Here's a reality check. They likely cost on the order of a few million/yr, which is small potatoes compared to what Taibbi makes it sound like. They got caught, and are going to jail.  Since Taibbi exggerates at every turn, and demonstrably so, I do not trust his reporting. The bid riggers were charged with corrupting *dozens* of bids from 1999 to 2006. Know how many bids were performed in that time? I challenge you to find out. I bet there was more than dozens issued over that 7 year period. In fact, since there appear to be 400B in new bonds issues a year and the one mentioned in the story was for 300M, if that is representative of the sizes then there are over 1,000 issued a year, for 7000 or so over that period. They corrupted *dozens*! Oh the humanity.  Feel free to correct any of these numbers as you see fit.  Reading the actual PDF from the charges, one finds that the fraud was no where near as egregious as the Taibbi story makes it out to be.  [Here](http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f261600/261602.htm) is the indictment, and [here is the DOJ](http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2012/May/12-at-620.html) press release. [Here's](http://www.bondbuyer.com/issues/121_88/cdr-financial-bid-rigging-trial-1039416-1.html) article reporting on the trial with no where near the sensationalism that Taibbi lives for, an article that actually reports *facts* from the case and makes no innunendo. [Here's](http://www.fbi.gov/newyork/press-releases/2012/three-former-financial-services-executives-convicted-for-roles-in-conspiracies-involving-investment-contracts-for-the-proceeds-of-municipal-bonds) FBI press release. Not a single one of these sources that actually had something to do with the investigation, trial, and conviction includes anything near what Taibbi writes.  In fact, other than Taibbi's story and those reporting on it, it appears this is not all the big banks in cahoots to defraud poor bond markets, but a few bad apples that got caught and are getting appropriate punishment.  Let me ask you - how much money did they take? The *total* market appears to be 400B in new sales. Some of the charges included something like changing a 5.04% instrument to a 5% instrument, for an item in a 300 million dollar range. If they reaped the entire difference (which is not likely since there were bid rigging which returns far less the the difference in the rigged bid) that comes to 120K/yr for one of dozens. Taibbi himself writes they may have made up to 87K/yr on that one. Wooo - massive theft!. If all were like that, then dozens is approximately 48 * 87k/yr = 4 million a year. The biggest number for stolen money in any of the actual court documents I have seen ranges in the 50-100K range.   Please provide better evidence *from actual court documents* and not Taibbi style hearsay. Until then I provided you a reality check.


"Each time I've been approached about one of these by a friend/associate my reaction is usually ""Do you really think that little of me?"" It usually puts them on their heels trying to recover and pickup the schtick with some positivity."


They used some software that took like an hour to load the trades but it did all the portfolio allocation and stuff at the same time The reason it took so long was because it pooled all the clients who had that particular trading strat


Generally this gets corrected when you file returns for both States -- one owes you some refund, and younowe some money to the other. Multistate tax returns are their own special kettle of worms, so you might want to consider hiring a pro to straighten this out -- their software has some tools personal packages don't.


"Bonds are priced ""very high"" because their price is compared to their yields. With the current interest rates, which are very low, the bond yields will be low. However, bond issuers still need the money, so there still will be high par value, and investors will not sell bonds at a loss unless there's a better investment (=bonds with better yields). Once the rates start going up, you'll see bonds with current rates dropping in value significantly. Once alternatives appear, people holding them will start dumping them to move the money somewhere more profitable. Similarly the stocks - since there's no other investment alternatives (yields on the bonds are low, interests are low), people invest more in the stocks. Once the rates go up, the investors will start rebalancing portfolios and cashing out."


If you buy a CD through a brokerage, the trade confirmation will indicate whether the CDs is FDIC insured. Unless you have authorized the broker (in writing) to exercise discretion in your account, meaning they can act in your account without contacting you first, they must contact you and discuss the specific investment with you before buying it. If they have misled you and the CD is not actually FDIC insured, you have a right to ask them to reverse the transaction.  Keep in mind that brokerages are also required to insure the assets in your account which they hold on their balance sheets (cash, bonds, stocks, mutual funds, but not commodities). This is provided by SIPC, the equivalent of FDIC in the brokerage world. Most large brokerages also insure you beyond the SIPC minimum. Keep in mind, unlike FDIC, you're not insured against market risk, only against a bankruptcy of the brokerage. Also, SIPC is funded by the securities industry, not by the US Government.


"So, there is no truly ""correct"" way to calculate return.  Professionals will often calculate many different rates of return depending on what they wish to understand about their portfolio.  However, the two most common ways of calculating multi-period return though are time-weighted return and money-weighted return. I'll leave the details to this good Investopeadia article, but the big picture is time-weighted returns help you understand how the stock performed during the period in question independent of how you invested it it.  Whereas money-weighted return helps you understand how you performed investing in the stock in question.  From your question, it appears both methods would be useful in combination to help you evaluate your portfolio. Both methods should be fairly easy to calculate yourself in a spread sheet, but if you are interested there are plenty of examples of both in google docs on the web."


I suppose all our (british) newspapers have 'social media teams' which may or may not include spammers, it will become a more common thing.  Bear in mind also that the Daily Mail  (website at least) seems really popular in the US. They are also taking posts from sites like reddit and putting them into their dead tree paper.  I think the issue the admins banned these domains about was that the sites (or agents acting on behalf of) were spamming *and* manipulating the voting system - method unknown.


>The Great Recession -- including the housing and stock market collapses -- wiped out nearly 30 years of net worth gains for the typical household.  So, stock market drops, rich get richer. Banks crash, rich get richer. Wars rage on, rich get richer. But the middle class loses 30 years. Hmm.


I think your comment sounded a lot more reasonable and aware of how it goes than the writer; and yes it does makes sense that for little investors like retailers, there is not really a point to consider it, as you said. I don't think it redeems the article at all.


Tips on The best way to Look for [dallas advertising agency](http://www.elevate-group.com)  who have been about for a even though will surely agree with us when we say that one from the ideal methods to market place your product will be to develop credibility in your brand name. The brand name will likely be what individuals acknowledge essentially the most and in the event you managed to develop one that features a optimistic effect in your goal industry, then you're definitely on the proper road.


You don't see data because you're not looking. What did congress do right after WW2? They slashed spending. All the plants and factories making war time things were now able to make products that people wanted, and the economy took off and people's standard of living rose across the board.   You're not looking back far enough in the euro story. Greece is not the same economy or government as Germany, and that's part of the problem. Putting them into the same centralized economic system with the same interest rates was bound to fail because they are so different. When Greece joined the euro, they saw a massive boom in economic growth from the access to cheap financing costs. There was certainly no lack of demand then eh? What you're seeing is the result of years of supply side problems created by the european union in their quest to be a centralized global super power. The best thing for Greece to do in their current situation is to leave the shackles of the european union and take the drachma back. In the short run they would face a massive devaluation in the currency, and there would certainly be a few tough weeks or months, but the devaluation would incentivise all types of entrepreneurs and businessmen to build there and utilize cheap labor, there would be a flood of tourism and Greece would soon be on a path towards real productive growth. Their only other option is to face decades of austerity, and prolonged unemployment, where they are no longer working for themselves, and have become modern day serfs. We saw similar scenarios play out in both Iceland and Argentina, and Greece will only be the first of many  to drop the the euro.   www.econlib.org/library/Enc/SupplySideEconomics.html


This. Everybody is pissed about monopolies but Amazon gets a pass. I have no idea why. They are not going to keep prices this low and barely make a profit forever. Once retailers have gone away they will jack prices up.


"First - Welcome to Money.SE. You gave a lot of detail, and it's tough to parse out the single question. Actually, you have multiple issues. $1300 is what you need to pay the tax? In the 25% bracket plus 10% penalty, you have a 65% net amount. $1300/.65 = Exactly $2000. You withdraw $2000, have them (the IRA holder) withhold $700 in federal tax, and you're done.  All that said, don't do it. Nathan's answer - payment plan with IRS - is the way to go.  You've shared with us a important issue. Your budget is running too tight. We have a post here, ""the correct order of investing"" which provides a great guideline that applies to most visitors. You are missing the part that requires a decent sized emergency fund. In your case, calling it that, may be a misnomer, as the tax bill isn't an unexpected emergency, but something that should have been foreseeable. We have had a number of posts here that advocate the paid in full house. And I always respond that the emergency fund comes first. With $70K of income, you should have $35K or so of liquidity, money readily available. Tax due in April shouldn't be causing you this grief. Please read that post I linked and others here to help you with the budgeting issue.  Last - You are in an enviable position, A half million dollars, no mortgage, mid 40s. Easily doing better than most. So, please forgive the soapbox tone of the above, it was just my ""see, that's what I'm talking about"" moment from my tenure here."


Yodlee is the back-end which communicates with the banks, and Mint just provide a pretty layer on top. You can sign up for an account with Yodlee directly, which may give you the flexibility you need.


The problem is that in order for me to be invested enough that it's worth money to me I need to use it for a long time.  I pay for Reddit gold because I'm on this stupid site every day so I feel I should support it.  I never would have come to that decision without using the site for at least a year first.


Most people interested in reviving antitrust legislation don't have a problem with the tech companies listed 'Facebook, Amazon, Google', all of them suffer from being good, not a monopoly. The bust trusting people want is telecoms, their ISPs mainly, major cell carriers second.   After that they mainly have problems with more traditional but very large corporations that have multiple companies under different brands that pretend to compete. Nestle, P&G, unilever, and other similarly large multinational goods corps.


