"Probably the best way to investigate this is to look at an example. First, as the commenters above have already said, the log-return from one period is log(price at time t/price at time t-1) which is approximately equal to the percentage change in the price from time t-1 to time t, provided that this percentage change is not big compared to the size of the price. (Note that you have to use the natural log, ie. log to the base e -- ln button on a calculator -- here.) The main use of the log-return is that is a proxy for the percentage change in the price, which turns out to be mathematically convenient, for various reasons which have mostly already been mentioned in the comments. But you already know this; your actual question is about the average log-return over a period of time. What does this indicate about the stock? The answer is: if the stock price is not changing very much, then the average log-return is about equal to the average percentage change in the price, and is very easy and quick to calculate. But if the stock price is very volatile, then the average log-return can be wildly different to the average percentage change in the price. Here is an example: the closing prices for Pitchfork Oil from last week's trading are: 10, 5, 12, 5, 10, 2, 15. The percentage changes are: -0.5, 1.4, -0.58, 1, -0.8, 6.5 (where -0.5 means -50%, etc.) The average percentage change is 1.17, or 117%. On the other hand, the log-returns for the same period are -0.69, 0.88, -0.88, 0.69, -1.6, 2, and the average log-return is about 0.068. If we used this as a proxy for the average percentage change in the price over the whole seven days, we would get 6.8% instead of 117%, which is wildly wrong. The reason why it is wrong is because the price fluctuated so much. On the other hand, the closing prices for United Marshmallow over the same period are 10, 11, 12, 11, 12, 13, 15. The average percentage change from day to day is 0.073, and the average log-return is 0.068, so in this case the log-return is very close to the percentage change. And it has the advantage of being computable from just the first and last prices, because the properties of logarithms imply that it simplifies to (log(15)-log(10))/6. Notice that this is exactly the same as for Pitchfork Oil. So one reason why you might be interested in the average log-return is that it gives a very quick way to estimate the average return, if the stock price is not changing very much. Another, more subtle reason, is that it actually behaves better than the percentage return. When the price of Pitchfork jumps from 5 to 12 and then crashes back to 5 again, the percentage changes are +140% and -58%, for an average of +82%. That sounds good, but if you had bought it at 5, and then sold it at 5, you would actually have made 0% on your money. The log-returns for the same period do not have this disturbing property, because they do add up to 0%.  What's the real difference in this example? Well, if you had bought $1 worth of Pitchfork on Tuesday, when it was 5, and sold it on Wednesday, when it was 12, you would have made a profit of $1.40. If you had then bought another $1 on Wednesday and sold it on Thursday, you would have made a loss of $0.58. Overall, your profit would have been $0.82. This is what the average percentage return is calculating. On the other hand, if you had been a long-term investor who had bought on Tuesday and hung on until Thursday, then quoting an ""average return"" of 82% is highly misleading, because it in no way corresponds to the return of 0% which you actually got!  The moral is that it may be better to look at the log-returns if you are a buy-and-hold type of investor, because log-returns cancel out when prices fluctuate, whereas percentage changes in price do not. But the flip-side of this is that your average log-return over a period of time does not give you much information about what the prices have been doing, since it is just (log(final price) - log(initial price))/number of periods. Since it is so easy to calculate from the initial and final prices themselves, you commonly won't see it in the financial pages, as far as I know.  Finally, to answer your question: ""Does knowing this single piece of information indicate something about the stock?"", I would say: not really. From the point of view of this one indicator, Pitchfork Oil and United Marshmallow look like identical investments, when they are clearly not. Knowing the average log-return is exactly the same as knowing the ratio between the final and initial prices."


Aside from cost, the real problem is lack of jobs after obtaining a degree. My degree got me low paid work. In the mid 1990's I considered getting another degree but none of the colleges I spoke to could tell me how many of their graduates got jobs related to their degree or what the jobs paid. I already had one worthless degree and couldn't see going into debt for another worthless degree.


"From the Op's comment below re: the ""audit""  http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11696.pdf, the first paragraph states that loans outstanding peaked at just over 1 trillion in 2008.  So you'd look at the Fed's balance sheet of loans outstanding over time, and perhaps subtract amounts reported as more normal operations."


"There seems to be a common sentiment that no investor can consistently beat the market on returns. What evidence exists for or against this? First off, even if the markets were entirely random there would be individual investors that would consistently beat the market throughout their lifetime entirely by luck.  There are just so many people this is a statistical certainty.  So let's talk about evidence of beating the market due to persistent skill. I should hedge by saying there isn't a lot of good data here as most understandably most individual investors don't give out their investment information but there are some ok datasets.  There is weak evidence, for instance, that the best individual investors keep outperforming and interestingly that the trading of individual investors can predict future market movements.  Though the evidence is more clear that individual investors make a lot of mistakes and that these winning portfolios are not from commonly available strategies and involve portfolios that are much riskier than most  would recommend. Is there really no investment strategy that would make it likely for this investor to consistently outperform her benchmark? There are so, many, papers (many reasonable even) out there about how to outperform benchmarks (especially risk-adjusted basis).  Not too mention some advisers with great track records and a sea of questionable websites.  You can even copy most of what Buffet does if you want. Remember though that the average investor by definition makes the average ""market"" return and then pays fees on top of that.  If there is a strategy out there that is obviously better than the market and a bunch of people start doing it, it quickly becomes expensive to do and becomes part the market.  If there was a proven, easy to implement way to beat the market everyone would do it and it would be the market. So why is it that on this site or elsewhere, whenever an active trading strategy is discussed that potentially beats the market, there is always a claim that it probably won't work? To start with there are a large number of clearly bad ideas posed here and elsewhere.  Sometimes though the ideas might be good and may even have a good chance to beat the market.  Like so many of the portfolios that beat the market though and they add a lot of uncertainty and in particular, for this personal finance site, risk that the person will not be able to live comfortably in retirement. There is so much uncertainty in the market and that is why there will always be people that consistently outperform the market but at the same time why there will be few, if any, strategies that will outperform consistently with any certainty."


"What is a stock? A share of stock represents ownership of a portion of a corporation. In olden times, you would get a physical stock certificate (looking something like this) with your name and the number of shares on it. That certificate was the document demonstrating your ownership. Today, physical stock certificates are quite uncommon (to the point that a number of companies don't issue them anymore). While a one-share certificate can be a neat memento, certificates are a pain for investors, as they have to be stored safely and you'd have to go through a whole annoying process to redeem them when you wanted to sell your investment.  Now, you'll usually hold stock through a brokerage account, and your holdings will just be records in a database somewhere. You'll pick a broker (more on that in the next question), instruct them to buy something, and they'll keep track of it in your account.  Where do I get a stock? You'll generally choose a broker and open an account. You can read reviews to compare different brokerages in your country, as they'll have different fees and pricing. You can also make sure the brokerage firm you choose is in good standing with the financial regulators in your country, though one from a major national bank won't be unsafe.  You will be required to provide personal information, as you are opening a financial account. The information should be similar to that required to open a bank account. You'll also need to get your money in and out of the account, so you'll likely set up a bank transfer. It may be possible to request a paper stock certificate, but don't be surprised if you're told this is unavailable. If you do get a paper certificate, you'll have to deal with considerably more hassle and delay if you want to sell later.  Brokers charge a commission, which is a fee per trade. Let's say the commission is $10/trade. If you buy 5 shares of Google at $739/share, you'd pay $739 * 5 + $10 = $3705 and wind up with $3695 worth of stock in your account. You'd pay the same commission when you sell the stock.  Can anyone buy/own/use a stock? Pretty much. A brokerage is going to require that you be a legal adult to maintain an account with them. There are generally ways in which a parent can open an account on behalf of an underage child though. There can be different types of restrictions when it comes to investing in companies that are not publicly held, but that's not something you need to worry about. Stocks available on the public stock market are available to, well, the public. How are stocks taxed? Taxes differ from country to country, but as a general rule, you do have to provide the tax authorities with sufficient information to determine what you owe. This means figuring out how much you purchased the stock for and comparing that with how much you sold it for to determine your gain or loss. In the US (and I suspect in many other countries), your brokerage will produce an annual report with at least some of this information and send it to the tax authorities and you. You or someone you hire to do your taxes will use that report to compute the amount of tax owed. Your brokerage will generally keep track of your ""cost basis"" (how much you bought it for) for you, though it's a good idea to keep records. If you refuse to tell the government your cost basis, they can always assume it's $0, and then you'll pay more tax than you owe.  Finding the cost basis for old investments can be difficult many years later if the records are lost. If you can determine when the stock was purchased, even approximately, it's possible to look back at historical price data to determine the cost.  If your stock pays a dividend (a certain amount of money per-share that a company may pay out of its profits to its investors), you'll generally need to pay tax on that income. In the US, the tax rate on dividends may be the same or less than the tax rate on normal wage income depending on how long you've held the investment and other rules."


"My opinion: including the value of depreciating property one owns in a net worth calculation is silly - but could be interesting You don't expect your TV or laptop to gain value.  Instead, you expect them to decrease in value every year until you replace them.  Anything you expect to hold or increase in value (art, a house, etc) is a different story. If you'd like to really get anal about this, you can track your net worth like a business would track its balance sheet.  I'm not going to go into detail, but the general idea is that when you purchase an item, you debit the cost from ""cash"" and add the value paid to ""assets"" (so your net worth doesn't change when you make a purchase).   You then depreciate the value of the item under ""assets"" according to a depreciation schedule.  If you plan on replacing your laptop every three years, you might subtract 33% of the value every year.   This could be an interesting exercise (i.e. even if you make money, your net worth may decrease because of all the depreciating junk you own), but my hunch is that it wouldn't be worth the effort it requires."


