>> You're just being pedantic.  > I'm really not.  Okay.  No, seriously.  It is always good to see someone back to champion their beliefs.  > ...you are responsible for the outcomes in your life. The sooner you accept that, and stop blaming everything listed above, the sooner you'll be on the road to a better life.  I totally agree but looking only at an individual in the job market will miss the unfairness of the job market. Yes, someone can better themselves and get a better job but somebody else is going to find themselves with only the option of that vacant job or something worse.  Your position is like saying musical chairs is a fair and equitable game for all because any player can work harder at getting to a seat first.  The fact that one player can improve their odds of winning doesn't change the fact that there are simply not enough chairs for everyone.  It sounds like you might agree that farm workers, ditch diggers, security guards, and dishwashers don't get paid a living wage.  If so, would you agree that unless there are more living wage or better jobs in an economy than workers, you are forcing people into a below living wage job?


Thing is no-one followed the part of Glass-Steagall that everyone talks about; banks formed holding entities called bancs,banqs to do the same function. The key to the crisis was that there was no regulation of derivatives, credit scoring agencies lied, as well as the continued bailouts by Greenspan every time one of his market bubbles popped


You need to talk to a local attorney specializing in real estate matters. The contract needs to ensure that your interests are protected. How you do that is too complex for an answer here and varies from state to state, or even jurisdictions within a state. There are all sorts of options. Sometimes deals like this are structured so that you can actually sell your remaining equity in the property to a third party later on. If the property has value, but the banks aren't interested in lending right now, you could potentially make money on it down the road.


Different stakeholders have different views of 'failure'. Maybe from Air Berlin's point of view it was a failure, but technically speaking it is not really possible to 'fail'. As long as all shares were purchased, which is a virtual guarantee since the investment banks who underwrite the IPO by and large must do to some extent, it will always be 'successful'. A decrease in value of shares immediately after IPO means that the investment bank who did the IPO for Air Berlin didn't match its IPO price with market expectations, causing shorts on the stock, and thus a decline. No failure per se.


I don't buy Twitter.  Their revenue and profit is all based on active users who will see ads on their twitter feed.  Yet we know millions of twitter accounts are fake bots.  Even with Trump blowing up twitter and making it so relevant, I don't see this as a profitable business.


You could pay off a portion of the debt and your minimum payments should also go down proportionately.  Your investment managers may be able to continue making returns in the markets in a sideways and a bear market. So you have 24k contributing to your net worth, and ~50k giving you a negative net worth. At best, you can bring this down to a negative 25k net worth, or you can start and keep using some of the gains from your investment account to supplement your credit payments (along with your income). This is based on chance that your investment managers can continue making gains, compared to paying down 24k and having possibly zero liquid savings now, but having more of your salary to start saving and make the lowered minimum payments, assuming you don't borrow more. Those are the options I've thought of, I don't see either option being necessarily quicker than the other.


tv advertising is getting cheaper and helps you building massive brand equity in a short time, which is the main reason why ATL advertising actually works even better for online brands...  plus, as someone as already pointed out, they're trying to get themselves known to a segment which necessarily does not know them yet.  btw, some insurance companies are moving they're budget away from ppc to tv. Since the huge increase in average cost per click for insurance related keywords, due to high competition, the cpc of a visitor coming from tv (saw advert on tv, typed url or accessed to the website through brand seo keyword) is actually cheaper than running ppc campaigns aimed to acquire new users. probably this is not the case for fab, however there's a still a lot to learn and improve in terms of media plans, considering on and offline media.


You could sum the P/E ratio of all the companies in the industry and divide it by the number of companies to find the average P/E ratio of the industry.  Average P/E ratio of industry  = Sum of P/E ratio of all companies in   Industry / Number of companies in industry


Don´t forget that changing volatility will have an impact on the time value too! So at times it can happen that your time value is increasing instead of decreasing, if the underlying (market) volatility moves up strongly. Look for articles on option greeks, and how they are interdependent. Some are well explaining in simple language.


What I am saying that in the time I have been importing from China I have learnt some important indirect lessons.  One of the most valuable is that you really have to expect the unexpected as it most certainly will happen. Really no level of experience can counteract some of the things that happen but you must be prepared to recover from them.  I think there are a lot of people online who like to blow smoke up their own ass and act like they are better than everyone else and that they never make mistakes. I am just not one of these people.   Sometimes i make mistakes and sometimes I lose money, I'm just honest about it.  I think this honesty helps people get that one step closer to obtaining their goals of importing by making this type of business actually sound like something that is real and obtainable instead of making it some shiny world that people can't just roll up their sleeves and get involved in.  Thanks for raising this point.


"Typed out a huge response and it's probably more than you want.  Are you asking, ""How can I become a CEO"" or are you dealing with the deeply flawed premise of Sheepman that CEOs do what they do for the money at that level?"


"The answer is that it depends on your bank and your creditor (whomever you are paying). Most banks offer ""overdraft protection"". For a fee, they will process the payment as if you had the money, and your account will become ""overdrawn"". The next deposit you put in will be applied to the overdraft and once the account is ""zeroed"" funds will begin to become available. The fees charged, and whether a particular charge will go through, depend on the bank; a few banks will process a payment without a fee if it only happens occasionally, some will hit you with a charge per debit in excess of the amount, while others will charge you per day on which debit transactions were made while your account was overdrawn, and still others will tack on a charge for leaving your account overdrawn for an extended period. In almost all cases, the for-profit institutions (banks) will charge more than non-profit institutions (credit unions).  Watch out for banks that offer ""automatic overdraft transfer""; they'll automatically transfer from another account (including, eek, a credit card) to cover a debit to an account with insufficient funds. Sounds great, but the fee they charge is often close to the overdraft fee, while without overdraft protection, if the payment were simply denied at point-of-sale, most banks have smartphone apps that allow for instantaneous transfer of funds, for free. I've never heard of a ""partial payment""; you either have sufficient funds to cover the debit or you don't. If you don't, and you don't have overdraft protection, the bank will simply decline to pay. The result of that situation depends on the exact circumstances; if a utility check bounces, they may try to run it again the next day, or they may immediately cut your utilities and come after you for the balance. At point-of-sale, they simply won't give you the merchandise. Some places are really rabid about pursuing ""hot check writers""; if the check doesn't clear you have to pay in cash, on the spot, or they call the police. As far as ""interest on debt"", it doesn't work that way; it's a ""service fee"", otherwise it would be subject to some pretty hefty federal regulation. However, if you figure it as interest, you'd be amazed; let's say you bought lunch at a burger joint for $10. You didn't have enough in the account, but it was close, so the bank let it go - and charged you $35. You have effectively inflated the cost of that meal to $45, a 350% instantaneous price increase (or if you prefer, 350% interest on that $10); I dunno about you but if I were paying $45 for one lunch it wouldn't be at a burger joint. Most banks simply will not process a check on an already-overdrawn account, overdraft service or otherwise; they'll hit you for the overdraft fee (usually actually a fee for an NSF check) AND decline the payment. So, if you had $1 in your account and wrote a rent check for $1000, it'd still bounce even with overdraft service."


Great question and good for you for starting investments.  Are you young, like in your 20s? I would do all that you can in the ROTH.  You will not get a tax break now, but you will get one later.  Keep in mind that any company match does not go into ROTH but the IRA. I try to look at two things when judging a mutual fund:  the historic performance, and the expense fee.  When comparing two funds, if one has a 10% average return for 10 years, and a 1% fee, I feel it is better than a fund that has a 12% return for the same time period and a 3% fee.   If they are close, you can always put a little bit in each one.   An important question to ask is if you have debt.  You may want to scale back your contributions some to pay down that debt.  For me, I don't like to go below a company match to do so, but anything over and above might be better utilized to move that student, car or credit card loan to zero.  Others might disagree, so YMMV, but I have done this myself.


haha ya, were a pretty great country. Our cell phone bills are ridiculous though. Highest in the world in fact, not to mention the province I am from, we're the highest in the country. So i pretty much pay more for my cell phone than anyone in the world!