Who is going to invest without being a gatekeeper? You don't invest in stuff you don't think is good ... as an investor, you will select who you invest in. You don't invest and sit back and not provide any input on what you think the artist should do to sell themselves so that you make your money back.


After reading your back and forth with geerussell, its interesting seeing you bring up WWII, where the concern was full output and employment, just as he is suggesting. If the government wants to, it can take a country mired in depression, with women mostly out of the work force and men unemployed in great numbers, and have near full employment and the addition of women in the work force in a few short years. *And they were shipping a lot of their best laborers and much of their output overseas to be simply destroyed.*


I've spent enough time researching this question where I feel  comfortable enough providing an answer.  I'll start with the high level fundamentals and work my way down to the specific question that I had. So point #5 is really the starting point for my answer. We want to find companies that are investing their money.  A good company should be reinvesting most of its excess assets so that it can make more money off of them. If a company has too much working capital, then it is not being efficiently reinvested.  That explains why excess working capital can have a negative impact on Return on Capital. But what about the fact that current liabilities in excess of current assets has a positive impact on the Return on Capital calculation?  That is a problem, period.  If current liabilities exceed current assets then the company may have a hard time meeting their short term financial obligations. This could mean borrowing more money, or it could mean something worse - like bankruptcy.  If the company borrows money, then it will have to repay it in the future at higher costs.  This approach could be fine if the company can invest money at a rate of return exceeding the cost of their debt, but to favor debt in the Return on Capital calculation is wrong. That scenario would skew the metric. The company has to overcome this debt. Anyways, this is my understanding, as the amateur investor. My credibility is not even comparable to Greenblatt's credibility, so I have no business calling any part of his calculation wrong. But, in defense of my explanation, Greenblatt doesn't get into these gritty details so I don't know that he allowed current liabilities in excess of current assets to have a positive impact on his Return on Capital calculation.


First, what country are you in? Canada doesn't offer a mortgage interest tax deduction, the US does. This changes the math a bit, and in the US, the current after tax cost of a mortgage is below our long term inflation rate.   Is the mortgage your only debt? I've seen people religiously pay extra each month to their 6% mortgage while carrying 18% interest debt on credit cards.  Next, there are company matched retirement plans, in the US, a 401(k) plan, where if you put up to 6% or so of your pay into the account, it's effectively doubled upon deposit. I'd be sure not to miss such an opportunity. After these considerations, prepaying is equal to buying a risk free fixed instrument. If that appeals to you, and you've considered the above first, go for it. Keep in mind, money paid to the mortgage isn't easily borrowed back, short of a HELOC. I'd strongly advise that your emergency fund be fully funded (6 months worth of spending) before starting to make extra mortgage payments.


"Can I teach children an invaluable skill for free and provide a website or PayPal link for anyone who appreciates the result of my gift to their child and wishes to gift me money (or maybe they don’t have a child but believe in my revolutionary contribution to the future) as they see fit, up to $10K? Two immediately obvious problems with this strategy: What about when you receive gifts from people who aren't in the US? You have to declare, and pay taxes on, foreign gifts. It seems to me that these may not be gifts because they are given in connection with the service you provided rather than from ""detached and disinterested generosity"" as required to make the gift tax exempt. (See Commisioner v. Duberstein -- gift given to thank associate for a sales lead did not arise from detached generosity. See Stanton v. United States -- gift given in appreciation of services rendered may or may not be a gift for tax purposes. See also Bogardus v. Commissioner -- gifts inspired by past service can be tax exempt.)"


"Six figures for college graduates. It's comparable to Apple and Google, except that Seattle has a lower cost of living than Silicon Valley so it's comparatively better pay. The downside is that there's a perception that working for Microsoft isn't as ""cool"" as Apple or Google."


I actually don't have a finance/accounting background but a much more technical background within my sector and had some general finance knowledge. However, most have finance/accounting degrees I work with, and then learn their sector.  Many (a third?) straight out of school, most associates with just a few years of experience in finance/accounting related jobs, not necessarily equity research.  Don't fret about not having much luck so far, keep looking for a good opening and understand that a lot of jobs in finance/accounting fields can lead you to other positions.


When I log in to Schwab to look at these options it tells me there's only Adjusted Options available on these terms: Adjusted Options:   Multiplier: 100; Deliverable: 15 PTIE; Cash: ---- It does confirm your July Call quote price of $0.05 because the contract, though priced for 100 shares, will only deliver 15 shares.  Separately, looking at the company website for news there was a 7 for 1 Reverse Split announced on May 8, which is the culprit for this option adjustment and the seemingly nonsensical call price.


If managed correctly, there's no reason the *Rolling Stone* brand shouldn't thrive, but it has been run into the ground and has essentially thrown away any and all goodwill it had. Honestly, it seems like Wenner wants to cash out before the UVA case(s) are finalized.


The ex-dividend date, prevents this, but people are still able to do this and this is an investment strategy. There are some illiquid and immature markets where prices don't adjust.  In the options market people are able to find mispriced deep in the money calls to take advantage of the ex-dividend date. It is called dividend capture using covered calls.


Recent grads from Berkeley's program are reporting 100-150k/yr.  If you look at job postings you'll find offers up to 300k/yr and in a few rare instances I've seen 500k+.  The key though for those really high paying jobs is that you must have a PhD and must be an expert programmer. Look at it more like they're giving you the capital to build an HFT system that makes the money - you're practically a business partner.


It certainly makes the NAFTA renegotiations unnecessary. Canada has already stated that it will not relax/weaken provisions in the Paris Agreement and will therefore be piling carbon tariffs onto US imports.   There is hope however. Rejecting Trump's opinion on the matter, several states will seek out their own trade agreements with Canada and the world as they are committed to following the Paris Agreement on their own. (Governor Brown has even gone on to state that California will not remit any federal taxes for its independent, Paris Agreement trade deals)


As regards Inheritance Tax if your parents are abroad the question must be asked about their Domicile status as non doms are generally only subject to IHT on assets situated in the UK.


"It will depend somewhat on the rules where the company is formed, and perhaps how much you're talking about investing. I don't know about Canada, but when I've formed businesses in the U.S., I've been advised to invest some of the money as an equity investment, and the bulk of the remainder as a loan. You say ""more shares"", so it sounds like you've already invested some money and need to inject another round. If you make a loan to the company, make sure everything is done at arm's length -- you'll need to wear the hat of the Company Management and sign a contract with yourself, use a market-based interest rate, and make sure the company is paying you back with interest. An alternative which may work if you expect cash flow soon is to pay for certain expenses personally and then submit an expense report to the company, which will pay you back. Overall, a quick consultation with your accountant should be a relatively inexpensive way to get the best answer for your specific circumstances."


Get a loan at a decent interest rate and use that to pay off all of the credit cards. Then pay into that loan and leave the credit cards alone. Cancel them and don't use them. Credit card debt is possibly the worst kind of debt. So expensive. It's not designed for long term borrowing. It's designed to be paid off completely every month. Get a single loan and consolidate all your debt into it. It will have a lower interest rate and cost you a lot less in the long term.


Prior to having children we did exactly what you describe.  We would visit my mother in law about four to six times a year, a 350-mile-each-way trip for a weekend.  We'd simply rent a car, drive down, drive back, return it, out $150 or so for the weekend, a total of under $1000 a year; far cheaper than owning. You should factor in whether you will save money, though, on things you might not immediately consider.  Will you spend less on groceries, in particular, if you can drive to Costco or Sam's Club (or even just to a regular grocery store)?  I doubt you'll save the cost of the car ($2000/year as you say), but it's possible it will factor into the mix. I definitely would discourage purchasing a new car, if you're considering the financial side primarily.  I suspect you can get a used car - maybe the $10k car you would've sold - and spend more like $1000 a year on it, or less.  I don't know if I'd go to the $5000 level as those in comments suggested, as if you're doing long trips you want something with higher than average reliability; but even a car like a 5 year old mid-level sedan, easily costing you less than $10k, would be fine and likely sell in 5 years for $5k itself while hopefully not having too much maintenance (especially if you choose something with lower mileage; shop around!).  But even with those assumptions, 20 days a year of rental which you can probably get less than $50 rates on (particularly if you look at some of the car sharing options, Zipcar and Enterprise both allow you to do longer term rentals for reasonable prices) seems like a fine deal compared to the hassle of owning.


I didn't sign up for the exam until March, so I have been a little bit behind. If I pass, I plan on starting on level 2 in late fall (I know too many people who couldn't get past it).


The answer depends entirely on your mortgage terms - is the interest rate low, how many years left? Questions like this are about Cost of Capital. If your mortgage has a low interest for a lot of years, you have a low cost of capital.  By paying it off early, you are dumping that low cost of capital. Use the extra money to start a business, invest in something or even buy another property (rental).  Whenever you have a low cost of capital, don't rush to get rid of it. Of course, if there are no other investment/business opportunities available and the extra money is going into a low return savings account, you might as well pay down your debt.  Or if you lack the self discipline to use the extra money properly - buying flat screens and meals out - then yeah just pay down your debt. But if you're disciplined with the extra money, use it to get access to more capital and make that new capital work for you.


NRE is better. It's a tax free account, exempt from income tax. NRE account is freely repatriable (Principal and interest earned) while the NRO account has restricted repatriability


"It's called disposable income for a reason. It's what's left after obligations, whatever bills you have, and saving. Saving half one's income is pretty much at one end of the spectrum, very few can afford this. The combination of high savings and low actual spending will enable you to retire very early if you wish.  Saving 'only' 15% might actually be out of your comfort zone, maybe 25% will keep you happy. What remains is yours to spend on what you wish, whatever makes you happy. There was a time I joked ""I spent most of my money on women and beer. The rest, I wasted."" Now, I don't mind travel, but it's not my passion. If traveling the world is yours, do it. Enjoy every minute of it."