Tax questions require that you specify a jurisdiction.  Assuming that this is the US, you owe Federal income tax (at the special long-term capital gains tax rate) on the net long-term capital gains (total long-term capital gains minus total long-term capital losses) and so, yes, if these two were your only transactions involving long-term holdings, you would pay long-term capital gains tax on $3000-$50 = $2950.  Many States in the US don't tax long-term capital gains at special rates the way the Federal Government does, but you still pay taxes on the net long-term capital gains. I suspect that other countries have similar rules.


"Well there are a few comments that need to be made here I suppose. Though at work now so this will be short.   First there is the difference between banking, which indeed mostly looks at capital adequacy ratios and uses VaR as one of the methods to get to the risk-weighted assets. Then there is the buy side which is more interested in ""how much would I stand to lose in portfolio X if markets head south, and how does that relate to what a have promised my client?"" In the first situation it is the bank itself taking on the risk, in the second the risk lies entirely with the client. An asset manager could lose 100% on your regular old equity mandate and it wouldn't hit him except for loss in fees, whereas a significant trading loss for a bank can put it out of business..   My personal view is that all of these metrics are merely useful instruments and for a large part they all tell me the same thing. A higher duration on a fixed income mandate will give a higher VaR, a higher shortfall, more negative results on rates stress scenarios etcetera. They only really become useful when imposing limits on them, or using them to steer based on whatever the prevailing risk appetite is at a certain point in time. Or when looking at trends, or relative risk of portfolio A vs B  Don't get me wrong, I too can debate for hours about VaR parameters. Confidence intervals, look back periods, return frequency, decay factors, parametric or historical / monte carlo simulation, etcetera. But I think in practise that is really of limited use. If you take any ex ante risk measure and you thoroughly understand it, make an informed choice about risk appetite and steer on it, you basically have done your job as a risk manager.  Sorry I know I am not answering your questions in a structured way but am on my phone so it's hard to keep overview. PM me if you want to discuss things in detail."


> Compares costs of construction of only solar array excluding batteries, continued maintenance, etc.   > Compares above fake costs to base load costs using peak production rates.  If solar was that cheap it would be prevalent across the world already. Shit I'd be down at Walmart getting in fist fights over the last solar panel to cover the top of my house in solar tomorrow if I could get energy for <$0.13 kWh I pay.


Oh, I agree that it is very likely to increase how often people go to the movies. I just don't know that, at the $10/month price, it's likely to be profitable for MoviePass....   I think the big difference between my evaluation and MP's of the strategy is that MP thinks it will eventually have enough leverage to get a share of concessions from theaters.   Based on the economics of the situation and the fact that theaters ultimately have more leverage, as well as in-person access to theatergoers and MP customers -- plus the theaters history of specifically not doing what MP hopes they will do -- I think that's a hell of gamble.   **Edit:**   Movie theaters aren't losing at all at this point because MP pays most of them full retail value for every ticket - they'll do very well. I just don't think they're going to ever, essentially, give MP a cut out of the goodness of their hearts.


Get a credit card is NOT the answer. The reason people have a bad (or no) credit score is often because they're new to the country, have just turned 18, have previously fallen into arrears or are just bad with money. Getting a credit card is risky because, if you don't stay on top of your payments, it'll just damage your score even more.  Now, it sounds like I hate credit cards - but I don't, and they do have their benefits. But avoid them if possible because they can be more hassle than they're worth (ie, paying the credit back on-time, cancelling accounts when the interest comes in, moving money in and out of accounts). It's risky borrowing money from anywhere whether it's a payday lender, a bank, a credit card, etc., so use them as a last resort. If you've got your own income then that's amazing!, try not to live outside of your means and your credit score will look after (and increase) itself. It takes time to build a good credit score, but always make sure you pay the people you owe on time and the full amount. I'd stick with paying your phone provider (and any other direct debits you have setup) and avoid getting a credit card. I'd recommend Noddle to keep track of your credit score and read their FAQ on how to help build it. Unlike Experian, it's free forever so not quite as detailed... but Noddle are owned by CallCredit - one of the biggest Credit Reference Agencies in the UK so they should have the latest information on yourself. In conclusion, if you already have financial commitments like a mobile phone bill, gym membership, store cards, anything that gets paid monthly by direct debit... your credit score will increase (provided you pay the full-amount on time).   I hope this helps. PS. I don't work for any of the companies here, but I've been working in the finance sector (more specifically, short-term loans) for 3+ years now.


"Sometimes it's like a fairy tale, and saying with the ""virgin"" and the ""child"" becomes reality. From our history in the Lower Rhine Helidays has in September 2015.  The lot after the drag race fell on our authors, Rüdiger Hut, and received a coupon for the CORE 700 helicopter from Markus Fieh, product manager of the company CORE Helicopter. Here he describes his experiences in construction and flight. Markus Fiehn is not only responsible as a developer at CORE Helicopter, but also directs troops around the CORE promotion team. In RC-Heli-Action 8/2015 there is an interview with him, explaining and demonstrating many technical characteristics of the CORE Heli-System. CORE Helicopter is a newly founded subsidiary of Karcher AG. But first, sequentially."


can someone recommend a book for everything finance for real estate?  what are some key distinctive features that crunching numbers for real estate have? im looking for stuff like cash flow, risk that comes with leverage.. stuff i have no idea about.


In your situation I suggest: In terms of what to spend it on, one tax preparer I knew said he would ask his wealthy clients (ones with real net worth) what they spent their money on, and it was almost always travel.  We agree, memories from our trips are ones that last a lifetime.  I can't say much else you buy gives you the same long term payback in your personal life.


https://thepointsguy.com/2017/01/how-government-officials-fly/  The main reason you see so many people in first class is because they earn miles for themselves (just like anyone else can earn miles) but they are not allowed to spend those miles on anything other than upgrades and other perks. The one thing that is absolutely not allowed is to spend those miles on personal travel.   Most of those government employees that you see in those seats are frequent last minute travelers due to the nature of their jobs. There will be certain routes handled primarily by certain airlines as they already bid for the business. The airlines miles on those routes for employees will be greatly discounted, but the airline miles associated with them are still calculated at the cost before the discount (most private companies with specific contracts with airline routes work the same).   Unions are free to make their own rules on these things. However I do know that many legitimate charities have policies similar to the government for how they can use airline miles.  So in short, it's because they can't use their airline miles for anything except upgrades. They can't even keep money received from being bumped from a flight.    Edit: In another response, it appears this article could be wrong about using your own miles for personal use (thanks (/u/workacct20910) for steering me to look more at it):   https://www.gsa.gov/policy-regulations/regulations/federal-management-regulation-fmr?asset=90778#wp1091613  It appears temp duty travel miles can be used for personal trips. Another poster pointed out people flying enough to get lots of miles will also be elite status, and thus get upgraded much more often even though their base fare is still coach.


The debt doesn't have to and never should be paid off.  The fed could print $20T tomorrow and swap all outstanding US govt debt for cash and it would be net neutral in terms of financial assets outstanding.    The result would be a massive removal of income paying assets, and near total loss of control and influence over interest rates however.


"I would say to only bother keeping the ones you know you'll use for itemized deductions. This includes any unreimbursed business expenses and vehicle licensing fees. There are a lot of other itemized tax deductions possible, but those are two common ones. Also, keep track of your business mileage (mileage before and after the trip, and commuting doesn't count as ""business mileage""). You may also want to keep receipts of all out-of-state purchases if your state is one of those that tries to collect state tax on out-of-state purchases. Ensure your supported charities are 501(c)(3), and they'll give you a receipt at the end of the year. Don't bother keeping fast food or gas receipts (unless they're business expenses)."


"Looking at some large lotto games out there, it seems that the lump sum (cash) option comes in at anywhere from about 50 to 70 percent of the jackpot amount (sum of annual payouts, typically over 20 to 30 years). I'm a fan of the phrase ""money today is better than money tomorrow.""  There's no telling how laws will change, taxes will change, if inflation will skyrocket, if you'll die early, if you or a family member will encounter a life-changing event, etc.  By taking the lump sum option you trade a percentage of the winnings for the risk of the future unknowns.  How much are those unknowns worth to you? The tax implications are something else to consider.  In your example of a ""small"" jackpot with $50,000 annual payouts, it's likely that you could still avoid the highest tax bracket each year, whereas taking the lump sum would be taxed at the highest rate (35% of the amount above $373k, for a single filer in 2010).  However, this might not make much of a difference for large jackpots with higher annual payouts. With the lump sum option, you also have a greater potential of investment returns (and losses) since you can put all the money to work for you right away.  It also allows you to purchase larger assets sooner, if that's something that interests you. In the end, I'd say the reduced risk and the higher return potential of the lump sum option is well worth the reduced payout.  I'd also suggest not playing the lottery :)"


">""“Airbus is trying to do the smart thing, which is to bring production to places that are closer to customers,” said Adam Pilarski, an economist at consultant Avitas in Chantilly, Virginia. “Another advantage is that Americans in general are lower paid, so you can get cheap labor in the U.S.”  It always hurts to read that. Major reason why Boeing moved some production to South Carolina. While it's off topic, the death of unions in this country are really killing the middle class manufacturing jobs."