After a few failed years of trying to get my daughters into Legos, Minecraft came along and now Legos are literally in every nook and cranny of our house.  If Minecraft deters some from buying Legos I believe there are just as many (more?) who it ignites the fire for building and creating..   I believe they are complementary products not substitute


"Everything you are doing is fine. Here are a few practical notes in performing this analysis: Find all the primary filing information on EDGAR. For NYSE:MEI, you can use https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0000065270&type=10-K&dateb=&owner=exclude&count=40 This is the original 10-K. To evaluate earnings growth you need per share earnings for the past three years and 10,11,12 years ago. You do NOT need diluted earnings (because in the long term share dilution comes out anyway, just like ""normalized"" earnings). The formula is avg(Y_-1+Y_-2+Y_-3) / is avg(Y_-10+Y_-11+Y_-12) Be careful with the pricing rules you are using, the asset one gets complicated. I recommend NOT using the pricing rules #6 and #7 to select the stock. Instead you can use them to set a maximum price for the stock and then you can compare the current price to your maximum price. I am also working to understand these rules and have cited Graham's rules into a checklist and worksheet to find all companies that meet his criteria. Basically my goal is to bottom feed the deals that Warren Buffett is not interested in. If you are interested to invest time into this project, please see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vuFmoJDktMYtS64od2HUTV9I351AxvhyjAaC0N3TXrA"


"According to the book of Hull, american and european calls on non-dividend paying stocks should have the same value. American puts, however, should be equals to, or more valuable than, european puts. The reason for this is the time value of money. In a put, you get the option to sell a stock at a given strike price. If you exercise this option at t=0, you receive the strike price at t=0 and can invest it at the risk-free rate. Lets imagine the rf rate is 10% and the strike price is 10$. this means at t=1, you would get 11.0517$. If, on the other hand, you did'nt exercise the option early, at t=1 you would simply receive the strike price (10$). Basically, the strike price, which is your payoff for a put option, doesn't earn interest. Another way to look at this is that an option is composed of two elements: The ""insurance"" element and the time value of the option. The insurance element is what you pay in order to have the option to buy a stock at a certain price. For put options, it is equals to the payout= max(K-S, 0) where K=Strike Price and St= Stock price.  The time value of the option can be thought of as a risk-premium. It's difference between the value of the option and the insurance element. If the benefits of exercising a put option early (i.e- earning the risk free rate on the proceeds) outweighs the time value of the put option, it should be exercised early. Yet another way to look at this is by looking at the upper bounds of put options. For a european put, today's value of the option can never be worth more than the present value of the strike price discounted at the risk-free rate. If this rule isn't respected, there would be an arbitrage opportunity by simply investing at the risk-free rate. For an american put, since it can be exercised at any time, the maximum value it can take today is simply equals to the strike price. Therefore, since the PV of the strike price is smaller than the strike price, the american put can have a bigger value. Bear in mind this is for a non-dividend paying stock. As previously mentioned, if a stock pays a dividend it might also be optimal to exercise just before these are paid."


No no, I didn't forget. 3 times 12 is 36 minus 20 is $16 more.  Thank you, I just needed someone to acknowledge that's they were incorrect. How's that get top comment though?! So frustrating.  Edit: okay, not top comment anymore but still up there.


He employs financial advisors because he's good at making money. That sounds like what any smart person would do... so I'm still confused? He built his own brands, he created his own company's, and whether or not he had any financial advisors is completely irrelevant. You're accusing the man of being bad with money based on nothing more than a few articles you read where he spent money in ridiculous ways, and you also read that article that said he needed the money from the McGregor fight to pay the taxes from the Pacquiao fight... his current net worth is 340mil... that's not a number that many people can boast... these articles are just clickbait to get attention, which is only helping him make more money. Honestly I hate the guy, but I'm absolutely fascinated by everything about him.


>Which one is Citibank  I literally *just* told you retard.   >Those CEO's (including this prick) were responsible for it.   No they werent. CDO's / MBS's are *not* from depository banks. The financial institutions that are responsible for the financial crisis are primarily Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns and AIG. AKA 2 *investment* banks and an insurance firm. So as I've said, you don't understand the difference between a depository bank and an investment bank.   You also have 0 idea on how a collateral works.   And again, tax payers didn't lose a single cent.   You're brainless.


Barclays Bank, RBS, and Deutsche Bank have an agreement as part of the Global ATM Alliance that allows you to make withdrawals at Deutsche Bank ATMs at no charge. The usefulness of this arrangement to you depends on how you use your money and would entail opening an account at Barclays or Royal Bank of Scotland. Edit: David, it looks like you will need some kind of residency to open a Barclays account, but you may be able to qualify with the proper supporting documentation. See this website: UK banking services and UK bank accounts, from Barclays Wealth International


>you're not one  it's the fact you don't see your chains that makes you believe you're free, so will never try to fight.  you don't think w/ the school loan shenanigans (within a span of a decade tuition rose insanely) they (government & it's corporations that control it) haven't just enslaved an entire generation?  there's a reason a great many people who are against the entire system can't fuckin muster the energy to protest or fight back.   the students are beholden to their debts, but if the banks run amok and give out endless bullshit loans they knew would go belly up we *MUST* save them?  too big too fail was the bullshit reasoning remember?  it's always about class warfare  gotta keep the anger, other we slip into complacency


I am the vendor and I pay the 2 to 3%, not the customer. And I will pay it with a smile on my face. It's either that or deal with cash or other payment methods that are a) difficult/expensive or b) not possible because I am an online merchant.  I would *like* the fees to be lower but right now pretty much every other method is either difficult, expensive or both. They know what they are doing.  EDIT: Merchants like debit cards. They have the cheapest interchange rate. Reward cards are the most expensive - where do you think your 1% cash back comes from? :)


The strategy has intrinsic value, which may or may not be obstructed in practice by details mentioned in other answers (tax and other overheads, regulation, risk). John Bensin says that as a general principle, if a simple technical analysis is good then someone will have implemented it before you. That's fair, but we can do better than an existence proof for this particular case, we can point to who is doing approximately this. Market makers are already doing this with different numbers. They quote a buy price and a sell price on the same stock, so they are already buying low and selling high with a small margin. If your strategy works in practice, that means you can make low-risk money from short-term volatility that they're missing out on, by setting your margin at approximately the daily price variation instead of the current bid-offer spread. But market makers choose their own bid-offer spread, and they choose it because they think it's the best margin to make low-risk money in the long run. So you'd be relying that:


"Here's what I suggest... A few years ago, I got a chunk of change.  Not from an inheritance, but stock options in a company that was taken private.  We'd already been investing by that point.  But what I did: 1.  I took my time. 2.  I set aside a chunk of it (maybe a quarter) for taxes.  you shouldn't have this problem. 3.  I set aside a chunk for home renovations. 4.  I set aside a chunk for kids college fund 5.  I set aside a chunk for paying off the house 6.  I set aside a chunk to spend later 7.  I invested a chunk.  A small chunk directly in single stocks, a small chunk in muni bonds, but most just in Mutual Funds. I'm still spending that ""spend later"" chunk.  It's about 10 years later, and this summer it's home maintenance and a new car...  all, I figure it, coming out of some of that money I'd set aside for ""future spending."""