"I wrote about it above... my employer doesn't pay for the service,  and isn't under any contract (other peer companies do pay for it). I'm partially a hero for completing the project for free, but that's another story.   I also created the company and did the work outside of business hours, so that I wouldn't breach any conflict of interest rules.   And being a government body, rather than a ""for profit"" corporation actually makes this kind of thing a lot easier to do, assuming you don't charge your employer money."


Oh definitely, you just need to be willing to work in Bismarck ND, or various parts of the rustbelt. And it's not that you're getting paid especially high, it's that everything is so insanely cheap (for the most part).  The last enclave of decent earning potential, really cheap living, and decent weather/enough stuff to do to keep you content is deep south college towns, but those are a secret so shush!


I don't agree he should be fired, but this was a huge fuck up by leadership. Google is already getting sued by women employees. They have a bad rep among women and even among some minorities. There were rumors Google didn't like conservatives, now they basically showed it.  He is going to sue for wrongful termination. They're going to settle. Googles reputation has been hurt. There is talk of busting them up. This guy now has a growing twitter population and anti Google stuff is all over Silicon Valley and the internet.   The thing is there were better options if they wanted to get rid of him. It was a very stupid business decision.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/australian-economy/issuing-new-loans-against-unrealised-capital-gains-has-created-an-australian-house-of-cards/news-story/853e540ce0a8ed95d5881a730b6ed2c9) reduced by 87%. (I'm a bot) ***** > THE Australian mortgage market has &quot;Ballooned&quot; due to banks issuing new loans against unrealised capital gains of existing investment properties, creating a $1.7 trillion &quot;House of cards&quot;, a new report warns.  > The report describes the system as a &quot;Classic mortgage Ponzi finance model&quot;, with newly purchased properties often generating net rental income losses, adversely impacting upon cash flows.  > Melbourne&#039;s median house price has risen by 12.7 per cent over the past year to $695,500, with Brisbane up 3 per cent to $488,757, Adelaide 5.2 per cent to $430,109, Hobart 13.6 per cent to $383,438 and Canberra 12.9 per cent to $575,173.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6z9ea1/issuing_new_loans_against_unrealised_capital/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~207582 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*: **property**^#1 **per**^#2 **cent**^#3 **report**^#4 **market**^#5"


"Somehow I just stumbled onto this thread...  > You essentially robbed the person holding the debt (since you promised to pay it off).   Depends on leverage, with fractional reserve lending.  Banks are permitted to loan out 30x their actual assets, or more.  If I have $1 but can loan out $30, and anything more than $1 gets paid back, I haven't lost any money.  In addition, I can write off the amount defaulted, *and the government will pay me back* for certain types of loans.  With student loans, since they are almost impossible to discharge, gov't will pursue the borrower for years and decades, and ultimately collect more interest.  Here is an article on it:  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704723104576061953842079760.html  > According to Kantrowitz, the government stands to earn $2,010.44 more in interest from a $10,000 loan that defaulted than if it had been paid in full over a 20-year term, and $6,522.00 more than if it had been paid back in 10 years. Alan Collinge, founder of borrowers' rights advocacy Student Loan Justice, said the high recovery rates provide a ""perverted incentive"" for the government to allow loans to go into default. Kantrowitz estimates the recovery rate would need to fall to below 50% in order for default prevention efforts to become more lucrative than defaults themselves.   Not to mention:  http://studentloanjustice.org/defaults-making-money.html  > So essentially, the Department is given a choice:  Either do nothing and get nothing, or outlay cash with the knowledge that this outlay will realize a 22 percent return, ultimately (minus the governments cost of money and collection costs).  From this perspective, it is clear that based solely on financial motivations, and without specific detailed knowledge of the loan (i.e. borrower characteristics, etc.), the chooser would clearly favor the default scenario,  for not only the  return, but perhaps the potential savings in subsidy payment as well,     And don't forget the penalties accruing to the person defaulting; they will probably have to move out of the country in order to escape collection.  And let's factor in the huge ROI the lender sees by creating an indentured servant class.  Plus, the gov't will issue as much currency as it wants, to make *itself* whole.  And how much of a loss IS the loss, when the whole of the loan amount went right back into the local economy, paying professors, janitors, landlords, grocery stores, etc.?  And don't forget all THOSE taxes (income and sale) that the gov't collects.  Government will collect ~30%-50% of the loan immediately as income and sales tax, plus a portion of it every time the money changes hands (I pay income tax, then use some of my after-tax money to pay you for a product or service, and you still have to pay tax on that money, and so on).  So it's more complicated than having ""robbed the person holding the debt"".  Banks at 30x leverage don't lose money as long as they get back 1/30th of the total amount lent out, including interest, fees, and penalties, before considering write-offs and government repayment.  In fact, the point of over-leverage is so you CAN make loans that have risk attached.  If you could only lend what you actually had, you would have to stay away from anything risky because it would be too easy to lose money.  Having virtual $ to bet means you can serve market segments that have higher risk.  This makes MORE money for the banks, that's why they do it.  They are already playing with funny money, so they don't lose any even if you default and move to another country.  And the money you ""spent"" has also made its way back to them in various amounts, such as your professor's mortgage payments, auto loan, etc.  Your taking on debt already helped the bank get its OTHER loans repaid.  So, roughly speaking, if you took out $90,000 and $3,000 of that made its way back to the bank through various means, they haven't lost any money, because it only cost them $3,000 actual dollars in the first place."


Tradable is a much broader term than marketable.  For example, some programmers/developers sell their services online, hence programming is a tradable service.  However, it is not a security nor is it marketable since it cannot readily be converted to cash.  All marketable securities are, by definition, tradable.


> Contingencies such as losing your job, being unemployed, or working for lower salary are excluded of course.  Why?  Lower education increases your likelihood of being unemployed for a prolonged period.  Even during this Great Recession, [the unemployment rate for those with a bachelor's degree and older than 25 never exceeded 5%.](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_4jIlyJ10uJU/TP1rTP2Me3I/AAAAAAAAKp0/JbKB1WQWVLE/s1600/UnemploymentEducationSept2010.jpg)    Edit:  > 90% of the people will not reach 300-400K more in their lifetime.  The difference of the median of those with a bachelor's compared to those with high school diploma in [2009 was 15K per year](http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=77) for full-time, full-year wage and salary workers ages 25–34.    At 15K per year for the 40+ years of work from 22 or so to 65, it will be 600K.   But the gap will widen as the employees age.  Professionals will have career advancement with resulting increase is salary.    For all ages, [the difference between median salary for a bachelor's degree holder compare to high school diploma is 19.5K \($46,930 compared to $27,380\)](http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d10/tables/dt10_392.asp)


If your new employer has a Final Salary or defined benefit type pension scheme, join it. DB plans are attractive because they are often less a risk for the employee. If your employer has a defined contribution scheme and contributes to it, join it and contribute at least up to the maximum amount that they will match – otherwise you are leaving free money on the table. You also probably need to sit down with an independent adviser for what to do with your existing pension (is it a DC or DB) and if you want to have a pension outside of your employer.


The principle here seems to be that just betting itself is not taxable. From BIM22015  The basic position is that betting and gambling, as such, do not constitute trading However,  An organised activity to make profits out of the gambling public will normally amount to trading. The idea seems to be that being a bookmaker is taxable, but just making bets is not. BIM22017 going into it a bit more: The fact that a taxpayer has a system by which they place their bets, or that they are sufficiently successful to earn a living by gambling does not make their activities a trade. BIM22018 goes into detail on the other side, talking those who are taxable: An organised activity to make profits out of the gambling public will normally amount to trading. An example of this is the bookmaker. ... The key feature is that the taxpayer is likely to be involved in the organisation of the activity. They are not mere punters. They are carrying on an activity where the odds are in their favour. The links prove further information, but the theme seems to be that acting as a bookmaker would be trading income, which is taxable, but acting like a punter, even one with a system, would not be. It's not clear from your description which applies. You may need further advice on the tax treatment that is appropriate. Also follow each of the links for further information. BIM22015 provides links to the most relevant information.   Note, it isn't true that all income is taxable, regardless of source. BIM15035 talks about this. It specifies that for something to be taxable income, it must come from a taxable source.  If, for example, a taxpayer is a trader that does not mean that any non-capital receipt he or she gets is chargeable as trading income. It must also be a receipt forming part of the profits of the trade, which is the taxable ‘source’


Your back of the envelope calculation shows an income of about 5.5% per year, which is much better than a bank. The risk of course is that in a few years when you want to sell the stock, the price may not be at the level you want. The question is what are you giving up with this plan. You have 80K in cash, will cutting it to 30K in cash make it harder for your business to survive? If your income from the business starts slowly, having that 50K in cash may be better. Selling the stock when the business is desperate for money may lock in losses.


Let's say you've got an idea for an instrument that could be used to hedge non-depreciating assets (commodities for instance) with benefits including getting rid of the basis risks associated with the futures market.  What would be some suggestions on how to market the idea without being left out of the loop? I work neither in a bank nor at a trading house, but as an analyst in the shipping sector and therefore don't stand to benefit directly from my own idea if I were to share it with a party that could make use of it.   Hope this is the sort of question that's within the scope of this thread. Any insight in how such issues can be dealt with would be much appreciated.