"You are comparing two things that are not comparable.  The ""market size"" would be the total annual revenue in one market, in this year.  The ""market caps"" of a company is the number of shares multiplied by the share price. This should be equal to the total profit that the company is going to make through its life time, taking into account that you would get interest on an investment, so future profits have to be counted less accordingly.  So if the ""market size"" is ten million dollars, and a company has four million revenue in that market with one million profit, and everyone thinks that company will continue making that profit for the next fifty years, then surely one million a year for the next 50 years is worth more than ten million.  That's if the market stands still. If the ""market size"" is ten million, and we expect that market size to double for the next three years, then the market size is still ten million, but a company having a 40% share of a market growing at that speed is going to be worth a lot more!"


"> excel  Ok, my point still stands. Are we going to make rules around excels? Its heavy ""abuse"" takes jobs away.   Let me make this clear, you are not entitle to be paid for something that someone else can do for fraction of cost.  If you think your time is worth more, then you should have no problem convincing employer of just that."


Shares are tanking because:  1. Amazon is having SOME impact  2. The market for the last 10 years at least overreacts to fucking everything that happens.  3. A lot of retailers over-expanded. A large amount of the stores retailers are culling have been poor performers. Amazon is what pushed it all over the edge, but it will be fine. Brick and mortar isn't going anywhere in the long-term, a lot of people enjoy going out and shopping as well as the instant gratification of immediately getting what they paid for. There are also plenty of brick and mortar stores that give you customer service , and more importantly knowledge that Amazon can't dream of. They're just not shitty retail giants like Best Buy.   4. A lot of retailers in competitive segments, particularly things like fashion, failed to innovate fast enough. They will be replaced by other retailers that meet market desires better, which in turn may ultimately meet the same fate. The other prominent cycle in retail is the shift from malls to strip malls to outlet centers etc. It's just like fashion, to be honest.   5. I remain concerned about the future of Amazon's foundation - the review system. Gaming the review system is possible now and to be frank, I wouldn't be shocked if a leadership change at Amazon eventually compromises the integrity of the review system by getting in on it


I work in advertising now and my boss was talking about this, we have our clients requesting ad campaigns to attract new employees. He said it used to be a lot less common.  Also its hard to find good people.


> Sell a product of $4 w/ COGS of $10, corner the market by driving out competition   Uber has to drive out the entire automotive industry, buses, trains, bicycles, taxis, other rideshare services, and *legs* in order to drive out competition in the transportation industry.   > for a majority in market share, raise the price  Uber started raising prices and their market share has been slipping ever since. Why? Because see the above, they can't drive out competition in this market. Lyft and others will always be there to compete directly on price, and then buses, private car ownership, bicycles, and walking are all there if the entire ridesharing industry raises their prices (which will never happen because 1) collusion, and 2) there's always market share incentive for someone to drop prices in a commodity market.   > or squeeze supplier's margins by either lowering BOM or delaying terms from 30 to 360  and Uber can't do either of these. Their drivers are already paid the bare minimum necessary to keep them driving and user fares only cover 40% of that cost. Investors subsidize the other 60%. There's no room to drive their costs down.   > then voila, big sustainable business.  Or rather, a ticking time bomb that's utterly unsustainable.   > You must be delusional if you think Amazon did otherwise. They used the above strategy for both their retail and their AWS. Their Lab126 did the exact same thing.  Amazon isn't Uber. And that's not what Amazon did either. They lowered costs by investing their *positive* unit economics' margins into building one of the best logistics and supply chain infrastructures of any organization in the history of the world.   Uber loses money *on each ride*. You aren't grasping the implications of that. The business model cannot sustain itself because customers aren't willing to spend what it actually costs to deliver the service. You aren't listening to me.   > You clearly showed you don't understand either growth equity or competition.  This is one of those cases of someone being so ignorant on a topic that they don't even know how ignorant they are.


Check out research: equities, credit, fixed income, quant, ECM. Typically research analysts need the 7/63/86/87, strong financial modeling skills (VBA, other kinds of coding help here), and the necessary financial background to perform valuations. Like the other commenter suggested, starting on your Level One CFA is a good start.


very simple.  RBI has stopped connecting Indian Bank's to Paypal, for deposit or withdrawal. You need to use a third party website (Online wallet etc) to send whatever money you have in the Paypal account.  Connect your Bank account with the third party website, and withdraw the money


Yes, that's the risk. If the stock is bouncing around a lot your options could get assigned.  If it heads south you now are the proud owner of more of a falling stock.  It's good that you're looking to understand the risks of an investment method.  That's important no matter what the method is.


"I found google policy regarding public domain content: Content comprised predominantly of public domain material is not   accepted due to its widespread duplication. Multiple versions of the   same book confuse our users and provide little distinguishing value.   We allow select partners to submit curated editions of public domain   books to ensure their availability, but we're not offering this   exemption to others at this time. They allow ""select partners"" to sell public domain books that most times are identical to the original version (usually sold for 1$).  Other book versions feature notes or a critical introduction and the price goes up to 10 $ .  Also, you cannot list books for free in google play. The minimum price is 1$ ."


The broker may be purchasing the CDs through a CDARS participant financial institution.  You can bypass your broker and go to a CDARS participant FI yourself.  CDARS is a network of financial institutions that spread your deposit across multiple FIs, guaranteeing your FDIC coverage.  The advantage is you have a single point of contact - your chosen financial institution.  You do not have to have any contact with the other FIs where your deposit may be spread. In fact, on your statements or online banking it will appear as if your large CD is all with your chosen FI.  The spreading will happen behind the scenes.  A local participating institution can help explain this program to you.


"The statistics are misleading. The German autoworkers do not ""make"" $67/hour, that is basically a $140k job! Back in 2009, some sensationalist articles said that the average UAW worker ""made"" $75/hr sitting in the jobs bank. That is taking the total labor cost and dividing it by the number of existing employees. The most obvious example of why this number is so lopsided is through health care benefits and pensions. You get the illusion that the auto worker gets paid very high when labor cost per employee is very high, but the labor cost actually includes the current worker's cost as well as some past worker's costs, so it gets double counted.  So yes, GM went bankrupt because labor costs were $75/hr. No, the UAW auto worker did not make $75 per hour. And yes, labor costs for the German workforce is a lot higher than the US workforce. But no, they don't actually get paid 2-3x more."


Wow, hard to believe not a single answer mentioned investing in one of the best asset classes for tax purposes...real estate.  Now, I'm not advising you to rush out and buy an investment property.  But rather than just dumping your money into mutual funds...over which you have almost 0 control...buy some books on real estate investing.  There are plenty of areas to get into, rehabs, single family housing rentals, multifamily, apartments, mobile home parks...and even some of those can have their own specialties.  Learn now! And yes, you do have some control over real estate...you control where you buy, so you pick your local market...you can always force appreciation by rehabbing...if you rent, you approve your renters.  Compared to a mutual fund run by someone you'll never meet, buying stocks in companies you've likely never even heard of...you have far more control. No matter what area of investing you decide to go into, there is a learning curve...or you will pay a penalty.  Go slow, but move forward. Also, all the advice on using your employer's matching (if available) for 401k should be the easiest first step.  How do you turn down free money?  Besides, the bottom line on your paycheck may not change as much as you think it might...and when weighed against what you get in return...well worth the time to get it setup and active.


"Great explanation. I want to add 2 thing: 1) Credit rating agencies played there role in messing up the economy, by giving subprime (higher risk) mortgage backed securities AAA rating.  2) ""Other banks saw this happening and were forced to lower their requirements for issuing mortgages."" Well not banks, but mortgage brokers lowered there requirement from issuing mortgages. They even started to issue NINA (no income verification, no assets verification) loans!"


You'd have to file to be incorporated (in Canada at least). It's mostly done for tax purposes. You can't just go and call yourself an corporation without filing legal papers (and be approved) with the tax agency of your country. In my experience, it'd be with the CRA. The rules at least here, there's a bunch of leeway that mostly any business can be classed as an corporation if you see fit. Hope it helps!


Businesses from food to retail, all assume the risk of spoilage, theft, or any form of lost assets. It's just business. With that said, I'm sure your mom didn't imagine too many ways she could've lost out when opening her nailshop. I'm unsure what the policy is that you're looking for, but my best advice to you would be to cut your losses and learn from this.  Hopefully you and your mother can be sure to check or figure out a system to ensure customers don't lie about their payments. Good luck


"Well, okay, let's unpack that.  Lying 24/7 is a pretty strong claim, even if it's a hyperbole.  The problem is not false statements and ""fake news"", but that [MSM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pS4x8hXQ5c) makes politics a [drama](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fKsBj2M-T8), not a topic of research and reason.  Also, what do you mean fake climate crisis? Do you think the warming is not real? Or do you think it's not dangerous?  What do you mean NSA/CIA influence elections?  WikiLeaks posted a lot of bullshit lately, is there something that you consider credible? Can you link to it?  > State has the capability to hack and leave a ""Russian footprint.""  Anyone can do it, but [attribution in cyberwar](https://medium.com/@thegrugq/evidence-guccifer-2-0-is-russian-intel-55f9f8b3f135) doesn't work like that. [APT28](https://medium.com/war-is-boring/google-knows-a-ton-about-russian-government-hackers-1c7f7efdebfd) (that did the DNC hack/leak) is attributed to GRU (Russian military intelligence), and the leaked NSA docs confirmed it. (You've [seen it](https://www.wired.com/story/russia-election-hacking-playbook/), I presume.)  > Somebody is pulling all the strings for a world government  What makes you think this is the case?   > Russia is moot.  Why?"