Flipping usually refers to real-estate transaction: you buy a property, improve/renovate/rehabilitate it and resell it quickly. The distinction between flipper and investor is similar to the distinction between trader and investor, even though the tax code doesn't explicitly refer to house flipping. Gains on house flipping can be considered as active business gain or passive activity income, which are treated differently: passive income goes on Schedule E and Schedule D, active income goes on Schedule C. The distinction between passive and active is based on the characteristics of the activity (hours you spent on it, among other things). Trading income can similarly be considered as either passive (Schedule D/E treatment) or active (Schedule C treatment). Here's what the IRS has to say about traders: Special rules apply if you are a trader in securities, in the business   of buying and selling securities for your own account. This is   considered a business, even though you do not maintain an inventory   and do not have customers. To be engaged in business as a trader in   securities, you must meet all of the following conditions: The following facts and circumstances should be considered in   determining if your activity is a securities trading business: If the nature of your trading activities does not qualify as a   business, you are considered an investor... Investor, in this context, means passive income treatment (Schedule D/E). However, even if your income is considered active (Schedule C), stock sale proceeds are not subject to the self-employment tax. As you can see, there's no specific definition, but the facts and circumstances matter. You may be considered a trader by the IRS, or you may not. You may want to be considered a trader (for example to be able to make a mark-to-market election), or you may not. You should talk to a professional tax adviser (EA/CPA licensed in your State) for more details and suggestions.


A recession has nothing to do with the stock market and everything to do with gross domestic product. By definition a recession is when for two or more consecutive quarters GDP remains constant or decreases. Officially US recessions are declared by the national bureau of economic research, a private non profit, non government organization tasked with doing so.


"No, I would feel guilty if I did something like in the original submission... Went to a store, tried something on, compared it with other items, asked the sales clerk for help, and then said, ""OK, thanks for everything!"" and turned around and gave my money to Amazon."


You say that you inherited the money from your mother, and are now paying these people using money that is already yours.  Because of that, the money is considered a gift from you to them, and the fact that you are doing it in accordance with your mother's wishes doesn't change that.  For it to be considered a bequest from your mother's estate directly to these beneficiaries, it would have had to be handled via the regular by-the-book inheritance procedure and been given to them directly rather than bequeathed to you with informal instructions to pass it on to them. If one gives another person more than $14K in any calendar year, there is the potential gift tax issue to address. I'll explain why it's more a matter of 'addressing' than 'paying', as there are a number of legal ways around this.  Form 709 is what you'll use. In the end, you'll report the gifts over $14K but no tax will be due as they'll simply go against your lifetime gifting allowance, currently $5.49M per person.  Note, 2 ways to avoid even this obligation. If you have a spouse, you have a combined $28K/yr gifting (per recipient) with no reporting required. Similarly, if the recipient has a spouse, you can gift them $14K. i.e. couple to couple can gift $56K/yr. Last, why not just gift $14K before December, and in January, give the second installment? If I had money coming in separate from a will, I'd be happy that you honored a verbal request, and wouldn't be so greedy as to expect you to risk a dime of your own finances to transfer the funds immediately.


Facebook the company is probably better understood as a capital good - it is a collection of software and servers and a well-known brand name with a snazzy network effect under reasonably competent corporate governance that can produce final goods and services (mostly services) that actually have value. A share of Facebook stock is a share of ownership in that capital. See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_good which makes some concessions for the difference between capital goods and capital services, so it's kind of a fuzzy thing.


"LOL!!!!!   No matter what Trump will do, even if he lowers the prices of drugs, you will be against him.  Even after what Trump just said, ""time to LOWER RIPOFF DRUG PRICES!"" (the bold letters and exclamation mark are Trump's), you still think that Trump does not want lower drug prices.   Clear tribalism on your side."


"> Sometimes that requires more time other times less.   True story: I was at a job interview once, and a manager told me, ""I don't care if you work 30 hours a week or 50, as long as your work is getting done.""  I thought about that for a second, and asked him, ""Do you have a lot of employees who regularly work 30 hour weeks?""  He sheepishly replied, ""Well, no.  And if you did that, I'd probably give you more work.""  I got the job, but left after a few months when (among other things) they announced mandatory 48-hour work weeks."


No, I'm not arguing that at all.  Just the timing of ones birth, and the desirability of ones skills in that time is a matter of luck.  Hypothetical: If Bach had been born in 1980, do you think he'd achieve the same level of fame and sucess as he did, assuming he released the same compositions?  edit: additionally, had Bach not been born into privilege in the first place, no one would have ever heard of him.  Being born into privilege is incredibly lucky.


"Your question asks us to explain why a false statement is true.  From the point of view of an investor, a high price to earnings ratio is not necessarily desirable. From the point of view of an investor, a desirable stock is one that is likely to provide future dividends or price increases that more than compensates for the risk of the stock.  This information cannot be inferred from the P/E ratio. So what does the P/E ratio tell us? The P/E ratio measures a stock's current price (i.e., the market's belief about its future earnings) divided by its recent past earnings.  A high ratio means the market thinks earnings in the future will be higher than they are now and have therefore bid the price up.  These can thought of as expensive stocks, and are often called ""growth"" stocks because their price is driven by the market's belief in future growth. Some individual high P/E stocks do live up to or exceed the market's expectation, but there's no evidence that this happens enough that they are more desirable as a group than low P/E stocks. If anything, the empirical evidence goes the other way."


Instead of giving part of their profits back as dividends, management puts it back into the company so the company can grow and produce higher profits. When these companies do well, there is high demand for them as in the long term higher profits equates to a higher share price. So if a company invests in itself to grow its profits higher and higher, one of the main reasons investors will buy the shares, is in the expectation of future capital gains.


To optimize your return on investment, you need to buy low and sell high.  If you knew that one stock had hit rock bottom, and the others had not, buying the low stock would be the best. However, unless you can predict the future, you don't know if any individual stock has hit the bottom, or if it will continue to drop. If you decide to spend the same amount of money each month on stock purchases, then when the price is low, you will automatically buy more shares, and when the price is high, you will buy fewer shares.  This strategy is sometimes called dollar cost averaging.  It eliminates the need to predict the future to optimize your buying. All that having been said, I agree with @Powers that at the investment amount that you are talking about and the per transaction fee you listed, a monthly investment in several stocks will cause you to lose quite a bit to transaction fees.  It sounds like you need a different strategy.


"Since it's not tagged united-states, I'd like to offer a more general advice. Your emergency fund should match the financial risks that are relevant to you. The two main classes of financial risk are of course a sudden increase in costs or a decrease in income. You'd have to address both independently. First, loss of income. For most, this would simply equate to the loss of a job. How much benefits would you expect to get, and for how long? This is often the most important question; the 6 months advise in the US is based on a lack of benefits.  With two incomes, you're less likely to lose both jobs at the same time. That's a general advise, though. If you both work for the same employer, the risk of losing two jobs at the same time is certainly real. Also, in countries with little protection against dismissal (such as the US), the chance of being layed off at the same time is also higher. On the debit side, there are also two main risks. The first is the loss or failure of an essential possession, i.e. one which requires immediate replacement. This could include a car, or a washing machine. You already paid for one before, so you should have a good idea how much it costs. The second expenditure risk is health-related costs. Those can suddenly crop up, but often you have some kind of insurance. If not, you'd need to account for some costs, but it's hard to come up with an objective number here. The two categories are dependent, of course. Health-related costs may very well coincide with a loss of income, especially if you're self-employed. Now, once you've figured out what the risks are, it's time to figure out how to insure against them. Insurance might be a better choice than an emergency fund, especially for the health costs. You might even discover that you don't need an emergency fund at all. In large parts of Europe, you could establish a credit margin that's not easily revoked (i.e. overdraft agreements), and unemployment benefits are sufficient to cover your regular cost of living. The main risk would then be a sudden lack of liquidity if your employer goes bankrupt and fails to pay the monthly wages, which means your credit should be guaranteed sufficient to borrow one month of expenses. (This of course assumes quite good credit; ""pay off my car"" doesn't suggest that.)"