They're not fully opposing SOPA, that's an error in the title of this post.    They still assert that SOPA is an attempt to fix something that's broken, their problem (according to the press releases) seems to be with some of the minutae in the bill.    While they've backed down somewhat, it's just not accurate to say they're in 'full SOPA opposition'.


Mortgage interest is a different story. That's a consumer financing consumption. A business is financing a profit making enterprise.  Not sure what the implications would be once this settles down -- probably less long term debt and a greater dependency on equity financing.


It's generally a bad idea to use low-risk credit (low-risk in sense you're practically guaranteed to be forced to pay it off) to buy high-risk shares. In optimistic scenario, the profit from shares would be higher than your credit percentages. In less optimistic scenario you come with nothing. In worse scenario you have worthless shares and another credit to pay.  If your only problem is the non-profitable property, you can always sell it and get rid of negative cash flow. It won't affect your quality of life negatively. In your high-risk scenario you trade the opportunity for a bit better life with for a risk of turning it into disaster for you and your family.


"I've been saying for awhile now, social media is dead. You can't make money from social media. Why anyone thought you could make money from social media is a bizarre mystery. There are only two revenue models in existence currently, subscriptions, and why would anyone pay for service when there's a thousand free sites, and advertising.  Advertising on the internet is dead, that means social media as a for-profit industry is dead.  And good riddance. Social media is _stupid_. If you want to blog, make a blog. OWN your blog. People can still ""follow"" it using this amazing technology known as RSS which has been around for a really long time.   Facebook and Twitter are both doomed. Neither one makes a dime from their core product, which is micro-blogging. Facebook only makes money because they're an umbrella company that owns a lot of other products. Twitter doesn't make money and is going to vanish in the coming years.  I hope this is a lesson to everyone. The internet is not a magical ATM machine, just because you don't know how it works. You still need to create value to create wealth."


Nonsense! If there are no immigrants willing to work for cheap, then the natives will be paid more to do those jobs.   Actually, more likely, the natives will work in jobs to automate work done by cheap immigrants. Developing automation is hampered by cheap labor because why bother to automate if you have cheap labor?


"@fredsbend, Hope this helps!  ""I understand that a reverse mortgage can be paid out in two ways: A lump sum and monthly payments. I figure that if you take the lump sum, eventually, the bank wants you to start paying it back."" Answer:   Actually, there are 3 payout options, or 4 if you consider a combination payout as another one. There's a lump sum, a line of credit, or the monthly payout, or a combination.  ""I figure that if you take the monthly payments, eventually, the bank stops paying out and wants you to pay it back. In both situations, interest accrues and this is how the bank makes money off of the deal"".  Answer: The only time the monthly payments would stop would be if the borrower defaults on the lenders' terms or they no longer live at home. You are right though, and interest does accrue on whichever payment is decided on. I'm not sure how the lender makes money, probably by the interest, but I know borrowers are protected against high rates and owing more than your house. Here's an article I found that goes over the protections more in detail: https://www.americanadvisorsgroup.com/news/6-consumer-protections-reverse-mortgage-loan-borrowers.  ""But what determines when you have to begin paying back the reverse mortgage? Some sources online seem to say that it's based only on if you die or would like to sell/move. That can't be right in all situations, because you could end up with a massive debt on a property more than its value.""  Answer: There are a lot of protections or regulations in place to protect anyone who takes out a reverse mortgage. One being, you can't owe MORE than your house is valued at during the time of repayment, a reverse mortgage is a non-recourse loan. In the instance that your house is less than you owe, you either sell the home and the proceeds are used to pay the loan and you keep the rest OR if you owe more than the house proceeds of the home go to the lender. Either way, you're not left paying for a ""mortgage"" without the house. In the case the parent, grandparent passes, then the heirs would have a choice of either paying back the reverse mortgage in payments, OR they can sell the house, heirs are protected during this as well to make sure they're not left with major debt in case of anything.  Is there a formula to figure out when the bank stops the monthly payments and then wants it back?  **Answer:**The amount becomes due if loan terms are not met, but the lender will discuss the options if it comes to that.  Is there a different formula for when the lump sum would have to be paid back?""  Answer: Each payout option has the same terms and the same pay back terms. As long as terms are met, the lender can't ask for early repayment."


My take is there's room for a lot of models on the Internet, just as there is room for nonprofits, for-profit businesses and other types of organizations in the brick and mortar world. The Internet is a flexible medium that can be used a number of ways. The best part of it to me is that people vote by their actions --- if I hate ad-supported sites, I can ignore them. If I'm willing to pay for, say, news, I can do that, too.


Economically it doesn't make much difference, but I like to control the account because I can adjust the amount I put aide each month based on the new tax rates that come out each spring. This allow me finer control. I also know that the bills have been paid, I had one lender years ago that failed to pay the property tax bill, I had to end the money in to the county, and then pend months fighting the lender to get the money back. Now I avoid escrow accounts.  The money being collected by the mortgage servicing company for property taxes and property insurance goes into a separate account. The company insists on handling the funds to make sure that these bills are paid on time, thus protecting their investment. The failure to pay the taxes leaves the property subject to forfeiture via tax lien.  The failure to pay property insurance leaves the house unprotected if there is a fire or other incident. You can avoid the use of an escrow  account if you have enough equity in the account. Some lenders ask for you to provide proof of payment each year if you are going to pay it yourself.  At the end of each year the servicing company will provide you with an accounting for interest on the loan, and the amount of money spent on taxes and insurance. Also expect that they will make adjustments to the monthly withholding based on estimated increases for taxes and insurance.  Depending on your financial situation the interest, taxes may be included on Schedule A. If you have a rental property the interest, taxes and insurance are considered expenses that you can write off. The biggest issue with escrow accounts is that the company can have a buffer built in to protect them from unexpected increases. Many people view the calculation of the buffer a confusing and feel that they are overpaying.  If you want to avoid the escrow account you should make sure that each month you put the money into a separate account so that when the property tax bill is due you can pay it on time. When savings accounts earned significant interest it was possible to make a little money in the deal, but that hasn't been true for the last few years.


Really I don't understand why they would run anything like an ATM or voting machine with more than a command line. They could also be using hardware the equivalent of a high school scientific calculator and do the same job. Putting in anything resembling a modern processor or computer into a single-purpose security device just screams incompetence to me.


"What you are seeking is termed ""Alpha"", the mispricing in the market. Specifically, Alpha is the price error when compared to the market return and beta of the stock. Modern portfolio theory suggests that a portfolio with good Alpha will maximize profits for a given risk tolerance. The efficient market hypotheses suggests that Alpha is always zero. The EMH also suggests that taxes, human effort and information propagation delays don't exist (i.e. it is wrong). For someone who is right, the best specific answer to your question is presented Ben Graham's book ""The Intelligent Investor"" (starting on page 280). And even still, that book is better summarized by Warren Buffet (see Berkshire Hathaway Letters to Shareholders). In a great disservice to the geniuses above it can be summarized much further: closely follow the company to estimate its true earnings potential... and ignore the prices the market is quoting. ADDENDUM: And when you have earnings potential, calculate value with: NPV = sum(each income piece/(1+cost of capital)^time) Update: See http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2014/02/24/warren-buffett-berkshire-letter/ ""When Charlie Munger and I buy stocks..."" for these same ideas right from the horse's mouth"


I agree! For an interview suit - I would go to men's warehouse and get a suit that fits.  If you're not wearing it all the time, you don't need a BB suit. I wear suits all the time for work and I love BB, but most people won't notice the difference, and even if they do, they don't expect a job applicant to be wearing a $1000 suit.  I'm going to trial tomorrow in a men's warehouse suit - wore BB today - no one will know or care.   Shoes though... get good shoes. I like AE and Johnston & Murphy.  Two pair has lasted me 4 years and they look great. I'd wear out $75 shoes in a few month.  This isn't necessary for a job interview though, but when you're looking for work shoes down the road...


I have never worked at Wal-Mart.  Additionally, the employees under me loved working for me. Nights when I would close, when I came in, workers would ask if I was the only once closing and be very happy when I was. I never received a single complaint and once I left, many of them have since contacted me to hang out in off work hours. I treated them all with respect.  As far as the pay itself, I worked for a major corporation so at the store level, you don't have much say in what was a very structured pay-raise scale.  You can treat people with respect while also demanding that they do a good job. In fact, I think workers don't respect those bosses that allow shitty work. I know I don't.


Out of curiosity, do you use any social media services (reddit included) that you would be willing to pay a subscription for?  It costs money to host a website. Content may also cost money. Other than advertising, there are very few other routes a website could go down for a regular income, and fewer routes that have actually succeeded.   Strip out advertising and the majority of the internet - certainly the most popular sites - would cease to exist, I feel.


"For me, it would be hard to leave all forms of money at home (cash, credit card, debit card.)  There are times when you simply need to have money on hand.  But, here's a simple idea I have that lets you bring your cards with you, yet still puts up a hurdle to curb impulse buying. When you're in a situation where you want to buy something, the card that's in your wallet/purse will be wrapped in your crafted ""reminder envelope.""  You'll see the reminder, which is hopefully enough.  Then, in order to make a purchase you'll need to tear it open.  That should get you to think twice. The one problem with the above is online purchases: If you have memorized your card information, add this rule for yourself:  No online purchases without the payment card present and visible.  (i.e. you also must tear open the envelope for online purchases.)"


I got an xbox one s, an extra controller, some charger thing, and 3 games(two of which I probably would have gotten anyway) for $240   I think that's a pretty good deal.  I had been looking for a switch since launch, but since apparently I still can't buy one (at MSRP) anywhere in a store,  I finally gave up.