I wonder if it's detecting the same IP so that it won't set off any alarms.  Edit: I just realized that I had a Mac I could borrow. Same results for NYC. PC using IE9 and Mac using Safari (both have Flashblock on Mozilla and wanted to eliminate that from the equation)


Trading can be traced back to when people would with others, they would trade what they had for what they needed. Trading and business, in general, has metamorphosed to a point where you can now sell and buy items and services from anywhere long as you have a gadget with access to the internet. Online auction has gained popularity in the recent past and have become a major way of trading and conducting business.


"Yes, I'm a big picture guy.  Like when the central banks opened unlimited short term lines recently the first thing I thought was ""now hedge funds can short the euro with impunity!""  So, short bets on the euro became a no brainer even as the market was perversely celebrating the announcement with a euro rally.  Almost as if they have no idea how the bigger picture works.  As if all liquidity is created equally.  All it meant to me was that European banks would not have to call in the lines of credit they extend to hedge funds for THREE YEARS.  That is enough time to crash the euro, hold a funeral and dance on the grave.  It is just musical chairs over there.  All the banks know the EU is coming for them an they all want to be in the right capital position to survive the banhammer.  They'll sell out the euro to get there.  I think I'm a bit too jaded for Graham style fundamental analysis.  Then again I do use strong companies as my preferred trading vehicles.  So, maybe I do a hybrid."


Is there a limit on how much I can send? Can I send $100K plus? No. Yes. What is the most appropriate way to send money - international wire?   Is there international-wire limit restrictions I need to be aware of? Yes. No. Is there any tax obligation should I be aware of when sending money   home? If you're a US tax resident (which, as a US citizen, you are), you should be aware of gift tax rules. You'll probably want to talk to a licensed tax adviser (EA/CPA licensed in your state) and/or attorney, to understand the ramifications in full. If my family can return my money back in future, great, if not I   really don't care, but when (if) I get my money back, will I have to   pay taxes on bringing my own money back into US? No. But if you're giving it as a loan - you'll get paid interest which is taxable income to you. Is there anything else do I need to be aware of? The rules of the country which you're sending the money to.


> If the buyside was showing demand, what's wrong with HFT for reacting with supply?  In my example, HFT isn't actually adding supply/liquidity.  They're just grabbing it and flipping it.  > The example you gave is akin to me going from car dealership to car dealership yelling loudly about what car I want and the price I'd like it at - would you be upset if someone heard you and decided to sell their car to you later down the line?   Not the same.  The equivalent would be me yelling about wanting to buy a Porsche 911, and you buying them all before I can finish my own purchase, then offering to resell them to me at a higher price.  >In this case, the buy side trader is being stupid.   Maybe - certainly if all this could be eliminated by avoiding market orders.  This is a major critique many people have with Brad K. Instead of serially going from exchange to exchange, he could have sent orders to all exchanges at the same time (parallel!) and likely received much better prices.   He did do this at his time at RBC - sent orders to all exchanges at once.  The result would be apparently liquidity (asks at the market) disappearing and his orders getting filled at higher prices.  >In my opinion, the HFT player here is simply facilitating price discovery by reacting to demand - as a market maker that's his job.  I think that's a misinterpretation of what these particular HFTs are doing.  >Here's a good article. Let me know what you think.  Interesting.  It certainly goes against a lot of what Lewis wrote.  And I suppose that's the problem... very few of us are actually qualified to say what is actually true.  I know little about market structure and, as I said, have no involvement in high liquidity stocks.  The fund managers next door to me also trade pretty illiquid stuff that I strongly doubt any HFT ever touches, and they're value investors anyway, not arb HFs or something.


"First of all, it'd be nice if you had any actual command of the English language as that would go at least some way toward mitigating the unabashed arrogance and idiocy of your arguments.  As it stands however, do yourself a favor and leave eloquence alone; it's not your bag and attempting it just makes you look like a twerp.    >When I analyze the actual information content of what you have had to offer in this exchange, I found nothing. Rather, I found ""you are stupid"" and ""you lack intelligence"". Perhaps a little, ""you are an idiot"".  This is correct and deliberately so.  I do not argue with idiots on the internet (except when I've been drinking, like now).  It's like bringing a lawsuit against an insoluble entity: even if you win, you still lose.  Why bother?    >And this in response to a well-educated opinion: that the common misguided belief that this amorphous concept of ""luck"" gives lie to years of hard work, persistence and study.  Lemme get this straight, your ""well-educated"" opinion was stated as, ""luck: what poor people use to explain away the efforts of the people who give them jobs""?  Really?    I don't know where you went to school, but where I was educated, such a trite statement would have been laughed out of the building as being the completely unsubstantiated ranting of a partisan boob.   > You're someone who lacks any substantive contribution and tries to influence thought through intimidation.  Nope.  I'm not trying to influence you or anyone else.  I just think that you are a two-dimensional buffoon and that's all that my original comment was meant to convey.    Come back when you have the intellectual horsepower to compete.  Meanwhile, get away from me with your clown-car of an argument; I have neither the time nor patience."


It seems the age restriction for the Capital One MONEY account has been removed; I just read the entire terms and conditions and there's no minimum age requirement. I just finished opening Capital One MONEY accounts for a child who is <5 and a child <8. Both now have activated debit cards and online access. Their accounts are accessible via their card, but also appear under my online banking login, as they are joint accounts. It is possible to deposit cheques, but no cheques are issued for writing. Debit card access is provided for ATM withdrawals and purchases. And the design on the card is really nice; my son said it looks like the $100 bill.


140 to 113?  That doesn't even begin to equal the mess they created.  This borders on criminal negligence but they'll get their wrist slapped and move on. IMHO, a proper punishment would be jail for the CEO, CFO and CTO.   White collar crimes should be punished as severely or more severely than violent crimes.     Edit:  as a small business owner I'm responsible for the whole financial cost of repairing someone's credit if I have a breach. Will they repair the credit for 130 million Americans?


That doesn't make it the perfect medium for theft. The system makes it okay to make non controversial items because its not like someone is going to put in the effort to track you for that.   Yet if you are buying something illicit, a large part of the blockchain can already be analyzed to see where stuff is coming from and they can start dective work from there.   For example, let's say you buy off Local Bitcoin. Well even if the FBI doesn't know your address or who it belongs to, they monitor the site and know that the funds came from a certain account. They know this because that certain someone bought coins from a regulated company.   Its not the perfect medium for theft at all. Do you actually research bitcoin or are you just looking for any reason not to like it? Its really much more complex/grand than most make it out to be.


One share costs the 202 $. You need to invest 3000 $ total at a minimum, meaning you have to buy some 14.9 shares at minimum. You should not worry about the exact number of shares, they are just to keep track, and you can buy every decimal part of them too. For example, if you invest now 5000 $, you will get 24.7525 shares. Next year, if they are for example worth 220 $ per share, you have a value of 24.7525 * 220 = 5445.55 $ It depends on the offering company, but that (a certain fixed amount per paycheck) is a typical way to invest (and a good way - you implictly take advantage of prices changing a bit - you buy more shares when the price is down and less when it's up). Probably you can make it an automated deduction from your checking account, or you send it every week/month/whenever. Good plan!


I haven't read this article, but the most pressing question I have from the headline is the timeline. We all know that triple-a rated CDOs were horrific in the financial crisis. How about ones that have been created in the past couple of years?


Insurance on something that you could replace out of your own pocket is almost always not worth it. If you have the discipline to put $1,000 in a savings account, and only use that to replace the phone, you'll be ahead, plus you'll also get to pocket the interest.


>“Now, instead of remembering hundreds of passwords, we’ll be able to hold our hand over an RFID reader,” says CEO Todd Westby.  I have maybe a dozen passwords at work, hell it might be closer to 2 dozen.  What kind of workplace requires users to have hundreds of passwords?


God forbid there is some differing point of views on a tech company's board. Politics aside, Thiel is a genius and a visionary - not to mention one of the huge catalysts to not only Facebook's growth, but also a mentor to Zuckerberg as well.


I love his example of channels that everyone watches still, in the midst of the collapse of the entire TV business:  > **The majority of what we pay our cable company is wasted.** We get broadband Internet from our cable company, and we use that constantly. But we also get 500 channels that we almost never watch, along with a couple (HBO, Tennis Channel) that we pay extra for and do watch occasionally.  Ah yes, what *would* we do without the Tennis Channel. Fast forward 10 years: only the Internet and the Tennis Channel are left standing, and are in fierce competition.


Same for me! Chatting with friends after school and then sneaking to stay on for longer after my mom went to bed. This was hard to do because the family computer was in my mom's bedroom! So, I would carefully position a blanket over the monitor and then drape that down my back to cover up the light emanating from it. I still don't know if she knew I did that.... I thought I was so clever but she probably knew. :)


So could someone working at your bank directly.  Of at your HR department at work.  Most of the wait staff at the restaurant I ate at technically had access to my credit card and could steal money.  While you are at work, someone could break into your house and steal your stuff too. The point is, Mint and everything else is a matter of the evaluating the risk.  Since you already understand the vulnerability (they have your accounts) and you know the risk (they could steal your money) what are the chances it happens? 1.)  Mint will make lots more money if it doesn't happen, so it benefits Intuit to pay their employees well and put in safeguards to prevent theft.  Mint.com is on your side even if a specific employee isn't. 2.)  You have statements and such, so you can independently evaluate mint.  I do not just trust mint with my stuff, I check info in Quicken and at the bank sites themselves.  I don't do them all equally, but I will catch problems. 3.)  Laws mean that if theft happens, you will have the opportunity to be made whole. If you are worried about theft, don't trust other people or generally get a bad feeling, don't do it.  If you check your accounts online with the same computer you log into Facebook with, them I would suggest it doesn't bother you.  You might have legal or business reasons to be more adverse to risk then me. However, just because somebody could steal your money, I personally don't consider it an acceptable risk compared to the reward. I will also be one of the first people to be robbed, I am not unrealistic.