"Funny you mentioned ""the protestors are here already,"" since they're cause is already a lost one. As you mentioned, everything will be on sale; those that already have excess income will be able to gobble up discounted assets, while those that are already in financial trouble (a la OWS protestors) will be left in the dust asset-wise, and if/when they recover the discount period will long be over.   Hence, the wealth gap will continue to widen, despite the OWS movement's passionate--yet uninformed and fruitless cause.   Also, I liked your ideas on guns. Arms and ammunition are--and especially will be in case of a tumultuous future period--a precious commodity in themselves and prove to be a wise investment, even if they only end up being used as a hobby only."


Facebook may sue you or your company for not paying the bill for the ads that Facebook ran for you or your company. There is a chance they may ban you and/or your company in addition to that to get the money as there was likely an agreement you accepted to put ads on Facebook.


Maybe most by number of people employed. There are still a large number of jobs that employ a small number of people. Performance measurement in something like a manufacturing job, or cashier, or fry cook is fairly easy to measure. Creative fields are harder to measure.


At the area where I live (Finland), banks typically charge a lot more for additional mortgage credit taken after purchasing the house. So, if you are planning to purchase a house, and pay it with a mortgage, you get a very good rate, but if you pay back the mortgage and then realize you need additional credit, you get a much worse rate. So, if this is applicable to your area as well, I would simply buy stocks after you have paid enough of the mortgage that it is only 50% of the house price or so. This is especially good advice if you are young. Also, if your mortgage is a fixed rate and not an adjustable rate mortgage, you probably have a very low permanent interest rate on it as interest rates are low currently (adjustable rate mortgages will also have a low rate but it will surely go up). Some people say there's a bubble currently in the stock market, but actually the bubble is in the bond market. Stocks are expensive because the other alternatives (bonds) are expensive as well. Paying back your mortgage is equivalent to investing money in bonds. I don't invest in bonds at the current ridiculously low interest rates; I merely invest in stocks and have a small cash reserve that will become even smaller as I discover new investment opportunities. I could pay back a significant percentage (about 50%) of the loans I have by selling my stocks and using my cash reserves. I don't do that; I invest in stocks instead, and am planning to increase my exposure to the stock market at a healthy pace. Also, consider the fact that mortgage is cheap credit. If you need additional credit for consumption due to e.g. becoming suddenly unemployed, you will get it only at very expensive rates, if at all. If you're very near the retirement age (I'm not), this advice may not be applicable to you. Edit: and oh, if your mortgage is fixed rate, and interest rates have come down, the bank will require you to pay the opportunity cost of the unpaid interests. So, you may need to pay more than you owe the bank. Edit2: let's assume the bank offered you a 4% fixed rate for a 10-year loan, which you agreed to. Now let's also assume interest rates of new agreements have come down to 2%. It would be a loss to the bank to pay back the amount of the loan (because the bank cannot get 4% by offering somebody else a new loan, only 2%), unless you paid also 10 years * (4% - 2%) * amount = 20% * amount of lost interest income. At least where I live, in fixed rate loans, one needs to pay back the bank this opportunity cost of unpaid interests.


Question (which you need to ask yourself): How well are your friends paid for their work? What would happen if you just took your money and bought a garage, and hired two car mechanics? How would that be different from what you are doing?  The money that you put into the company, is that paid in capital, or is it a loan to the company that will be repaid?


Firstly what are you trading that you could lose more than you put in? If you are simply trading stocks you will not lose more than you put in, unless you are trading on margin. A limit order is basically that, a limit on the maximum price you want your buy order bought at or the minimum price you want your sell order sold at. If you can't be glued to the screen all day when you place a limit order, and the market moves the opposite way, you may miss out on your order being executed. Even if you can be in front of the screen all day, you then have to decide if you want to chase the market of miss out on your purchase or sale. For example, if a stock is trading at $10.10 and you put a limit buy order to buy 1000 shares at or below $10.00 and the price keeps moving up to $10.20, then $10.30 and then $10.50, until it closes the day at $11.00. You then have the choice during the day to miss out on buying the shares or to increase your limit order in order to buy at a higher price. Sometime if the stock is not very liquid, i.e. it does not trade very often and has low volume, the price may hit $10.00 and you may only have part of your order executed, say 500 out of your 1000 shares were bought. This may mean that you may have to increase the price of your remaining order or be happy with only buying 500 shares instead of 1000. The same can happen when you are selling (but in reverse obviously). With market order, however, you are placing a buy order to buy at the next bid price in the depth or a sell order to sell at the next offer price in the depth. See the market depth table below:  Note that this price depth table is taken before market open so it seems that the stock is somewhat illiquid with a large gap between the first and second prices in the buyers (bid) prices. When the market opened this gap is closed, as WBC is a major Australian bank and is quite liquid. (the table is for demonstration purposes only). If we pretend that the market was currently open and saw the current market depth for WBC as above, you could decide to place a limit sell order to sell 1000 shares at say $29.91. You would sell 100 shares straight away but your remaining 900 sell order will remain at the top of the Sellers list. If other Buyers come in at $29.91 you may get your whole sale completed, however, if no other Buyers place orders above $29.80 and other Sellers come into the market with sell orders below $29.91, your remaining order may never be executed. If instead you placed a market sell order you would immediately sell 100 shares at $29.91 and the remaining 900 shares at $29.80. (so you would be $99 or just over 0.3% worse off than if you were able to sell the full 1000 shares at $29.91). The question is how low would you have had to lower your limit order price if the price for WBC kept on falling and you had to sell that day? There are risks with whichever type of order you use. You need to determine what the purpose of your order is. Is it to get in or out of the market as soon as possible with the possibility of giving a little bit back to the market? Or is it to get the price you want no matter how long it takes you? That is you are willing to miss out on buying the shares (can miss out on a good buy if the price keeps rising for weeks or months or even years) or you are willing to miss out on selling them right now and can wait for the price to come back up to the price you were willing to sell at (where you may miss out on selling the shares at a good price and they keep on falling and you give back all your profits and more). Just before the onset of the GFC I sold some shares (which I had bought a few years earlier at $3.40) through a market order for $5.96. It had traded just above $6 a few days earlier, but if instead of a market order I had placed a limit order to sell at $6.00 or more I would have missed out on the sale. The price never went back up  to $6 or above, and the following week it started dropping very quickly. It is now trading at about $1.30 and has never gone back above $2.00 (5.5 years later). So to me placing a limit order in this case was very risky.


Sweden just recapitalized and fired the bankers. They are fine and were fine just a few years after their crash. Now the US has an out of control bail out culture mixed with the worst, most dishonest business men in history running the show. This will end up way worse than last time.


I believe you're looking for some sort of formula that will determine how changes in savings, investing, and spending will affect economic growth.  If such a formula existed (and worked) then central planning would work since a couple of people could pull some levers to encourage more savings, or more investing, or more spending - depending on what was needed at that particular time.  Unfortunately, no magic formula exists and so no person has enough knowledge to determine what the proper amount of savings, investing, or spending should be at a given time. I found this resource particular helpful in describing the interactions between savings, consumption, and investing.


This is really just a matter of planning.  It's good that you don't want the train to go off the rails but really you just need to budget your fixed expenses.  I do this by having two checking accounts.  One account gets a direct deposit to cover all of my fixed expenses, the other is my regular checking account.   Take your rent and other fixed expenses, if you have any, and total them.  Take that total and divide by four.  That's how much of each check you should be socking away in to the separate account. Additionally, with a 30% pay increase you can probably start a savings account.  You should start to establish an emergency fund so this really never becomes a problem.  Take 10% of your pay and put it in savings, this will still leave you with a healthy pay increase to enjoy but you'll keep some of your money for yourself too.