I've been looking through annual reports of some Canadian insurance companies. Having serious trouble with their reporting; it varies widely. I've been trying to create a historic look at the combined ratios, and have been comparing income statements. Maybe that's the wrong place to look.


Of course, 100k a year is middle to upper middle in almost every location except the global hubs of America (la, San Fran, new york, etc etc). I know where i live a family making 100k is just 227$ away from upper class (according to Washington posts calculator). Hell growing up my mother made 38k and she was able to afford a 150k house, yearly vacation trips abroad, and a new car paid off in 1 year. By all means of the article that is the aspirations Joe Biden quoted. The only difference is we live in the midwest. I think no one living in California, New York city, miami, etc. should get delusional and believe that our most demanded locations will have room for everyone, especially at a reasonable rate. People are willing to spend 5k for a studio in New York because it is a city of opportunity, San Francisco is not a place to let life come to you. What i love about the Midwest is that living is incredibly cheap, and if you have established yourself soon enough there is a fortune to be made, especially in real estate. Not to mention we have Chicago, Detroit, Cedar Point which almost every family is close enough and earns enough to visit at least once a year. We may not have enough to afford Lamborghini's, multi million dollar houses, or to visit paris on a whim but I feel most in the midwest have enough to love comfortably and save for retirement atleast (minus maybe the bible belt)


>[**Новые проекты без вложений и скамы! Как заработать в интернете в 2017 году! Топ лучших сайтов 2017 [3:37]**](http://youtu.be/MSTH3UQeneA)  >>¦ Ссылки на регистрации в проектах:  > [*^Вектор ^Криптовалют*](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAOABF2yT1SjVqI7RK9aIUg) ^in ^People ^& ^Blogs  >*^5 ^views ^since ^Jul ^2017*  [^bot ^info](/r/youtubefactsbot/wiki/index)


Generally speaking no person or program is really going to be able to help you lower your current tax burden, most tax decisions are done well before you reach the tax time. You either qualify for the deduction/credit or your don't. Where a good accountant will really be able to help you out is in planning that will limit your future tax burden. Particularly if you run a small business or are very wealthy you will probably want to consider using an accountant. I would always avoid the large scale tax prep places like HR Block they provide the same or lower quality service for a higher price than the software. I run a small business and do my own taxes using turbo tax, but my business isn't overly complex Sole prop, no employees, couple 1099's simple expenses (nothing to amortize) etc.


You are close to understanding, but it looks like you are slightly off: regular 401K - The amount you contribute is taken out of your taxable income for tax purposes in the tax year you earn it. However, when you take it out at retirement that withdrawal counts as income for tax purposes. (You pay the tax on the money later) Roth 401K - The amount you contribute is not taken out of your taxable income for tax purposes in the tax year you earn it. However, when you take it out at retirement that withdrawal will not as income for tax purposes. (You pay the tax on the money now.) Additional benefit: You don't pay tax ever on the gains.


The dividend quoted on a site like the one you linked to on Yahoo shows what 1 investor owning 1 share received from the company. It is not adjusted at all for taxes. (Actually some dividend quotes are adjusted but not for taxes... see below.)  It is not adjusted because most dividends are taxed as ordinary income. This means different rates for different people, and so for simplicity's sake the quotes just show what an investor would be paid.  You're responsible for calculating and paying your own taxes.  From the IRS website: Ordinary Dividends Ordinary (taxable) dividends are the most common type of distribution from a corporation or a mutual fund. They are paid out of earnings and profits and are ordinary income to you. This means they are not capital gains. You can assume that any dividend you receive on common or preferred stock is an ordinary dividend unless the paying corporation or mutual fund tells you otherwise. Ordinary dividends will be shown in box 1a of the Form 1099-DIV you receive. Now my disclaimer... what you see on a normal stock quote for dividend in Yahoo or Google Finance is adjusted. (Like here for GE.) Many corporations actually pay out quarterly dividends. So the number shown for a dividend will be the most recent quarterly dividend [times] 4 quarters. To find out what you would receive as an actual payment, you would need to divide GE's current $0.76 dividend by 4 quarters... $0.19. So you would receive that amount for each share of stock you owned in GE.


No. Empirically no.  The issue at hand has little to do with market confidence. This loss of confidence is the effect of the problem. It's cause is the result of a wholly inadequate fiscal transfer mechanism that is incapable of addressing demand shocks. While there are relevant political and ideological parameters worthy of analysis, they render themselves moot because of the structural constraints of monetary union.  My two cents.


Summarized article: In an effort to increase funding to cover expenses, some states are considering selling sponsorship rights for highway rest areas.   States can spend millions of dollars every year to maintain rest areas so corporate sponsorship is viewed as a viable way to keep rest areas open.   Georgia, Iowa, Ohio and Virginia are currently seeking bids from private companies. Ohio is also considering selling sponsorship rights for bridges.   The Federal Highway Administration allows corporate sponsorship as long as signs are consistent with other highway signs.   Because many drivers fall asleep at the wheel when they go long periods without breaks, rest areas play an important role in keeping highways safe.  * For more summarized news, subscribe to the [/r/SkimThat](http://www.reddit.com/r/SkimThat) subreddit


yeah but most likely, it's a 1x liquidation preference. The startup isn't going to generate cash flows enough to pay off the initial investment to the investor. Technically it isn't exactly specified as only triggered on a liquidation event because OP didn't specify the real legal language but it seems likely that's the case. Point 2 is exactly what a liquidation preference is. No way the owner of the company is participating in anything until the investor gets his initial investment back.


I think it is clear that this has a lot to do with keeping salaries down.    The company has a maximal possible salary limit (i.e. the most they would be willing and able to pay) for what you do.  You have a minimal possible salary.  Both of you know that the current salary is in between the two figures.  For negotiations it would be very useful for you to know the maximal possible salary (i.e. the utmost the company would be willing to pay you to stay and continue); the company on the other hand is obliged to keep costs low and hence would like to know your new minimum acceptable salary so they won't make an offer too high.    But if you knew all salaries of people around you -- you could make a better guess about your own maximal possible salary.  You probably would over-estimate it because we all tend to over-estimate our own relevance and competence, but it would be a better informed guess at least.  The company would hence give up an informational advantage which could lead them to have higher costs.  So they will ask you how much you were offered at the competitor (i.e. they will be close to your new minimum acceptable salary) while trying to prevent you from learning anything about the maximal possible salary..


I did answer, and you not only misinterpreted my answers but presumed I hold opinions that I don't, then argued against those opinions I had never expressed, using arguments based on unsupported speculation rather than fact, and couching your response in personal attacks.   You're being ridiculous, which is why I'm done attempting to discuss the topic with you.


Liên hệ Jimmy Group  Trung tâm SMS: 016 435 09 274 (không nhận cuộc gọi – tin nhắn)  Hotline của Jimmy Group: 0 1992 111199 (tư vấn – hỗ trợ dịch vụ – việc làm)  Hotline khách hàng hàng của Jimmy Group: 01 222 50 9899 (chỉ phục vụ khách hàng VIP)


Well basically a lot of dot-com companies that had no real plans for having actual profit's, self-destructed. I had worked for a company called VarsityOnline.com which was depending on endless money from investor's, and had never really made any kind of profit, for which it had ample opportunity. People lost sight of reality, that just because it wasn't a real brick and mortar store, that common sense, good service and good products didn't matter. We were so clueless back then.


"... which is why the entire ""it costs 1.8 cents to make a penny"" argument is meaningless.  We're not losing 0.8 cents per penny made.  If that was true, we'd also be ***gaining*** $99.877 for every $100 bill that was printed ([which costs 12.3 cents to make](http://mentalfloss.com/article/68650/how-much-does-it-cost-manufacture-us-paper-money)) - which would more than offset the non-existent ""loss"" that people seem to think we incur producing pennies."


"In Europe you can get a huge problem with the financial authorities if you do deals with a daughter company which are not done ""at arm's length"", e.g. by inflated fees or costs.  (This can be classified as fraud, tax evasion or worse.  Obviously, usually details are so complex that almost all investigations end with a deal, but in principle you can get into a lot of trouble.)  This is apparently not a problem in the US, though."


If your money market funds are short-term savings or an emergency fund, you might consider  moving them into an online saving account.  You can get interest rates close to 1% (often above 1% in higher-rate climates) and your savings are completely safe and easily accessible.  Online banks also frequently offer perks such as direct deposit, linking with your checking account, and discounts on other services you might need occasionally (i.e. money orders or certified checks).   If your money market funds are the lowest-risk part of your diversified long-term portfolio, you should consider how low-risk it needs to be.  Money market accounts are now typically FDIC insured (they didn't used to be), but you can get the same security at a higher interest rate with laddered CD's or U.S. savings bonds (if your horizon is compatible). If you want liquidity, or greater return than a CD will give you, then a bond fund or ETF may be the right choice, and it will tend to move counter to your stock investments, balancing your portfolio.   It's true that interest rates will likely rise in the future, which will tend to decrease the value of bond investments.  If you buy and hold a single U.S. savings bond, its interest payments and final payoff are set at purchase, so you won't actually lose money, but you might make less than you would if you invested in a higher-rate climate.  Another way to deal with this, if you want to add a bond fund to your long-term investment portfolio, is to invest your money slowly over time (dollar-cost averaging) so that you don't pay a high price for a large number of shares that immediately drop in value.


Yes, you can open a Trading Account at one place and a Demat Account at another place. Therefore you can open Trading Account at Sharekhan and Demat Account at OBC. However, it would be more convenient for you if both the accounts are opened at the same place which would reduce unnecessary work after every transaction.