Do you need help from Calgary florists for your wedding? Then look no further than All Flowers and Gifts. We can help you to figure out what sorts of arrangements that you want to invest in and make sure that, no matter what, you’re going to get the perfect flowers for your celebration. #Calgary #Flower #Delivery #Florists #Shops


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-markets-idUSKCN1B82GL) reduced by 85%. (I'm a bot) ***** > MILAN - World stocks tumbled and safe-haven assets jumped on Tuesday after North Korea fired a missile over northern Japan, fuelling worries of fresh tension between Washington and Pyongyang.  > North Korea fired a missile that flew over Japan and landed in the Pacific about 1,180 km off the northern region of Hokkaido in a sharp escalation of tensions on the Korean peninsula.  > North Korea threatened this month to fire missiles into the sea near the U.S. Pacific territory of Guam, host to major U.S. military installations, after U.S. President Donald Trump warned that Pyongyang would face &quot;Fire and fury&quot; if it threatened the United States.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6wq3cb/stocks_tumble_yen_gains_after_north_korea_fires/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~200341 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*: **percent**^#1 **U.S.**^#2 **Korea**^#3 **North**^#4 **Japan**^#5"


This has often been one of the things that eats away at my sanity. I'm sure that these people know full well what they are doing to the environment and they're planning ahead on how they're going to profit from that too. Poison the land and make fresh water harder to get, no problem, charge more for habitable land and fresh water and ignore the fact the profits come at the cost of human lives.


Most millionaires became millionaires by being very frugal and living well below their means, all the time.


This is the exactly wrong thing to do especially in the age of algorithmic trading.  Consider this event from 2010:  Chart Source  Another similar event occurred in 2015 and there was also a currency flash crash in that year. As you can see the S&P 500 (and basically the entire market) dropped nearly 7% in a matter of minutes.  It regained most of that value within 15 minutes. If you are tempted to think that 7% isn't that big of a deal, you need to understand that specific securities will have a much bigger drop during such events.  For example the PowerShares S&P 500 Low Volatility ETF (SPLV) was down 45% at one point on Aug 24, 2015 but closed less than 6% down. Consider what effect a stop loss order would have on your portfolio in that circumstance.  You would not be able to react fast enough to buy at the bottom.  The advantage of long-term investing is that you are immune to such aberrations. Additionally, as asked by others, what do you do once you've pulled out your money.  Do you wait for a big jump in the market and hop back in?  The risk here is that you are on the sidelines for the gains.  By missing out on just a small number of big days, you can really hurt your long-term returns.


It's not an online-only ESPN, it's a new service by ESPN that's completely different and separate from what we know of as 'ESPN'. What it really is, is a re-branded MLB Media (streaming all MLB games) with some hockey and soccer and other stuff thrown in.


No fair and equal is paying the same price for the same service. Not some silly sliding scale based on percentage. You don't go to a service provider and demand the same service as someone who pays when you pay nothing by comparison.


"I think I understand what you're trying to achieve. You just want to see how it ""feels"" to own a share, right? To go through the process of buying and holding, and eventually selling, be it at a loss or at a gain.  Frankly, my primary advice is: Just do it on paper! Just decide, for whatever reason, which stocks to buy, in what amount, subtract 1% for commissions (I'm intentionally staying on the higher side here), and keep track of the price changes daily.   Instead of doing it on mere paper, some brokers offer you a demo account where you can practice your paper trading in the same way you would use a live account. As far as I know, Interactive Brokers and Saxo Bank offer such demo accounts, go look around on their web pages.  The problem about doing it for real is that many of the better brokers, such as the two I mentioned, have relatively high minimum funding limits. You need to send a few thousand pounds to your brokerage account before you can even use it. Of course, you don't need to invest it all, but still, the cash has to be there.  Especially for some younger and inexperienced investors, this can seduce them to gambling most of their money away. Which is why I would not advise you to actually invest in this way. It will be expensive but if it's just for trying it on one share, use your local principal bank for the trade.  Hope this gets you started!"


"RSUs are not ""essentially cash"". ""R"" in the RSU stands for restricted. These awards have strings attached, and as long as the strings are attached - you don't really own the money. As such, most banks do not include RSUs in the income considerations. Some do, especially if they have a specific agreement with your employer (check your HR/benefits coordinator). Specifically for mortgage loan,  where the underwriting is very strict, I'm not aware of banks that include RSUs as income without a specific agreement with the employer as a perk. For credit cards/car loans, where you just need to write a number, they would probably care less. Some banks (but not all) consider past performance, and would include bonuses (and maybe RSUs) if you can show several consecutive years of comparable bonuses."


Let's consider that transaction cost is 0(zero) for calculation. In the scenario you have stated, maximum profit that could be made is 55$, however risk is unlimited. Hedging can also be used to limit your losses, let's consider this scenario. Stock ABC trading @ 100$, I'll buy the stock ABC @ 100$ and buy a put option of ABC @ strike price 90$ for a premium of 5$ with an expiration date of 1 month. Possible outcomes I end up in a loss in 3 out of 4 scenarios, however my loss is limited to 15$, whereas profit is unlimited.


>  It has moved economic resources to where they're most productive, and thereby enabled the economy to grow faster.  I don't agree with this. Economic resources aren't moved to where they are the most productive. They are moved to where they will generate the highest short term return. Money flowing into finance and banking doesn't increase productivity.


In the US market at least, there is long-term evidence that there's no strong correlation between interest rates and house prices. A less detailed Canadian study found that house prices tended to increase when rates increase.  One possible reason: interest rates can increase when the economy is doing well (needs less help), which is also the time when people feel more confident about buying. The are many reasons why Toronto condo prices may come down (such as oversupply), or may increase (empty nesters downsizing).  But, by itself, a small increase in interest rates appears, based on history, to be unlikely to lead to a substantial drop in prices over a short timescale.


"One factor to consider is timing. If you set up the automatic payments through the bank that holds the mortgage (I'll call them the ""receiving"" bank), they will typically record the transactions as occurring on the actual dates you've set up the automatic payments to occur on, which generally eliminates e.g. the risk of having late payments. By contrast, setting up auto-pay through your personal bank (the ""sending"" bank) usually amounts to, on the date you specify, your bank deducts the amount from your account and sends a check to the receiving bank (and many banks actually send this check by mail), which may result in the transaction not being credited to your mortgage until several business days later. A second consideration (and this may not be as likely to occur on a loan payment as with a utility or service) is the amount of the payment. When you set up your auto-pay through the sending bank, you explicitly instruct your bank as to the amount to send (also, if you don't have enough in your account, your bank may wait to send the bill payment until you do). This can be good if finances are tight, or if you just like having absolute control of the payment. The risk, though, is that if some circumstance increases the amount that you need to pay one month, you'll have to proactively adjust your auto-pay setting before it fires off. Whereas, if you've set the auto-pay up through the receiving bank, they would most likely submit the transaction to your bank for the higher amount automatically. I'll give an example based on something I saw fairly often when I worked for Dish Network on recovery (customers in early disconnect, the goal being to take a payment and restore service). If you had set up auto-pay through your bank based on your package price, and then the price increased by $2/month, you might not notice at first (your service stays on, and your bill doesn't have any red stamps on it), but the difference will slowly add up until it exceeds a full month's payment, at which point a late fee starts being assessed. From there, it quickly snowballs until the service is turned off. Whereas if you had set that auto-pay up through the provider, when the rate increased, they would simply submit an EFT for the new, higher amount to your bank. On the opposite side of the spectrum: if you've set up the auto-pay through the sending bank, and you're not paying close enough attention when you finally pay off the mortgage, you might accidentally overpay by either making an extra payment or because the final payment is smaller than the rest. Then you'd have to wait a few days (or weeks?) for the receiving bank to issue a refund, leaving those funds unavailable to you in the interim. For these reasons, I personally prefer to always set up automatic payments through the receiving bank, rather than the sending bank."


Today the most exciting and innovative way to generate massive leads for your business is through inbound marketing.The inbound marketing’s main aim is to generate leads via the website. Integrating SEO into your web design is a very important part of Marketing And Web Design. Be sure, your web design SEO Company makes your website accountable for new business generations every month. Visit us online here: http://www.homebuiltairplanes.com/forums/member.php?u=46774


Personally, I keep two regular checking accounts at different banks.  One gets a direct deposit totaling the sum of my regular monthly bills and a prorated provision for longer term regular bills like semi-annual car insurance premiums.  I leave a buffer in the account to account for the odd expensive electrical bill or rate increase or whatever.  One gets a direct deposit of the rest which I then allocate to savings and spending. It makes sense to me to separate off regular planned expenses (rent/mortgage, utility bills, insurance premiums) from spending money because it lets me put the basics of my life on autopilot.  An added benefit is I have a failover checking account in the event something happens to one of them.  I don't keep significant amounts of money in either account and don't give transfer access to the savings accounts that store the bulk of my money.  I wear a tinfoil hat when it comes to automatic bank transfers and account access... It doesn't make sense to me to keep deposits separate from spending, it makes less sense to me to spend off of a savings account.