Quick get a Social Security Number for the child. You will need it before you file your taxes early next year. If you don't have a SSN for your child you will not be able to claim them as a dependent. If you applied for one already, many do so at the hospital, then wait for it to arrive. The next step is to open a savings account with the child's SSN. Then have your parent write the check in the child's name and deposit it into the account.  If it is written in the child's name already then you don't need a new check from them. If the check is large, you may run into problems if you take a check in the name of a minor and try and deposit it into your account. The bank would have no idea that the person is related to you.


I am assuming that you are talking about US Savings Bonds: Here is a page that talks about maturity dates of US Savings bonds. If They aren'tSavings bonds but are another type ofUS Government Bond Assuming they are Savings bonds, here is information regarding redeeming of bonds. How do I redeem my EE/E Bonds?  Electronic bonds:     Log in to Treasury Direct and follow the directions there. The cash amount can be credited to your checking or savings account within one business day of the redemption date.  Paper bonds    You can cash paper EE/E Bonds at many local financial institutions. We don't keep a list of banks that redeem bonds, so check with banks in your area. What will I need to redeem a paper bond? Before taking in the bonds to redeem them, it's usually a good idea to check with the financial institution to find out what identification and other documents you'll need.   When you present your paper bonds, you'll be asked to show your identity. You can do this by being a customer with an active account open for at least 6 months at the financial institution that will be paying the bonds, or presenting acceptable identification such as a valid driver's license if the >redemption value of the bonds is less than $1,000. If you are not listed as the owner or co-owner on the bond, you'll have to show that you >are entitled to cash in the bond.  The treasury direct website also discusses converting bonds, rules regarding using them for education, how often they are credited with interest


Select the calendar year unless there is a good reason to choose another year end, for example, if your business is really busy at that time of year and you won't have time to do your books.


Flight paths are the way they are because they were set up decades ago before GPS was available. NextGen is the upcoming upgrade to the US ATC system. It's been delayed for years, but hopefully the government can finally get it implemented. The benefits are huge compared to the current system.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next_Generation_Air_Transportation_System


Whether or not you have money in your account will not necessarily stop them withdrawing the money, and it certainly won't stop them attempting to withdraw the money. There are two possible scenarios when they attempt to withdraw the money (as they surely will): I think you are just lucky they haven't attempted the withdrawal yet. Put the necessary money into your account now if you possibly can, and consider this a slightly expensive lesson learned about following the Ts and Cs when cancelling services.


There are different ways of credit card purchase authorizations. if some choose less secure method it's their problem. Merchants are charged back if a stolen card is used.


If it costs more to fix the car than the car is worth, then those repairs are not worth it.  Hit craigslist and look for another junker that runs, but is in your cash price range.  Pay to get it looked at by a mechanic as a condition of sale.  Use consumer reports to try and find a good model. Somebody in your position does not need a $15K car.  You need a series of $2K or $4K cars that you will replace more often, but pay cash for.  Car buying, especially from a dealer financed, place isn't how I would recommend building your credit back up. EDIT in response to your updates: Build your credit the smart way, by not paying interest charges.  Use your lower limit card, and annually apply for more credit, which you use and pay off each and every month.  Borrowing is not going to help you.  Just because you can afford to make payments, doesn't automatically make payments a wise decision.  You have to examine the value of the loan, not what the payments are.  Shop for a good price, shop for a good rate, then purchase.  The amount you can pay every month should only be a factor than can kill the deal, not allow it. Pay cash for your vehicle until you can qualify for a low cost loan from a credit union or a bank.  It is a waste of money and time to pay a penalty interest rate because you want to build your credit.  Time is what will heal your credit score. If you really must borrow for the purchase, you must secure a loan prior to shopping for a car.  Visit a few credit unions and get pre-qualified.  Once you have a pre-approved loan in place, you can let the deal try and beat your loan for a better deal.  Don't make the mistake of letting the dealer do all the financing first.


"First off, looks like they didn't ""get away"" with anything. Second, the company said these guys didn't know about the breach - is it possible they actually didn't know and were selling for other reasons? Why must we jump to the worst possible conclusion right away? Third, it's not clear there's actually been a crime here so what are you on about?"


"I opened several free checking accounts at a local credit union.  One is a ""Deposit"" account where all of my new money goes.  I get paid every two weeks.  Every other Sunday we have our ""Money Day"" where we allocate the money from our Deposit account into our other checking accounts.  I have one designated as a Bills account where all of my bills get paid automatically via bill pay or auto-pay. I created a spreadsheet that calculates how much to save each Money Day for all of my upcoming bills.  This makes it so the amount I save for my bills is essentially equal.  Then I allocate the rest of my deposit money into my other checking accounts.  I have a Grocery, Household, and Main checking accounts but you could use any combination that you want. When we're at the store we check our balances (how much we have left to spend) on our mobile app.  We can't overspend this way.  The key is to make sure you're using your PIN when you use your debit card.  This way it shows up in real-time with your credit union and you've got an accurate balance.  This has worked really well to coordinate spending between me and my wife.  It sounds like it's a lot of work but it's actually really automated.  The best part is that I don't have to do any accounting which means my budget doesn't fail if I'm not entering my transactions or categorizing them. I'm happy to share my spreadsheet if you'd like."


Nobody outside of the credit scoring agencies know exactly what goes into the scoring formula. That said, I don't think there is any evidence that keeping a fixed loan (car or mortgage) open is necessary to keep its effect on your score. It doesn't improve your utilization ratio like an open revolving credit line would. And depending on the exact details of how your specific lender reports the loan, it might appear detrimental to your debt-to-income ratio.  I would simply pay it off.


You can try Wave Accounting. Its a free software for Small Business and web-based. http://waveaccounting.com/


"I can agree that Youtube is hardly pure in the matter, but you also have to remember that takedown notices have been served for really stupid things too - for example, Prince serving that random nobody woman a takedown for having a video of her baby dancing to ""Let's Go Crazy."" The song is BARELY understandable over the din of the baby, and the clip is like 45 seconds long at best - yet somehow it angered the Purple One and his lawyers."


I doubt that it is possible to keep something like this secret from your husband forever. If you get away with it once, I'd guess you'll probably try it again, and sooner or later he'll find out. He'll notice that things show up in the house that aren't accounted for in the budget, or he'll see a statement from your secret bank account, or one of your friends will carelessly say something about it when he's around, etc. I found out about some of my ex-wife's secret finances when she wasn't home one day, I got the mail, and found a credit card bill for an account I knew nothing about. If the preconditions on the question are that you're not going to tell him the truth (and you're not going to get a divorce), I think the only realistic answer is that there is no way of keeping this secret with a high probability of success.


If you are looking for an advisor to just build a portfolio and then manage it, a robo-advisor can be beneficial (especially if the alternative is doing it your self, assuming that you are not well versed in the markets). The primary risk with one is that it does not build a portfolio that accurately represents your needs and risk tolerance. Some firms base the number of questions they ask you on sign up based not on what is needed to get a good profile, but on how many before people decide that it is too much hassle and bail. That usually results in poorer profiles. Also a live advisor may be better at really getting at your risk tolerance. Many of day our risk tolerance is one thing but in reality we are not so risk tolerant.  Once the profile is built. The algorithms maintain your portfolio on a day by day basis. If rebalancing opportunities occur they take advantage of it.  The primary benefit of a robo-advisor is lower fees or smaller minimum account balances. The downside is the lack of human interaction and financial advise outside of putting together a portfolio.


The cheapest currently available Delta flight from JFK to Dulles tomorrow is $164.  What you've shown is that their markup is greater than 100%.  Regardless of what the cost is, I don't see anything untenable about requiring all flights departing an evacuation area be run at cost.