You'll need to contact payUSAtax.com support and explain the situation. From the payUSAtax.com support FAQ: Please verify your prior payment through this service by selecting the payment verification link. Within the payment verification link, you will enter your prior payment amount and social security number or employer identification number. Your confirmation number and payment date/time will be returned. If your payment was successful, please select the Contact Us link by clicking Support at the top of the page and notify us of your non-payment notification.


"> These curricula—packed with classes like operations, accounting, statistics, and management—fail to account for students’ individual needs.  Yea, because what we really need is more MBAs without basic knowledge of accounting and statistics. The new economy of ""make shit up"" is working so much better than the old way of doing things."


I do love it when people play the moral appeal/outrage argument.    >It's stupid consumers like you that allow these companies to get away with this shit.  And its people like you that won't convince anyone with such an argument.  All the big banks do unethical things, more so every company on this planet does unethical things.


"Actually, I use SwagBucks (main site) all the time now. It's not a coupon site, but it is a site that I use to save money. For someone like me who does a lot of searching, the ""SwagBucks"" add up pretty fast and can be exchanged for gift cards. The Amazon ones are the best deal ($5 account credit for 450 SwagBucks), and I get one or two a month. I avoid coupon printer programs, because of how they ""install"" on your computer."


I wish I would have known macro-economics taught by the Austrian School types at The Mises Institute.  Their teachings would have compelled me to do the following:


I don't think you're stupid, evil, bad or anything like that.  I'm sure in fact that you are an intelligent, nice person who only wants the best for everyone.  I just think that you are in a willful mannor refusing to understand the difference between insurance and healthcare.  It's not that you are incapable, it is that you simply refuse to do so.  You are doing so to justify making the bad guy out of an industry whose goal is to make health-care accessible to as many people as possible by spreading out the cost of health-emergencies over time, which is mis-directed anger.  I fully appreciate and understand that most health-care is payed for via insurance.  However, this is entirely an artifact of business-tax deductions which make it cheaper for individuals to accept part of their compensation in the form of health insurance benefits.  Health care and insurance aren't intrinsically inseparable, they are bound together in the US due to the tax code.    So what you should be arguing for is the removal of business health-care tax deductions, and direct financial assistance for the poor.  This would make insurance and healthcare a more competitive market, which would in turn drive costs down, and by giving the money directly to the impoverished more of the benefit would reach them, rather than creating some huge bureaucracy that it has to be filtered through first.  But instead you are choosing to vilify a industry for not handing out free health-care, which is misguided at best.


"Also talk to your bank(s) or credit union(s); first one of mine I looked at offers an unsecured loan at 7% variable, and a signature loan at 7.5% fixed, no hidden costs on either. You might do better. Also check store credit. Sears used to offer 1-year-0% financing on appliances if you signed up for the store's card at the time of purchase, and if you have the discipline to reliably pay it off before interest hits that's a hard deal to best. Other stores have offered something similar for major purchases of this sort; do some homework to find out who. (I bought my fridge that way, paying it in month 10.) The ""catch""  is that many people get distracted and do wind up paying interest, and the store hopes that having an account with them will encourage you to shop there more often.)"


"He is stupid don't mind him, the guy has all of his money in one bank. He could make a lot of money with that amount of money(i m no suggesting ""he"" but someone he will pay for) and do not need to make stupid ass fights with that Irish ginger."


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-06-06/saudi-arabia-s-feud-with-qatar-has-22-year-history-rooted-in-gas) reduced by 86%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Saudi Arabia&#039;s isolation of Qatar has been brewing since 1995, and the dispute&#039;s long past and likely lingering future are best explained by natural gas.  > Qatar&#039;s sovereign wealth fund agreed last year to invest $2.7 billion in Russia&#039;s state-run Rosneft Oil Co. PJSC. &quot;Qatar used to be a kind of Saudi vassal state, but it used the autonomy that its gas wealth created to carve out an independent role for itself,&quot; said Jim Krane, energy research fellow at Rice University&#039;s Baker Institute, in Houston, Texas.  > Gas isn&#039;t the immediate cause of the current showdown, but &quot;You can question why Qatar has been unwilling to supply its neighboring countries, making them gas poor,&quot; said Wright, the academic, speaking by telephone from the Qatari capital Doha.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6ftc7d/saudi_dispute_with_qatar_has_22year_history/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~138558 tl;drs so far."") | [Theory](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31bfht/theory_autotldr_concept/) | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **Qatar**^#1 **gas**^#2 **Saudi**^#3 **Iran**^#4 **Arabia**^#5"


"Considering land mass, natural resources, population, tech and a thriving free market, this country could be heaven. It's just good. If not for corruption in Washington that legalized a bribing system that allows politicians to be owned by corporations that through lobbying write themselves laws that favor them instead of the majority of the people, this country would be in a much, much better place.   Since most laws have to benefit the richest people first, and those are the greediest of people, it reflects on society. You have the Walton family worth hundreds of billions of dollars through a company that makes hyndreds of billions of dollars, but refuse to pay their employees decent wages. On top of that, many billionaires get tremendous tax cuts or don't pay at all. The burden is all on the middle class. People are angry.   And don't give me that redneck ""leave the country"" argument, I am discussing a topic posted on a public forum. It's what I think and I am sure a lot of Americans agree with me. Are you going to tell them to leave as well? I have a house in three continents, you can't tell me shit."


This. My partner is a highly skilled tech worker and we have slowly been coming up with a back up plan to leave if things get too crazy. I was born here and fully intended to die here but I have a chronic illness that could kill me and I'm scared. I know a few others who are doing the same.


Hmm ... let me think about that ... perhaps they will then have less money?   Reddit really isn't just a tiny niche website anymore, we get like 20 million unique hits per day or something. If those 20 million finally get it through their heads that they should stop giving cash to the MAFIAA, they will suffer. It's the only way.


They need to spread the work for all customers over the whole month, and they don't work on weekends. Combine the two, and the rule becomes clear - if months have minimum of N working days, 1/N of all customers gets set on each day. You seem to be on day 5: If the month starts with a Monday, the fifth working day is the 5. (Friday); if there is a Sat or Sun in between, it will be the 6th, and if there is both a Sat and a Sun in there, it will be the 7th. However, the statement itself is not very important at all. It is just the day where they print it on paper (or even only on a PDF). You can see your bank account activity every day 24/7 by checking online, and nothing keeps you from printing it on every 1st of the month if you want (or every day, or whenever you prefer).


"Assuming its in the US: No, it is not, and such things are usually treated as ""red flags"" for audit (and no, golf club memberships are not deductible either). The food expenses are not deductible in their entirety as well, only up to 50% of the actual expense, and only if it is directly business related. From what you've described, it sounds like if you have an audit coming you'll be in trouble. The purposes and activities of a club, not its name, will determine   whether or not you can deduct the dues. You cannot deduct dues paid   to: Country clubs, Golf and athletic clubs, Airline clubs, Hotel clubs, and Clubs operated to provide meals under circumstances generally considered to be conducive to business discussions."


"First of all, the recovery isn't ""right around the corner.""  It's been in process since March of 2009.  It might not be ""the recovery you want,"" or even an ""ideal"" recovery, but it's a recovery nonetheless.  I could produce any number of official indicators that bear this out.  Your views extremely hyperbolic.  Do you know what a HELOC is?  Do you know what it means to have a $500k HELOC?  It means that you have $500k of *equity* in your house.  Not what your house is worth, mind you - but the value of your stake in the house, minus the value of the bank's stake in the house.  $500k?  Into a house, over 20 years of stagnating wages?  Doesn't make much sense.  Why?  It's total hyperbole.  Just like your post:  Total hyperbole."


An alternative to paying thousands of dollars for historical prices by the minute:  Subscribe to real time data for as low as USD$1.5/month from your broker, then browse the chart.


Exchanging their labour for low wages gives them the work experience they need for future, better-paid employment. Wew now that we know that, lets give a bring round of applause for all the dedicated low wage workers out there! Keep it up low wage workers, your low wage service is so importantly needed by employers. Surely your sacrifice for the economy will one day be rewarded.


I'm a bot, *bleep*, *bloop*. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:  - [/r/talkbusiness] [Weekly Stock Market Review](https://np.reddit.com/r/talkbusiness/comments/787ys8/weekly_stock_market_review/)  [](#footer)*^(If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads.) ^\([Info](/r/TotesMessenger) ^/ ^[Contact](/message/compose?to=/r/TotesMessenger))*  [](#bot)


"Risk is the capital you have staked in pursuit of profit. The danger is that you lose what you have risked.  For some bets (risks), you can get insurance to cover for losses.  Now the ""game"" of Landlord and Tenant requires you to play fully by the rules set forth by your legislators. In your case, that is the legislators of the State of Texas. Without knowing those rules, you could be liable (open to civil prosecution) for violating those rules. Tenants could be savvy to those rules or savvy enough to hire someone, a lawyer, who knows those rules. As well, in the game of Landlord and Tenant, you must ascertain the creditworthiness of your would-be tenant. If the tenant fails to pay rent, that tenant can detain the residence. You will incur additional outlays to gain possession of your property (ownership in your rental). Now the game of Landlord vs Landlord is different. You can't pick up houses easily enough and even if you could, likely the expense of doing so could wipe out any would profits from having the house as a rental. So, in Landlord vs Landlord, you get constrained by where your rental sits. Thus you must forecast what will the neighborhood look like in five, ten, fifteen years."