To be clear on my comment, I am not anti union. I have issues with some unions, their crazy high rates, and how they intimidate and push people around. Unions have done a good job of protecting workers rights, ensuring that benefits are available (even if crazy expensive), and ensuring worker safety. If all companies could be trusted to do that on their own then there would be no need for unions, but history has repeatedly shown otherwise.


This is a problem that is rampant in general on reddit.  The general population seems to be undereducated, uninformed, unemployed, immature kids.  Quite honestly, the only way to combat the problem is by making the subreddit private.  By doing this you also run the risk of keeping out high potential members while accidentally letting in people that have no business being in here in the first place.  This is probably why the creators included internet Karma, to give the collective subreddit the power to bring topics to the top that they would like seen and discussed while also allowing them to bury the crap they don't want to see.  The only problem with that is those same uninformed members mentioned above also have the ability to vote.  That is why we are attempting to generate a discussion here to get opinions from people that want to take the sub in a certain direction that voting alone cannot accomplish.


To be honest, all they do is reformat and rehost content from other sources.  While that's 80% (or more) of the internet, it isn't like they're providing unique content.  Add to that that they game the system to increase their page views and they're offering no benefits while still abusing the system.


"Volume is measured in the number of shares traded in a given day, week, month, etc. This means that it's not necessarily a directly-comparable measure between stocks, as there's a large difference between 1 million shares traded of a $1 stock ($1 million total) and 1 million shares traded of a $1000 stock ($1 billion total). Volume as a number on its own is lacking in context; it often makes more sense to look at it as an overall dollar amount (as in the parentheses above) or as a fraction of the total number of shares in the marketplace. When you see a price quoted for a particular ticker symbol, whether online, or on TV, or elsewhere, that price is typically the price of the last trade that executed for that security. A good proxy for the current fair price of an asset is what someone else paid for it in the recent past (as long as it wasn't too long ago!). So, when you see a quote labeled ""15.5K @ $60.00"", that means that the last trade on that security, which the service is using to quote the security's price, was for 15500 shares at a price of $60 per share. Your guess is correct. The term ""institutional investor"" often is meant to include many types of institutions that would control large sums of money. This includes large banks, insurance companies, pooled retirement funds, hedge funds, and so on."


CFDs (Contracts for Difference) are basically a contract between you and the broker on the difference in price of the underlying between the time you open a position and close a position. You are not actually buying the underlying. With share CFDs, the outcome is a bit like buying the underlying shares on margin. You pay interest for every day you hold the CFDs overnight for long CFDs. However, with short positions, you get paid interest for every day you hold your short position overnight. Most people use CFDs for short term trading, however they can be used for medium to longer term trading just as you would hold a portfolio on margin. What you have to remember is that because you are buying on margin you can lose more than your initial contract amount. A way to manage this risk is by using position sizing and stop loses. With your position sizing, if you wanted to invest $10,000 in a particular share trading at $10 per share, you would then buy 1000 shares or 1000 CFDs in that share. Your initial expense with the CFDs might be only $1000 (at a margin rate of 10%). So instead of increasing your risk by having an initial outlay of $10,000 with the CFDs you limit your risk to the same as you were buying the shares directly.


"Which people?  There are 7 billion people in the world. The majority of them are relatively poor; and the reasons why they either remain so, or are able (and willing) to change their status... the reasons vary tremendously.  Alas, I think the author missed the point of the statement the woman made, he began with a *belief* ""...the poor at all times and enclose them, making up a “surround of force” from which, it seems, they cannot escape. I had come to understand that this was what kept the poor from being political and that the absence of politics in their lives was what kept them poor.""  and he really never looked outside of the context of his own biased view.  The key in is hidden in the middle of his statements of belief above -- the ""it SEEMS, they cannot escape"".  That is what the woman was addressing, the ""it seems"" and ""escape"".  In fact many DO ""escape"" (historically speaking, most of the US population are descendents of such ""escapees"").  When the things ""surrounding them"" are massive, then it takes a lot of courage, AND humility, AND willingness to sacrifice & risk -- to leave those surroundings and venture out into the ""great unknown"" (potentially having to endure a lot of hardship, and possibly failing, when there).  So the biggest hurdle they have to overcome is an identical ""belief"" that the author had at the beginning (and seems to have still maintained).  It isn't about ""politics"" (at least not in the modern sense of the word)."


"From the UK side, the estate may be liable to ""inheritance tax"" depending on its size - but this will be paid by the estate itself before any payment is made to you, so if the estate makes a payment to you, the whole of it is yours to keep. The tax thresholds are a bit complicated and due to become more so, but at a minimum any estate under £325,000 will be exempt. If your spouse died first without using their entire allowance, or for deaths after 6th April 2017 where a family home is being left to direct descendants, the allowance is higher. Anything above the threshold is subject to 40% tax, which will be paid be the person dealing with the estate before they can distribute anything else."


The purpose of long term care insurance is to pay for your long term care while protecting your assets. This is highly recommended to people who have high risk factors or family history. People who will most likely receive care should purchase this as early as possible in order to avoid the soaring cost of coverage and care. Another reason why people should buy this is is because of the much longer life expectancy today. Statistics would show that about 70% of people who are 65 years old will need long term care. This is obviously high and alarming. For me, this is enough to encourage people to prepare for their future and buy insurance for long term care.


I think the correct statement is that Expedia wants to buy Orbitz for $12/share. The market price is $11, which means there is somebody willing to sell for that price. But you can't say that a stock price of $11 means that everybody is willing to sell for that price. And Expedia is unlikely to bid $12/share for just 40% of Orbitz shares; they'll want at least a controlling majority.


">Also, they didn't mean ""make money from thin air"" in the sense of it being a magical trick. They make money from a sort of market inefficiency: they broker between people who want to invest money and those who want to borrow it.  They actually do make money ""from thin air"" when they make new loans. They're not disintermediating - they have a license to create new money and they use it. This is not something especially *sinister* - just how it works.  Equally, when bank loans are paid off, that money that was created out of thin air is again destroyed.  There is evidence also, that demand deposits do not really restrict lending, as they are supposed to. See here:  http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/money-supply-economics-economy-bank-reserves-infla-pd20121022-ZAS44?OpenDocument&emcontent_spectators"


"Roth is currently not an option, unless you can manage to document income. At 6, this would be difficult but not impossible. My daughter was babysitting at 10, that's when we started her Roth.  The 529 is the only option listed that offers the protection of not permitting an 18 year old to ""blow the money."" But only if you maintain ownership with the child as beneficiary. The downside of the 529 is the limited investment options, extra layer of fees, and the potential to pay tax if the money is withdrawn without child going to college. As you noted, since it's his money already, you should not be the owner of the account. That would be stealing.  The regular account, a UGMA, is his money, but you have to act as custodian. A minor can't trade his own stock account. In that account, you can easily manage it to take advantage of the kiddie tax structure. The first $1000 of realized gains go untaxed, the next $1000 is at his rate, 10%. Above this, is taxed at your rate, with the chance for long tern capital gains at a 15% rate.  When he actually has income, you can deposit the lesser of up to the full income or $5500 into a Roth. This was how we shifted this kind of gift money to my daughter's Roth IRA. $2000 income from sitting permitted her to deposit $2000 in funds to the Roth. The income must be documented, but the dollars don't actually need to be the exact dollars earned. This money grows tax free and the deposits may be withdrawn without penalty. The gains are tax free if taken after age 59-1/2.  Please comment if you'd like me to expand on any piece of this answer."


It is also worth noting that one of the character defining features of a publicly traded company is that the management that is responsible for the day to day operations of the stands independent of those who have ownership. Shareholder of a public company typically don't have influence over the day to day running of the company.


Eighteen years into his research, Lo had a major insight. One day in 1999 his 4-year-old son took off running toward a gorilla cage at the Smithsonian’s National Zoo. “The mother gorilla jumped right in and growled,” he says. “And as soon as she did that, I did the same thing. I ran to my child and brought him back.” The similarity of their reactions startled Lo and caused him to wonder: Could there be other similarities in the way people and animals react to danger and risk?  The insight eventually led to the adaptive-markets hypothesis. “Right now, we tend to collect prices and assume that those are the only things that matter” to predict investor behavior, Lo says, whereas an ecologist would try to understand investors as a population—which means accounting for their animal instincts. Lo’s hypothesis says people act in their own self-interest but frequently make mistakes, figure out where they’ve erred, and change their behaviors. The broader system also adapts. These complex interactions contribute to our booms and busts.  Lo’s book-length exploration of the idea, Adaptive Markets, came out in February. Says Ben Golub, a founding partner at BlackRock Inc. and now co-head of the company’s risk and quantitative analysis group: “It makes you realize that at any time in the market, the people who are there are not there by accident.” Some people survived the last financial crisis and might be more risk-averse, and some people who’ve joined since might be more risk-tolerant. “The cautious guys survive for a while and then get pushed out by the more aggressive risk takers, who then get thrown out when the thing blows up in their faces,” Golub says. He’s made the book required reading for many BlackRock employees.


Here's how I have worked it out.  Different answer to the one expected.  Pretty sure it's right though.


You lose your interest free grace period if you don't pay your balance in full every month by the due date. So you would be paying interest on the $70 amount from the date you bought it to the date you made the $70 payment, and interest on the $30 balance from the date of purchase and thereafter.