"I think everything in your case is just simply missing one important rule of how credit works. Essentially, your MIL cannot get a loan. You can. You are making her a large loan that she cannot get for herself. That is all. That is the essence of what this deal is. It is not without interest - she makes a financial contribution toward your son, you get the deal in 2 years assuming she doesn't default (she will), etc. Imagine it this way: you are sitting in the dealership with the dealer and your MIL. She wants a loan to pay for the car. The dealership says, ""you are way not credit worthy."" So your MIL says, ""why doesn't my son-in-law take out the loan instead?"" Now the dealership says, sure, that's fine. From the dealer's standpoint, every other part of your arrangement is irrelevant - boring, even. The only magic trick is in who takes the loan out, no other difference. You're letting your MIL pull a car out of her sleeve like a magician, and in taking the deal you're believing her.  This sentence: I am pretty sure that the ex-MIL will not let me down (I've loaned her large sums of money before and she always promptly repaid).  is everything. You're making a rather large bet that the things that can go wrong in two years - including any situation involving your wife's welfare - are rather miniscule. And furthermore, that the few times she's paid you back - that did NOT convince banks and dealer she is more creditworthy - justifies her good creditworthiness. Is the interest worth it? Do you really believe that your MIL needs to wring a car out of you before she would consider contributing to her grandson's well-being (which is, essentially, the interest)? But wait, it's NOT everything. Her daughter (my ex-wife) would drive it for 2 years and then turn the car over to our son. Even if your MIL is creditworthy, the woman you described as follows: Her daughter, though, is a loose cannon. Will be holding and returning the collateral in this deal. Things she can do include: So I'm arguing two points: Obviously my opinion on this is clear. I hope I did a decent job of explaining where the components of this deal (credit, interest, collateral) play out in the eyes of a dealer or bank, and get lost in the mechanics of the rules you worked out with your family."


It's not quite identical, due to fees, stock rights, and reporting & tax obligations.  But the primary difference is that a person could have voting rights in a company while maintaining zero economic exposure to the company, sometimes known as empty voting. As an abstract matter, it's identical in that you reduce your financial exposure whether you sell your stock or short it.  So the essence of your question is fundamentally true.  But the details make it different.  Of course there are fee differences in how your broker will handle it, and also margin requirements for shorting.  Somebody playing games with overlapping features of ownership, sales, and purchases, may have tax and reporting obligations for straddles, wash sales, and related issues.  A straight sale is generally less complicated for tax reporting purposes, and a loss is more likely to be respected than someone playing games with sales and purchases. But the empty voting issue is an important difference.  You could buy stock with rights such as voting, engage in other behavior such as forwards, shorts, or options to negate your economic exposure to the stock, while maintaining the right to vote.  Of course in some cases this may have to be disclosed or may be covered by contract, and most people engaging in stock trades are unlikely to have meaningful voting power in a public company.  But the principle is still there. As explained in the article by Henry Hu and Bernie Black: Hedge funds have been especially creative in decoupling voting rights from economic ownership. Sometimes they hold more votes than economic ownership - a pattern we call empty voting. In an extreme situation, a vote holder can have a negative economic interest and, thus, an incentive to vote in ways that reduce the company's share price. Sometimes investors hold more economic ownership than votes, though often with morphable voting rights - the de facto ability to acquire the votes if needed. We call this situation hidden (morphable) ownership because the economic ownership and (de facto) voting ownership are often not disclosed.


Yes. Although I imagine the risk is small, you can remove the risk by splitting your money amongst multiple accounts at different banks so that none of the account totals exceed the FDIC Insurance limit. There are several banks or financial institutions that deposit money in multiple banks to double or triple the effective insurance limit (Fidelity has an account like this, for example)


"What you're describing makes sense. I'd probably call the non-liquid portion something besides my ""emergency fund"", but that's semantics mostly. If you have 3 months of ""very liquid"" cash in this emergency fund and you're comfortable that this amount is good for your situation, then I don't see why you can't have additional savings in more or less liquid vehicles. Whatever you set up, you'll want to think about how to tap it when you need it. You might have a CD ladder with one maturing every three months. That would give you access to these funds after your liquid funds dry up. (Or for a small/short term emergency, you'll be able to replenish the liquid fund with the next-maturing CD.) Or set up a T Bill ladder with the same structure. This might provide you with a tax advantage."


Keep in mind, when talking about other deductions, such as mortgage interest, you need to look at your overall situation and whether the taxpayer is near the standard deduction amount. For some, their interest deduction and property tax are below the standard deduction, and therefore, they'd not itemize.


Grass is always greener at the other side of the hill.  Tax is only a small proportion of your costs. you could easily set up a small company in a so called tax haven. But are you willing to emigrate? If not, will the gain in less taxes cover the frequent travel costs? Even if you would like to emigrate less tax might be deceiving.  I recently had a discussion with a US based friend. In the US petrol is way cheaper then in Europe. THere were many examples in differences, but when you actually sum up everything, cost of living was kind of the same. So you might gain on tax, but loose on petrol, or child care to just name some examples  For big companies who think globally it makes sense to seek the cheapest tax formula. For them it does not matter where they are located. For us mortals it does.


"I am going to respond to a very thin sliver of what's going on.  Skip ahead 4 years. When buying that house, is it better to have $48K in the bank but a $48K student loan, or to have neither?  That $48K may very well be what it would take to put you over the 20% down payment threshhold thus avoiding PMI. Banks let you have a certain amount of non-mortgage debt before impacting your ability to borrow. It's the difference between the 28% for the mortgage, insurance and property tax, and the total 38% debt service.  What I offer above is a bit counter-intuitive, and I only mention it as you said the house is a priority. I'm answering as if you asked ""how do I maximize my purchasing power if I wish to buy a house in the next few years?"""


"> You keep saying this is based on data. Please feel free to provide peer reviewed data supporting your stance that smoking impacts income.  LOL, are you kidding me?     ""The findings suggest why ‘stoners’ are stereotypically viewed as lacking motivation to work hard to pursue their dreams or to be ambitious.""  https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-athletes-way/201307/does-long-term-cannabis-use-stifle-motivation    Cannabis reduces short-term motivation to work for money Smoking the equivalent of a single 'spliff' of cannabis makes people less willing to work for money while 'high'  https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/09/160901211303.htm   Cannabis smokers end up in worse jobs and have less money than average, study finds  http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/cannabis-smokers-end-up-worse-7608737   Getting high on cannabis makes you less likely to work hard for money, study says  https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/cannabis-marijuana-weed-effects-getting-high-working-hard-money-motivation-a7220441.html   Regular pot users wind up earning less money, new study says  http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/california-weed/article69339292.html   Study: Poorer marijuana users smoking the most     (Yeah, they ended up losers)  http://www.denverpost.com/2016/08/14/study-poorer-marijuana-users-smoking-the-most/"


"In the US service animals are treated like durable medical equipment from a tax POV, and some expenses can be deducted. Likewise, expenses associated with working animals are business or hobby expenses than can be deducted to a certain extent.  But pets, no. Legally they are ""chattels"" -- property that can move. Generally speaking, you can't deduct the cost of maintaining your belongings."


your money in a bank gets used to fund other investments. So basically you either make money, or you're making money for someone else.  Sorry i'm such a dick for not foreseeing 100,000% APR interest in bank accounts with no inflation, god i feel stupid now.