"Often in life we have to choose the lesser of evils.  Whole Life as an investment vs. Term Life and invest the difference is one of these times. I assume the following statement is true. ""The commissions on whole life are sick. The selling agent gets upward of 90% of your first year's premium."" But how does that compare to investing in mutual funds (as one alternative)?   Well according to Vanguard the average mutual fund keeps 60% of the total returns over the average investors lifetime. And of course income taxes (on withdrawal) consume another 30% (or more) of the dollars you withdraw (from a tax deferred retirement plan like a 401k.) http://www.fool.com/School/MutualFunds/Performance/Record.htm So you have to pick your poison and make the choice that fits your view of the future. Personally I don't believe my cost of living in retirement will be radically lower than my cost of living while working. Additionally I believe income tax rates will be higher in the future than the in the present and so deferring taxes (like a 401k) doesn't make sense to me.  (In 1980 a 401k made sense when the average 401k participant was paying over 50% in federal income tax and also got a pension.) So paying 90% of my first year's premium rather than 60% of my gains over my lifetime seems acceptable.  And borrowing tax free against my life insurance once retired (with no intention of paying it back) will, I believe, provide greater income than a 401k could."


Think I had to sign an NDA on pricing w them so can't get specific. Depends if you want realtime or just historical data. Historical obviously cheaper, realtime more. The prices aren't crushing though, one of cheapest tick data vendors around. You get pros and cons to that though - data is time stamped at 25ms and sent over WAN. But they also have self healing tapes w backfill etc so if your server knocks offline for a while you fill the gap when back up etc.


The whole concept of a monster chain restaurant (maybe other than fast food/coffee) is anathema to me. Boutique food made with love, local-ish ingredients, chef/owner and I'm in. Publicly traded, industrial kitchen crap??? Who in their right mind would pay actual money for that?    It seems to me that's a business plan who's time has passed. Give it annother 5 years and these places will either have adapted or died.


In all transitions, real people actually did suffer.  In the large view, new markets were created and new jobs appeared.  But the people who got those new jobs were not the same people who originally lost them.  When the pace of such disruption is relatively slow, those pain points are manageable.  When the disruptions start coming one after another in rapid fire, the managing of problems of that many real, suffering, jobless or under-employed people becomes a disruptive problem in and of itself.


lol he worked out of his garage and drove a 12 year old car to build the company while his neighbors and friends partied and bought fancy cars.  Way to take one paragraph out of context and also suggest violence, Kudos, you are the more civilized person.


The tax deferred status of a 401k plan helps you in theory because your tax rate will be lower once you retire and start drawing the money.  This theory could prove incorrect. Also the money you add to a 401k lowers your taxable income today so you end up paying less taxes to the government right now.  Depending on where you are in the tax bracket scale that could have the affect of lowering your tax bracket which will save you money in other areas. Each person's situation is different by my general theory is to contribute towards retirement in the following order: Hope this helps.


The CBOE site, as well as some other sites and trading platforms, will show the bid/ask and statistics for that option at each individual options exchange, in addition to statistics and the best bid/offer across all exchanges. cboe.com: Delayed Quote Help lists what the single-letter codes mean. A is for the AMEX options exchange, B is for BOX, X is for PHLX, etc.


I don't believe Saturday is a business day either. When I deposit a check at a bank's drive-in after 4pm Friday, the receipt tells me it will credit as if I deposited on Monday.  If a business' computer doesn't adjust their billing to have a weekday due date, they are supposed to accept the payment on the next business day, else, as you discovered, a Sunday due date is really the prior Friday. In which case they may be running afoul of the rules that require X number of days from the time they mail a bill to the time it's due.  The flip side to all of this, is to pick and choose your battles in life. Just pay the bill 2 days early. The interest on a few hundred dollars is a few cents per week. You save that by not using a stamp, just charge it on their site on the Friday. Keep in mind, you can be right, but their computer still dings you. So you call and spend your valuable time when ever the due date is over a weekend, getting an agent to reverse the late fee. The cost of 'right' is wasting ten minutes, which is worth far more than just avoiding the issue altogether.  But - if you are in the US (you didn't give your country), we have regulations for everything. HR 627, aka The CARD act of 2009, offers - ‘‘(2) WEEKEND OR HOLIDAY DUE DATES.—If the payment due date for a   credit card account under an open end consumer credit plan is a day on   which the creditor does not receive or accept payments by mail   (including weekends and holidays), the creditor may not treat a   payment received on the next business day as late for any purpose.’’. So, if you really want to pursue this, you have the power of our illustrious congress on your side.


In addition a lot of people are simply rather uneducated on the subject.  For me personally, the debate of whether or not it causes OD (which it obviously doesnt) or if it causes side effect A or B really is moot. Why do some people believe they have a say in what another human being does in private with a God damn plant?  I don't understand the mind set. Nay, I don't understand how we all got struck by this collective God complex.


yes, there does need to be demand. on heavily traded stocks, there is no reason to be concerned. on thinly traded equities, you will want to check the market depth before placing a sell.  the company is likely not the one that is buying your shares on the open market.


And driving out of business the rest of competitors with huge incentives at loss, cause uber has a very long term plan and don't care of profitability. Let's face it once they'll be one of the push to deregulate autonomous driving there will be a massive shift in labour economy too.


Money is a means to an end. If you see it as an end, of course you're not going to be happy, but so long as you utilize it to maintain a stable lifestyle which will allow for you to do things like spend quality time with loved ones, develop skills, and pursue interests (things that actually do tend to bring happiness), money is a good tool to have.


First of all, this is a situation when a consultation with a EA working with S-Corporations in California, CA-licensed CPA or tax preparer (California licenses tax preparers as well) is in order. I'm neither of those, and my answer is not a tax advice of any kind. You're looking at schedule CA line 17 (see page 42 in the 540NR booklet). The instructions refer you to form 3885A. You need to read the instructions carefully. California is notorious for not conforming to the Federal tax law. Specifically, to the issue of the interest attributable to investment in S-Corp, I do not know if CA conforms. I couldn't find any sources saying that it doesn't, but then again - I'm not a professional. It may be that there's an obscure provision invalidating this deduction, living in California myself - I wouldn't be surprised. So I suggest hiring a CA-licensed tax preparer to do this tax return for you, at least for the first year.


Honestly, why not? If my goal is to end up in finance, then I need to understand, from people in that field, whether a certain subject is relevant for me to achieve that goal.   If I were to ask that question to those majoring/working in physics, then I am going to get a completely different outlook that's not beneficial for me.   What you don't realize is that when you are asking your peers in school, many of them give you half answers or even bogus ones. It makes perfect sense to ask the question in a forum. As a matter of fact, the answers that I am getting here are completely different from what I was originally told by my peers.


Thanks for the info! It seems the consolidation option is the best; switching to the new merchant services provider and getting the discount from our POS on gift card software  Can you give me a but more info about the customer loyalty/marketing info?


">Our rating  >In a Journal Sentinel op-ed, Trump said: ""In 1986, President Ronald Reagan"" cut the business tax rate to 34 percent and ""it worked -- our economy boomed, the middle class thrived and median family income increased.""  >Some economists say the corporate rate reduction, from 46 percent, did help lead to economic growth and higher income. But it wasn’t necessarily any more important than a cut -- from 50 percent to 28 percent -- in the top individual income tax rate that was part of the same 1986 package that included other tax changes, as well.  >More importantly, many other factors beyond tax cuts -- demographics, immigration, trade policy and more -- bear on the economy.  >Trump’s statement contains only an element of truth -- our definition of Mostly False.  In case you still believed anything this toilet bowl of a website publishes."


You SHOULDN'T lease one if you are going to get an economy car, if you don't drive too much (<15K / year), and you want to hang on to the car for a long time.  Otherwise, if you are a regular driver, driving a leased new quality car can be cost effective. Many cars now have bumper-to-bumper warranties that last as long as the lease (say 80K). So there is rarely any extra costs apart from regular maintenance. The sweet spot for most new cars is in the 5th, 6th, or 7th years, after they are paid off. But at that point, you may find you have maintenance bills that are approaching an average of $200 - $300 per month. In which case, a lease starts to look pretty good. I owned a 7 year old Honda Accord that cost only $80 less per month in maintenance than the new leased VW that replaced it.  Haven't looked back after that. Into my 3rd car and 9th year of leasing.


This thread has been linked to from elsewhere on reddit.    - [/r/bestof] [/u/78fivealive explains the debt crisis in Argentina as &quot;A Streetcar Named Desire.&quot;](http://np.reddit.com/r/bestof/comments/2cb2qi/u78fivealive_explains_the_debt_crisis_in/)   *^If ^you ^follow ^any ^of ^the ^above ^links, ^respect ^the ^rules ^of ^reddit ^and ^don't ^vote ^or ^comment. ^Questions? ^Abuse? [^Message ^me ^here.](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmeta_bot_mailbag)*


Not sure if it is the same in the States as it is here in the UK (or possibly even depends on the lender) but if you have any amount outstanding on the loan then you wouldn't own the vehicle, the loan company would. This often offers extra protection if something goes wrong with the vehicle - a loan company talking to the manufacturer to get it resolved carries more weight than an individual. The laon company will have an army of lawyers (should it get that far) and a lot more resources to deal with anything, they may also throw in a courtesy car etc.


>Companies requesting unnecessary levels of qualification or experience and thus making it very difficult for young people to find work.  I've found this is often largely a screener to deter the more weak minded people from applying.


Sums up in a nutshell how I've looked at the income gap. It's not that the wealthy are necessarily hoarding on the rest of us; it's just that the wealthier folks will have a far greater variety of options to increase their wealth than Joe Schmuck. Of course, it doesn't help that the wealth is exactly what most investing firms look at and drool over, which leads to clamoring over top-dollar investors and ignoring everyone else. At least, that's how I've felt.