My recommendation is to not ask for a credit increase, but just increase the utilization of one card if you have multiple cards, and decrease the utilization of the others, and continue paying off all cards in full each month.  In a  few months, you  will likely be offered a credit increase by the card that is getting increased use.  The card company that is getting the extra business knows that you are paying off big bills each month and keeping your account in good standing, and they will likely offer you a credit increase all by themselves because they want to keep your business.  If no offer is forthcoming, you can call the card company and ask for a credit increase. If they refuse, tell them that you will be charging very little on the card in the future  (or even canceling your card, though that will cause a hit on your credit score) because of their refusal, and switch your high volume to a different card.


Lightning is one of the most devastating natural phenomena and a direct strike will damage anything and everything on its way. Lightning Eliminators & Consultant Inc. installs a wide range of lightning protection products to divert a strike away from the structure and equipment. These products are designed to prevent physical damage to people, structural damage to buildings and protect against internal system equipment failure. Get more details on lightning protection products: https://lightningprotectiondesignblog.wordpress.com/2017/10/12/why-consider-lightning-protection-products-from-lec/


> Also Wilbur Ross is trump's secretary of commerce and part of the administrstion, trump getting figures from him is still his responsibility.  An executive is not expected to be an expert in various sciences. An executive is expected to makes decisions and execute laws based on the best information provided by the technocratic class. So I can't really fault him. He made a statement based upon the best numbers that had been presented.  I'm no Trump fan, either, but let's not go straining at gnats when there are elephants we haven't even looked at yet.


The S&P500 is an index, not an investment by itself.  The index lists a large number of stocks, and the value of the index is the price of all the stocks added together. If you want to make an investment that tracks the S&P500, you could buy some shares of each stock in the index, in the same proportions as the index.  This, however, is impractical for just about everyone. Index mutual funds provide an easy way to make this investment.  SPY is an ETF (exchange-traded mutual fund) that does the same thing. An index CFD (contract for difference) is not the same as an index mutual fund.  There are a number of differences between investing in a security fund and investing in a CFD, and CFDs are not available everywhere.


My Credit Union offers a market-linked CD where the investment has FDIC protection if it is held to maturity, but otherwise they are linked with the S&P 500. it comes with this warning: Market-Link CDs are not appropriate for all depositors including   clients needing a guaranteed interest payment or seeking full   participation in the stock market.  If redeemed prior to maturity, the   amount received will be subject to market risk including interest rate   fluctuations an issuer credit quality. So they still do exist. Another credit union I belong to has a similar product. The risk is that if you need the money early, there may be losses. There would also not be a way to switch to a more conservative posture as the CD approached maturity, if you were interested in protecting your gains.


I'm not pointing specifically to category 5 hurricanes, more that they are becoming increasingly common and powerful as time goes on. Additionally, most of these climate change issues are exponential, and so it may not seem like a significant change in the last 20 years but it points to a larger trendline that is disturbing.  When it comes to sea level changes, it's not about the last 8,000 years. It comes down to polar ice caps melting at ever-increasing speeds, which will hit us quickly and harshly. [A link to all the data you'd need on increasing CO2 can be found here.](http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/future.html)


A day is a long time and the rate is not the same all day. Some sources will report a close price that averages the bid and ask. Some sources will report a volume-weighted average. Some will report the last transaction price. Some will report a time-weighted average. Some will average the highest and lowest prices for the interval. Different marketplaces will also have slightly different prices because different traders are present at each marketplace. Usually, the documentation will explain what method they use and you can choose the source whose method makes the most sense for your application.


>I would be interested in knowing how much of the recent returns of the S&P are being driven purely by the Fed bond purchase program, controlling for other macro-economic variables.  The correlation of asset purchase dollars and SPX level does not answer this question.


Look into *Getting Past No*, *Getting To Yes*, *Difficult Conversations*, and *The Mind and Heart of the Negotiator*.  Those were the books I read for an MBA negotiations course last year.  Except for the last one, they're all very short and easy to read.


Gold is a commodity.  It has a tracked price and can be bought and sold as such.  In its physical form it represents something real of signifigant value that can be traded for currency or barted.  A single pound of gold is worth about 27000 dollars. It is very valuable and it is easily transported as opposed to a car which loses value while you transport it.  There are other metals that also hold value (Platinum, Silver, Copper, etc) as well as other commodities.  Platinum has a higher Value to weight ratio than gold but there is less of a global quantity and the demand is not as high.  A gold mine is an investement where you hope to take out more in gold than it cost to get it out.   Just like any other business.  High gold prices simply lower your break even point. TIPS protects you from inflation but does not protect you from devaluation.  It also only pays the inflation rate recoginized by the Treasury.  There are experts who believe that the fed has understated inflation.  If these are correct then TIPS is not protecting its investors from inflation as promised.   You can also think of treasury bonds as an investment in your government.  Your return will be effectively determined by how they run their business of governing.  If you believe that the government is doing the right things to help promote the economy then investing in their bonds will help them to be able to continue to do so.  And if consumers buy the bonds then the treasury does not have to buy any more of its own.


They will just break the company up into subsidiaries.     A smaller company will run the mail room, another will run the computer repair, yet another will run the sales team and so on an so forth. There will be one small executive company that runs all those companies and siphons all the revenue from all of the subsidiaries. Using your scheme they can make you a 30% owner of a subsidiary that services another subsidiary and makes no money at all and in fact is a money loser and stock options will mean nothing.  Major motion pictures do something similar: each movie is its own entity/company, lets call it BigExpensiveMovie397 Co., that is only around for a single movie. BigExpensiveMovie397 then hires other companies to do the work: catering, set building, production and everything else that makes a movie.  And here is the fun part: if BigExpensiveMove397 is a hit, then it will pay a lot of licensing fees to yet other corporations that allowed it the use of its characters, story and anything else they can think of.  Those licensing fees tend to *always* be more that whatever profit BigExpensiveMove397 makes. And that is how movies like LOTR is a money loser...no matter how much money it makes.  Which is why the convinced Congress to ban using actual money with HSX...   There is no way to beat such accounting. The only choice is not to take jobs like that. But since we are competing with the World and a good annual salary is $6K a year....we have a long way to go down to hit equilibrium.


There are at least three important aspectss missing from your equation. However they come with some uncertainty as one typically cannot tell the future performance. Appreciation of the rental units value. When comparing to the gain of any alternative investment an increasing value of the flat is a gain too. Increase of rent. Rents are typically adjusted either on a regular basis or at least when changing tennants. Calulation with a flat rent over 20 years is therefore way off. Tax deductions due to capital expenditures (i.e. mortgages), expenses for the upkeep and maintenance of the property, conserving and management, and so on. Obviously those are depending on your local legislation. There are multiple other issues to consider of course, e.g. inadvertant vacancy, which would not act in your favour.


You are right that even if you do not receive a 1099-MISC, you still need to report all income to the IRS.  Report the $40 on Schedule C or Schedule C-EZ.  Since your net profit was less than $400, you do not need to file Schedule SE.  From the IRS web site: Self-Employment Income It is a common misconception that if a taxpayer does not receive a Form 1099-MISC or if the income is under $600 per payer, the income is not taxable. There is no minimum amount that a taxpayer may exclude from gross income. All income earned through the taxpayer’s business, as an independent contractor or from informal side jobs is self-employment income, which is fully taxable and must be reported on Form 1040. Use Form 1040, Schedule C, Profit or Loss from Business, or Form 1040, Schedule C-EZ, Net Profit from Business (Sole Proprietorship) to report income and expenses. Taxpayers will also need to prepare Form 1040 Schedule SE for self-employment taxes if the net profit exceeds $400 for a year. Do not report this income on Form 1040 Line 21 as Other Income. Independent contractors must report all income as taxable, even if it is less than $600. Even if the client does not issue a Form 1099-MISC, the income, whatever the amount, is still reportable by the taxpayer.


If I donate $10,000 to charity then I can deduct that $10,000 from my income and not pay income taxes on it.  So if I make $50,000 a year then I will only pay income taxes on $40,000 instead of $50,000 since I donated $10,000 to charity.  This is what is meant when charity contributions are said to be tax deductible. Don't feel like you have to donate to charity.  You owe no one anything.  You do more for others by working (assuming you work in the private sector). If you know of someone personally that is in need of aid then you could give them some help directly.  I find this more effective then blindly dumping money in a bureaucratic, inefficient charity.  I also find there are very few people in need of charity. Personally, I think charity donations are a way for people to feel good about themselves.  They rarely care if their donations are effective.


An answer from PayPal stated that donations may be turned on only for Business PayPal accounts that are verified for its non-profit status. Such PayPal Business account must be opened in the name of non-profit organization (not a single person) and go through verification process. One must provide the following information: That would mean that one cannot ask for donations as a private person, at least in Croatia, and probably in Europe.


This is mostly an addendum to @fredsbend answer, which appears to list reasonable causes, but ignores the technical cost aspect. The other answer lists the technical cause, but doesn't explain it in detail. Look at the two graphs (from Wikipedia). This is how difficult -- in terms of computing power, meaning hardware costs and electricity costs -- it has been to mine bitcoins over years:  This is how many total bitcoins have been made since the start of btc era:  As you can see, despite rising difficulty and costs, the bitcoin mining is slowing down. It should be noted that this is by design. If you could use a home computer at start of bitcoin and mine 1 bitcoin a day on it, nowadays, you need to use specialized hardware costing thousands of dollars and pay huge sums in electricity costs in order to mine the same 1 bitcoin in a day. And this happened on the large scale quite recently.  Add the fact that there is no visible way to significantly increase bitcoin mining speed regardless of hardware used -- the network self-adapts.  The more hardware anyone throws at it, the harder it becomes for him and everyone else -- so extra hardware is used in order to drive out smaller players and keep the general ability to mine, rather than to increase the mining speed. Last year a friend and I were considering buying a couple specialized rigs, running on off-the-shelf powerful computers and using extra (gaming) graphics cards for number crunching. As we didn't get on the train fast enough, the graphic cards were bought up by bitcoin mining organizations en masse.