"It sounds like you are isolated and in a small town.  Without the true ability to bank, perhaps you should move. As an alternative you could do some kind of online banking.  Most banks offer the ability to deposit via mobile phone and you could obtain cash by using remote ATMs or writing checks for an amount over your purchase at the grocery store.  How are you paid?  If via direct deposit, that makes mobile banking even easier.   Did your read your premise out loud?  Using Game Stop as a bank is just silly. Are you banned from banks because of not paying child support or some other legal obligation?  If so just ""face the music"".  I know people that are over 40 and owed a relatively small amount of child support and the result of they lost out on order of magnitudes greater income.  It was just a short-sighted move that cost them far more than if they just obeyed the court order. It would be smarter to use a check cashing store, like AmScott, to do your banking.  They will cash checks for a fee, issue money orders, or even allow you to pay some bills directly through them.  Never, ever use them to cash a hot check or for short term financing but using them or Walmart, or the Grocery store is a much better option than Game Stop."


"Absolutely. But the FTC says that ""Thanks Neutrogena"" isn't enough anymore. And it can't be buried after the '...more' cutoff either. Again, I'd rather not get fined and still be able to run these endorsements and get better data than risk fines and/or not be able to do them at all."


If for some reason you need to replace a section of an aluminium balustrade, the material can be recycled to fabricate and fit a new panel quite easily. With aluminium balustrades you are not increasing your carbon footprint.Aluminium balustrades are ideally suited for residential buildings where the aesthetics greatly matter. In premises where safety is a concern steel balustrades are better equipped to address these issues. Swimming pool fencing, railings for staircases and balconies can be fabricated out of aluminium.


While the tone of the article isn't the best or the most informative the general premise of bid-rigging and collusion is still a problem and wait till all the swaps/derivatives come to light that were sold to european municipalities also uncompetively and collusively (if the europeans have balls to press charges).  A lot of the products were offered with clauses that disallowed the muni's to check the market prices and some had even collusion (I will dig up the link when I find it).


Trump got stopped on heathcare and on his wall. He might be willing to start fighting pretty dirty.  It will be so interesting to see if Democrats will join republicans to send a veto-proof debt bill to Trump. It's awkward for all sides. In a bizarre twist Trump may actually encourage bipartisan action in congress.


>I want to work in an environment where I can advocate for myself and, occasionally, negotiate for better compensation. Some people aren't good at these things, and frankly, that sucks for them. I'll eat their lunch if they let me.  Isn't that kind of the point?  If you can't advocate for yourself using negotiation tactics, you're left with the options of increasing the scope of your job or increasing your skills.


The answer depends on the specific instrument to which you are referring. It is possible to make straight bets that are cash-settled and in which the underlying commodity or instrument will never be bought or sold.  It is also possible to have such a contract be settled in the underlying (if the cash value is appropriate, then the cash settlement can be used to purchase the underlying directly, if necessary).  Physical delivery was predominant until the last few decades.  Most traders, as opposed to hedgers or strategics, are going to prefer cash-settled contracts as opposed to physical delivery. It is possible to make trades with a brokerage firm such that the firm pays if the trader wins the bet.  The firm will typically find parties on the other side to even out this bet and leave itself neutral as to the outcome (plus a small premium it charges each side for the cost of making the market).  The cost charged to one contracting party should be set by the dealer in relation to prices being charged to parties making the opposite, matching bet (in this way, brokers are following market price, while traders are setting it). Financially, options and contracts can be settled for cash or for the underlying, and they can be made directly with the opposite bettor or with a neutral dealer.


"Changing my answer based on clarification in comments. It appears that some of the securities you mentioned, including GEAPP, are traded on what is colloquially known as the Grey Market. Grey Sheets, and also known as the ""Gray Market"" is another category of OTC stocks that is completely separate from Pink Sheets and the OTCBB.  From investopedia The grey market is an over-the-counter market where dealers may execute orders for preferred customers as well as provide support for a new issue before it is actually issued. This activity allows underwriters and the issuer to determine demand and price the securities accordingly before the IPO.  Some additional information on this type of stocks. (Source) Unlike other financial markets... No recent bid or ask quotes are available because no market makers share data or quote such stocks. There is no quoting system available to record and settle trades. All Grey sheet trading is moderated by a broker and done between consenting individuals at a price they agree on. The only documentation that can be publicly found regarding the trades is when the last trade took place. No SEC registration and little SEC regulation. Regulation of Grey Sheet stocks takes place mainly on a state level. Unlike Pink Sheets, these stocks have no SEC registration to possess a stock symbol or to possess shares or trade shares of that stock. Such penny stocks, similar to Pink Sheets, are not required to file SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) financial and business reports. These stocks may not be solicited or advertised to the public unless a certain number of shares are qualified to be traded publicly under 504 of Regulation D. Extremely Illiquid. Gray sheet trading is infrequent, and for good reason... Difficult to trade, not advertised, difficult to follow the price, the least regulation possible, hard to find any information on the stock, very small market cap, little history, and most such stocks do not yet offer public shares. The lack of information (bids, history, financial reports) alone causes most investors to be very skeptical of Gray Sheets and avoid them altogether.  Gray Sheets are commonly associated with Initial public offering (IPO) stocks or start up companies or spin-off companies, even though not all are IPO's, start-ups or spin-offs. Grey Sheets is also Home to delisted stocks from other markets. Some stocks on this financial market were once traded on the NASDAQ, OTCBB, or the Pink Sheets but ran into serious misfortune - usually financial - and thus failed to meet the minimum requirements of the registered SEC filings and/or stock exchange regulations for a financial market. Such stocks were delisted or removed and may begin trading on the Grey Sheets.  So to answer your question, I think the cause of the wild swings is that:   Great question, BTW."


The advice is always to not get a big refund from the IRS, because that is giving them an interest free loan. You actually have an opportunity to get an interest free loan from them.  When you file your taxes for 2013 note how much you paid in taxes. Not the check you had to send in with your tax form or the refund you received, but the total amount in taxes you paid. Multiply that amount by 1.1 or (110%). For example $8,000 * 1.10 = $8,800. When you get your paychecks in 2014 you goal is to make sure that your federal taxes (not state, Social security or medicare) taken from your paycheck will get you over that number $8,800 /26 or ~350 a paycheck. Keep in mind that the later you start the more each check needs to be. You will owe them a big check in April 2015. But because of the 110% rule you will not owe interest, penalties, or have to deal with quarterly taxes. The 110% rule exempts you from these if you end them 110% as much a you paid in taxes the previous year. Note that no matter how you pay your taxes for 2014: big check now, extra per paycheck, or minimum now; you will have to watch your withholding during 2015 because the 110% rule won't protect you.


Contrary to Muro's answer which strangely shows a graph of the Fed's balance sheet and not the money supply, the supply of US dollars has never doubled in a few days.  This graph from Wikipedia shows M2, which is the wider measure of money supply, to have doubled over approximately 10 years, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Components_of_US_Money_supply.svg The answer to whether gold has a higher chance of experiencing big devaluation has to do with forces outside anyone's control, if a big new mine of gold is discovered that could affect prices, but also if the economy turns around it could lead investors to pull out of gold and back into the stock markets. The USD, on the other hand, is under control of the policy makers at the Fed who have a dual mandate to keep inflation and unemployment low. The Fed seems to have gotten better over the last 30 years at controlling inflation and the dollar has not experienced big inflation since the 70s. Inflation, as measured by Core CPI, has been maintained at less than 4% for the last 20 years and is currently coming off record low levels below 1%.


Get an advanced degree.  This should increase your earning power.  Also learn how to use a computer, this should also tend to increase your earning power.


no it would not. Did you read the article? corporations and funds are already paying the government to hold money short-term (negative real 2 year bond yields).   or are you advocating that the government place an additional tax on people who buy government bonds?


There could be a number of reasons: The price hit your number ($39.70) but by the time your order hit the market, the price had gone up. Perhaps the stock went up between when you placed the stop loss and when the order was executed. A trailing stop loss will ratchet up: Very simply, the trailing stop maintains a stop-loss order at a precise percentage below the market price (or above, in the case of a short position). The stop-loss order is adjusted continually based on fluctuations in the market price, always maintaining the same percentage below (or above) the market price.