It depends where you are going to live and how you are going to pay for your new accommodation. If you are moving within the UK and intend to buy another house you run into the problem that you will find it hard to get a second mortgage. If you rent out the house in Kent you will probably have to change the mortgage basis on it to a mortgage that allows for letting - normal residential mortgages exclude that entirely - which would allow you to take out a residential mortgage. It depends how much equity you have in the house. If most of the value of the house is mortgaged then you'll (1) find it hard to re mortgage on a commercial mortgage (2) may find it hard to cover the costs by letting and (3) are very sensitive to house prices falling. Also bear in mind that for the past three months in a row, house prices in the UK have mostly either stagnated or fallen... so you cannot guarantee any increase in value of the house in Kent. What I'm saying is ... there is no crystal ball that will tell you what's financially the best thing to do. Talk to estate agents, find out how much the house would sell for / how much it would rent for. Talk to your mortgage lender and find out if they will let you rent it out. Talk to other mortgage lenders and find out how much a commercial mortgage would cost. Do the sums, find out if renting the house would cover the costs, in which case you can gamble on the housing market continuing to rise. Don't rely on house prices continuing to rise as they have done before. Certainly where I live due to the number of new houses being built and other economic issues house prices have fallen appreciably over the past few months and may well continue to fall as more and more new houses come on the market.


"I remember the bailout propaganda using economic pseudo-science pretending it was well established that using debt and QE 1, 2 and 3 would only be good. They refused to prosecute obvious banking fraud too. I recommend the book ""Bailout"" by the IG for TARP. Geithner and Holder did everything they could to protect their banker buddies and Obama knew they would. However, I have to say, most of those hurt worst by it all voted for ""Hope and Change"" in disproportionate numbers. Baby Boomers not as much. Biggest bait and switch in American history."


It is generally best to avoid such situations. Any credits to your accounts need to be explained to tax authorities whenever they enquire.  This cannot be treated as income as you did not work in exchange for the amount. It can be treated by tax authorities as GIFT. Gift upto certain amount is tax free. Beyond the amount its taxable. Gifts from close relatives has not amount limit and is tax free. Whenever the scrutiny happens, if you can convince the tax authorities that the action was more for convenience, it maybe fine.


One thing we always have to consider when talking about raising the minimum wage is that job loss will happen. Remember that these businesses have been built on paying their employees less. That means money goes towards other things that help the company. When you are forced to increase wages, you have a choice, reorganize your business to free up cash or decrease your labor.


My take on this is that this reduces your liquidity risk. Stocks, bonds and many other investment vehicles on secondary markets you may think of are highly liquid but they still require that markets are open and then an additional 3-5 business days to settle the transaction and for funds to make their way to your bank account.  If you require funds immediately because of an emergency, this 3-5 business days (which gets longer as week-ends and holidays are in the way) can cause a lot of discomfort which may be worth a small loss in potential ROI.  Think of your car breaking down or a water pipe exploding in your home and having to wait for the stock sale to process before you can make the payment. Admittedly, you have other options such as margin loans and credit cards that can help absorb the shock in such cases but they may not be sufficient or cause you to pay interest or fees if left unpaid.


That's not true - insurance companies can manage that risk and look to Re-insure that risk with very large pools of risk capital through reinsurance.   Government agencies traditionally have not looked to buy insurance but are now starting to insure such catastrophic risks.  I believe the NFIP has some sort of excess risk cover such that if losses are greater than $500 million, then it triggers a payout from large private insurers.


Congratulations on being in this position. Your problem - which I think that you identified - is that you don't know much about investing. My recommendation is that you start with three goals: The Motley Fool (www.fool.com) has a lot of good information on their site. Their approach may or may not align with what you want to do; I've subscribed to their newsletters for quite a while and have found them useful. I'm what is known as a value investor; I like to make investments and hold them for a long time. Others have different philosophies. For the second goal, it's very important to follow the money and ask how people get paid in the investment business. The real money in Wall Street is made not by investment, but by charging money to those who are in the investment business. There are numerous people in line for some of your money in return for service or advice; fees for buying/selling stocks, fees for telling you which stocks to buy/sell, fees for managing your money, etc. You can invest without spending too much on fees if you understand how the system works.  For the third goal, I recommend choosing a few stocks, and creating a virtual portfolio. You can then then get used to watching and tracking your investments. If you want a place to put your money while you do this, I'd start with an S&P 500 index fund with a low expense ratio, and I'd buy it through a discount broker (I use Scottrade but there are a number of choices).  Hope that helps.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.aei.org/publication/do-minimum-wage-hikes-aid-workers-the-jury-is-still-out/) reduced by 85%. (I'm a bot) ***** > The NBER working paper includes in their analysis all low-wage workers across different industries that earn below a certain hourly wage, such as $13 or $19. The authors worry that if the analysis only focused on workers who are either at or below the minimum wage, it would overstate the dis-employment effects if employers moved some workers to wages above the threshold minimum wage.  > In contrast, the IRLE Berkeley study focuses only on the food services and restaurant industry, since that industry is likely to have the largest fraction of low wage workers affected by the minimum wage hike.  > In other words, a control group is a group of geographic units that matches Seattle so closely before the minimum wage increase that any difference in outcomes between Seattle and &quot;Synthetic Seattle&quot; can plausibly arise only from the minimum wage increase.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6l4vzl/two_studies_two_different_results_aei_has_some/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~158651 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*: **wage**^#1 **Work**^#2 **minimum**^#3 **paper**^#4 **Seattle**^#5"


No way!! I can't believe that. I agree that the size is not the issue. How many can you eat at a time?! I can't help but think how Obama eats burgers just about anytime he is on the road. I used to think that was a great ad for them.


YSK that unless you live in a very low cost of living area, you took an extremely underpaid position out of college, and have kind of fucked yourself in the face.  Source: I'm a senior software engineer with a computer science degree.


"It's not my industry so I may be wrong, but I don't believe there are any transactions or companies that would provide a worthwhile comparable, hence my problem with the valuation attempt. For the same reasons you wouldn't use a P/E multiple or DDM model on a startup, you don't just pick tangential comparables and slap a value on it. If you're seriously advising companies, that shit will land you in court defending your valuation.  It's not a ""floor"" just because you know it's inaccurate.. it's irrelevant. Quite frankly, I don't think they released any value, let alone $1bn.  It's merely a PR move, with the hope that Tesla's technology will become the standard for all EVs.  At best, major companies decide to use some of their patents ""in good faith"" and leverage the infrastructure that Tesla has already put in place.   At worst, Tesla still did not give away $1bn in value. How much have they made off of licensing their patents? How much have others offered for their patents? How many companies are infringing, and how many lawsuits have they won from going after them? If you can't put a hard figure on any of those, or a solid rationale on how the patents are the only reason they'll be able to gain market share, then I don't see how we can conclude on $1bn given away."


Per their merchant agreements, Visa and MasterCard say that the signature on the back of the card is the proper way to identify the card holder.  If a card is not signed, the merchant is supposed to check your ID and make you sign the card before accepting it for payment.  Merchants are not allowed the require an ID for paying with a signed card. Of course, store employees rarely know all these things.  Some will gladly accept an unsigned card.  Some will try to make you show your ID.


Buy low and sell high.  Right now stocks are cheap (or at least cheapish).  If you wait for better forecasts, the price will be higher.  They might go down still farther, but no one knows for sure when that will happen, or where the bottom is -- despite what the talking heads on TV say.  Remember that what you really care about is sell price minus purchase price (plus dividends, but I'll ignore that).  What happens between the time you buy and the time you sell is irrelevant financially, but can be important psychologically. If it was me, and you are sure you won't need the money for at least 10 years, or better still 15-20, I would buy some index funds.  Pick something that you are comfortable with (some are more aggressive/risky than others), and then only look at it a few times a year, if that much.  Only do this as long as you are sure that you won't sell if the market drops further. That is a guaranteed way to lose money. This is what I've been doing for my retirement funds for 15 years, and its worked well so far.


"Businesses need websites. Especially businesses in the labor field -- when we renovated our old home, the very first place we checked was Google. ""Colorado Springs plumbers""; ""Colorado Springs electrician"" -- I was shocked at how few actually had websites. It's worth the money for a simple, but informative site with contact info, prices, etc. Oh, and also, social media. Get on the Twitter! And everywhere else online that people are gathering."


It's not like bankers and politicians forget what happened then, and the biggest causes of the 2008 crash began in the mid 90's and early 2000's. nobody went to prison for the crisis because there was no one who actually committed criminal acts, people were just stupid and figured debt would be forever cheap and the market would never decline. And the regulations that are being rolled back actually made big banks more powerful because only they could afford the compliance costs.  Just like after 2008, your best bet in dealing with a crash is just hold everything you own, because if you sell into a decline, you have less money to buy when the market rebounds


I'm curious what percentage of the job market make up the no-experienced people you mention and what percentage is made up of individuals that, for one reason or another, are stuck working those types of jobs just to make ends meet. Unless you distinguish between the no-skill individuals that don't need a livable wage, like teens still living at home, and other people that are struggling to support themselves with the only job they can get, and do so without age or other forms of discrimination, raising the minimum wage to a livable wage level is the only way I can think of that would enable the disadvantaged people that are for all intents and purposes stuck in their situation to gain the financial footing they need to raise themselves up to the next rung of the ladder. If you have other suggestions, I am more than happy to hear them.