Well, that's probably not even all of it. If that stranger did his taxes properly, then he already paid about a third of it to the government because wherever he got it from it was income for him and thus it must have been taxed. Now, the remainder is in your hands and yes, according to US law it is now your income and so now you too, must pay about a third of it to the government, and yes you are supposed to explain where it came from. Be careful giving it to somebody else or it'll be taxed yet again. disclaimer: I am not a US citizen


"They lose money on those (much higher rate of theft) and it still requires one or two employees to oversee, plus they bottleneck much faster than regular checkout because people are idiots and will try to roll through the self checkout line with 20 bags worth of groceries in their cart.   They really need to figure out a way to stop letting people with full carts use self checkout. If you can't fit it in a handbasket, you need to use regular checkout. The amount of theft from people ""forgetting"" to pay for the stuff in the bottom of their cart must be mind boggling."


"Yep - the detergents you have to use for human waste tends to disinfect pretty well. As long as there aren't skid marks (plus babies don't eat the same crap as adults) and they don't smell people will happily purchase used cloth diapers. Which we could have done as well to save even more! It's a really good way to go, but again only if you can commit to ""everything else involved"""


Some sample prices for straightforward pay-for-hours-or-deliverables planners: I think I've seen some similar rates elsewhere, too. I'd feel like you might get something perfunctory and boilerplate for too much less than $1000 - how could the person afford to spend much time? - and I'd feel like lots more than $1000 for just a standard straightforward plan might be a ripoff. Basically you're paying $1000 for a day or two of work, you don't want just a couple hours of work, but you don't need a week of work either. Anyway, extracting the general guideline (since prices may vary regionally or over time), you could figure it takes a day or two to do a decent job on a basic complete financial plan without a lot of complexities in it. From there you can decide what's fair, adding or subtracting time if you need less than a complete plan or have complex issues. This is assuming you're paying for time and deliverables, which is not a given. The biggest factor in how much you pay is probably how they charge; a couple of the most common models, (There are other models but these are the ones I've seen most.) The difference between these two models is a lot of money over time. Hourly is going to be much cheaper, because it's a one-time cost instead of ongoing, and unrelated to what you have in assets. However, you won't get investment management, which can be valuable if you aren't the kind to stick to an investment plan or you want someone else to completely take care of it for you. The investment-management planners have the potential to make a lot more money (and are more likely to be in it for the money). Hourly planners don't really have as good a business from a business owner's perspective, but they are cheaper from a customer perspective, as long as you're happy to DIY a bit. One thing I like about hourly planners is that I don't really feel investments are the main place planners can add value, so it makes me nervous to have the compensation based on that. Insurance, estate planning, taxes, etc. are where it's harder for a layperson to know all the ins and outs and DIY. From what I've seen, the cheapest planners are the ones that you can get free or discounted from companies like USAA or Vanguard if you have an account with them. However, they will only recommend products from the company in question, so that's a downside, and you probably won't get to meet them in person. This question may be useful too: What exactly can a financial advisor do for me, and is it worth the money?


"have a bank account here, you need to have a credit history, That is wrong, whoever informed you that. You don't need a credit history to open a bank account. Some banks allow you to open no frills accounts without a credit history. I myself opened an account, with Barclays, with my NI card, job contract and probably my passport too and I amn't from the EU. Also, the bank that allowed me to open the account, doesn't allow me to wire transfer (my) money to another (UK) account, and claims that ll the bank have the same policy for ""cash accounts"", is that true, I mean, is there an actual law that for some reason donesn't allow you to transfer your funds? Why? Did you read the T&Cs. Chances are that other the account is with a different bank. And it always is fishy, atleast for banks because of heightened money laundering regulations, for people opening accounts and starting to transfer money to accounts with other banks. After you have banked with them for certain time, you can ask them to upgrade you to a current account which allow these services. Secondly because it might be a no frills account and they aren't allowed to charge fees, they might disallow transfers to other banks. And banks generally don't charge fees for no frills accounts so certain services are disallowed, which cost them money. NB:- I have had a cash account for 4-5 years with Barclays and I used to transfer money to other banks, but I probably never tried transferring money just after opening an account."


I quit when they had the 24 hour timer.  It also allowed me to leave without a cancellation fee (which they no longer have).   I may go back, but I moved, and no longer have my main theaters near me.


Well to port across platforms, since most of the AAA titles are being built and ported across x86 platforms: xbox, ps and PC.  On one side it may cost more, on the other it may attract more devs since it's another platform where their content will be available with low effort of porting.  Unless ATARI would take the burden of supporting and producing most of the games... and that's not an easy task...


It will likely only increase as unemployment rises too.  Most companies which request degrees or unnecessary levels of experience generally do so as a way to filter out applications. As unemployment rises and the number of people applying for each job increases, I would imagine that will become more widespread.  Two things which reddit feels very passionately about (and understandably so) are:  1. Companies not paying a living wage.   2. Companies requesting unnecessary levels of qualification or experience and thus making it very difficult for young people to find work.   Unfortunately it seems like solving one of these problems will only exacerbate the other.


absolutely $SPY ETF is the way to go if your point of comparison is the S&P and you want to do low maintenance.


Title is incorrect. $1000 every ten years, or $100 per year.   The author puts the calculations in the article, and while I think the methodology is dubious it is at least transparent. The $1000 was the cost over the next decade applied to the number of workers, which means the annual cost is one tenth of that, or $100.  Edit: I said number of households and I should’ve said number of workers.


The issue of unclaimed life insurance policies is a hot topic right now. Your questions are exactly the reason why. For a long time unclaimed life insurance policies have been a boon to life insurance companies but the states are cracking down. There is a lot of new legislation that requires the companies to make a diligent effort to find the rightful beneficiary. In some states if the beneficiary can't be found the proceeds wind up in the states abandoned assets fund. The death benefit is payable if the policy was in force on the date of death. Since no premium is actually due after the insured dies it doesn't matter if the policy lapses after the insured dies. You're correct that there is no one place to go to find out if you are the beneficiary of an unclaimed life insurance policy. Our agency has a resource page which gives you tactics to follow in order to do a search. See How To Find Lost Or Unclaimed Life Insurance Policies.


Academic research into ADRs seems to suggest that pairs-trading ADRs and their underlying shares reveals that there certainly are arbitrage opportunities, but that in most (but not all cases) such opportunities are quickly taken care of by the market. (See this article for the mexican case, the introduction has a list of other articles you could read on the subject). In some cases parity doesn't seem to be reached, which may have to do with transaction costs, the risk of transacting in a foreign market, as well as administrative & legal concerns that can affect the direct holder of a foreign share but don't impact the ADR holder (since those risks and costs are borne by the institution, which presumably has a better idea of how to manage such risks and costs). It's also worth pointing out that there are almost always arbitrage opportunities that get snapped up quickly: the law of one price doesn't apply for very short time-frames, just that if you're not an expert in that particular domain of the market, it might as well be a law since you won't see the arbitrage opportunities fast enough. That is to say, there are always opportunities for arbitrage with ADRs but chances are YOU won't be able to take advantage of it (In the Mexican case, the price divergence seems to have an average half-life of ~3 days). Some price divergence might be expected: ADR holders shouldn't be expected to know as much about the foreign market as the typical foreign share holder, and that uncertainty may also cause some divergence. There does seem to be some opportunity for arbitrage doing what you suggest in markets where it is not legally possible to short shares, but that likely is the value added from being able to short a share that belongs to a market where you can't do that.


Thank God that hospice can provide such care because the real problem is that there is a window of time when some elderly are too infirm to live independently but too poor to afford the atrocious high costs of assisted living care. This leaves quite a few elderly in the position of having to rely on the goodwill of relatives to take them in and who may not be emotionally or financially stable enough to withstand the stress that comes from being a caregiver for the elderly. If hospice can provide support for the family and the patient, more power to them.


We are FAR FAR better off than the majority. That is COMPLETELY true. But the point is that this does not made 300k$ easily, despite being far far far ahead of most. That's the crazy part -- the income disparity.  (P.s., where we live 400k$ gets you the shittiest house in town. You could get a tiny condo for 250k$ too)


>Have these corporations taken away your ability to vote?  What do votes matter if they have no power?  To relate, in my home city, the local utility company is a monopoly.  A Public Utility Commission (PUC) of 3 commissioners was set up to regulate them.  The utility offers all the PUC Commissioners cushy no-show jobs after their term.  The results of this regulatory capture?  We have the highest electric rates in the continental US.  The next county over with a less powerful company is less than half the price from the same powerplants.  This is the same story for many such things including healthcare and insurance, internet, etc.  We can vote how we want, nothing changes because the corporations swing both ways.


I grew up around St. Clairsville. I liked BW3's a lot when I lived in Columbus, so when I heard one opened in St. C, I got a bunch of gift cards for family members. They don't let me pick the restaurant when we go out anymore. Apparently that one is particularly shitty.