"There are several areas of passive fraud by being unclear on what you are doing.  When a citizen buys a house, the mortgage lender wants all the details as to how the buyer rounded up the money.  That is so they can use their own formulas to assess the buyer's creditworthiness and the probability that the buyer will be able to keep up on payments, taxes and maintenance; or have they overextended themselves. The fraud is in the withholding of that info. By way of tricking them into making a favorable decision, when they might not have if they'd had all the facts.  Then there's making this sound all lovey-dovey, good intentions, no strings attached, no expectations. You're lying to yourself.  What you've actually done is put money between yourselves, because you have not laid down FAIR rules to cover every possibility.  You're not willing to plan for failure because you don't want to admit failure is possible, which is vain.  Once you leap into this bell jar, the uncertainty of ""what happens if..."" will intrude itself into everyone's thoughts, slowly corroding your relationship.  It's a recipe for disaster.  That uncertainty puts her in a very uncomfortable position.  She has to labor to make sure the issue doesn't explode, so she's tiptoeing around you to avoid fights.  Every fight, she'll wonder if you'll play the breakup card and threaten to demand the money back.  The money will literally come between you. This is what money does.  Thinking otherwise is a young person's mistake of inexperience.  Don't take my word on it, contact Suze Orman and see what she says. Your lender is also not going to like those poorly defined lovers' promises, because they've seen it all before, and don't want to yet again foreclose on a house that fighting lovers trashed.  (it's like, superhero battles are awesome unless you own the building they trashed.)  This thing can still be done, but to remove this fraud of wishful thinking, you need to scrupulously plan for every possibility, agree to outcomes that are fair and achievable, put it in writing and share it with a neutral third party.  You haven't done it, because it seems like it would be awkward as hell - and it will be! - Or it will test your relationship by forcing direct honesty about a bunch of things you haven't talked about or are afraid to - and it will! - And to be blunt, your relationship may not be able to survive that much honesty.  But if it does, you'll be in much better shape.   The other passive fraud is taxes.  By not defining the characteristics of the payment, you fog up the question of how your contribution will be taxed (if it will be taxed). A proper contract with each other will settle that.  (there's an argument to be made for involving a tax advisor in the design of that contract, so that you can work things to your advantage.)  As an example, defining the payment as ""rent"" is about the worst you could do, as you will not be able to deduct any home expenses, she will need to pay income tax on the rent, but she can cannot take landlord's tax deductions on anything but the fraction of the house which is exclusively in your control; i.e. none."


First you need to incorporate.  2) Build your websites & setup social accounts 3) create content: photoshoots, marketing designs, etc  You should be creating your apparel designs at the same time as your site is being built and your product should be printed before the photoshoots.   If you need more in depth help. Message me.


"Reich is trying to highlight the disparity between the market price of a person's labor and the real social value of that labor. But while the former concept has a standard definition in modern economics, the latter does not, and Reich does not offer one. That is why I found the article dissatisfying. It's clear he is lamenting the disparity, but he gives no clue about what the disparity actually amounts to.  Case in point:  > Does anyone seriously believe hedge-fund mogul Steven A. Cohen is worth the $2.3 billion he raked in last year, despite being slapped with a $1.8 billion fine after his firm pleaded guilty to insider trading?  I would wager that whoever paid Cohen the money believes it pretty seriously. By rhetorically asking whether *anyone* so believes, Reich assumes away the existence of whoever pays Cohen. His tone throughout the rest of the article is similar. Yet this is precisely where Reich could have stepped in with a definition of social value, e.g.:  > Stephen A. Cohen raked in $2.3 billion last year, despite being slapped with an $1.8-billion fine because of insider trading by his firm. Yet the social value of his work is far lower than $2.3 billion. Here's what I mean by ""social value"" and a way to approximate it...  Here is something Reich does say later on that is probably true and worth emphasizing:  > Most financiers, corporate lawyers, lobbyists, and management consultants are competing with other financiers, lawyers, lobbyists, and management consultants in zero-sum games that take money out of one set of pockets and put it into another.  Of course, this is also true of many government officials, athletes, and social activists. But the concept of a socially wasteful zero-sum game--and its implications for welfare--ought to be much more widely understood by the general public. Reich should be praised for calling attention to some examples of it, but it would have been much better if he had dwelt on it a little more instead of just ranting."


Well said .. but it's not like our defense industry gives the DOD an innovation discount. The only thing we get are export restrictions and it becomes game .. Make a next gen widget and earn the right to profit from your slightly obsolete (but still patented) cogs of war.


TAPE-RITE is a convertor of adhesive tapes. That means we buy tape in bulk rolls and then we cut it to size in our on premises shop. Because we do it all ourselves it gets done fast at competitive pricing with high quality. This means you don't need to order too much stuff too far in advance. We hold on to the inventory and produce it to your order. This allows you to free up capital and warehouse space for other uses. For details call us at: 516-406-8294 / 800-532-2309 Fax at: 516.328.0344 E-mail at: sales@taperite.com visit us: http://taperite.com/


I didn't take too many finance or economics courses so i can't comment.   In my post I recommended the YouTube video or audiobook 'why an economy grows and why it doesn't'  I guess it's more economy related than finance related, but is still relevant as it touches on loans and net worth and stuff.


Yes. In fact, it's explicitly mentioned in Publication 590-A that you can file before making the contribution, as long as you make the contribution before the deadline. Filing before a contribution is made.    You can file your return claiming a traditional IRA contribution before the contribution is   actually made. Generally, the contribution must be made by the due   date of your return, not including extensions.


If you are diversifying just for diversification purposes then all you are doing is averaging down your returns. You shouldn't just buy two securities because you think it is safer than putting all your money into one. A better method is to use money management and position sizing to limit your risk and exposure in any one security. You should know what your maximum risk is before you buy any security and know when it is time to get out of it. There are better ways to manage your risk. Don't put all your eggs in the one basket - yes, but don't diversify just for diversification purposes.


This merger will be approved because there is not a monopoly on Internet access. (Fast Internet access, on the other hand...)  Comcast and Time Warner do not substantially directly compete geographically. This map shows this. Thus, in the eyes of the regulatory bodies and the courts, competition for most *consumers* is not reduced because they do not have access to both Comcast and Time Warner.   I'm not saying that this merger is a good idea, just why it will likely be approved. Downvote me anyway.


Dont pay just bounce. But make sure you leave a note and keys. Also dont leave anything thing for them to have to clean or remove. Also be prepared to surrender your security deposit. So if u want to leave in july pay julys rent and be out last week of July. Clean out etc....


Photograph booths are an excellent approach to make your wedding more enjoyable and they are in demand for so long. He can furnish you with best photo booth hire West Midlands for various occasions like corporate occasion, birthday party, wedding or it can be any of the moment of happiness. @ https://bluefinchphotography.co.uk/


"I'm in agreement with what you write. I think these are good questions.  From my perspective I think the staggering growth of technology is both the cause and the answer to stagnating wage/productivity increase conundrum. Today a small business will hire a secretary to use email and Excel while in 1980 they would have hired a team of accountants with piles of ledger books. We are paying less employees while accomplishing more.   At the same time technology gives us all in the general public a higher standard of living through better phones, more access to cheap/free education, better health care, better infrastructure more cheaply than anyone in 1980 would have imagined.  What happens when we get to the point that any person that is halfway capable and not on drugs can survive just fine in a 40 hour workweek? If we got to that point, the normal barometers of rate of growth and wage stagnation and economic mobility would flatline. There would be people happy to live a stress-free life at that baseline ""survive just fine,"" and there would be people working their butts off to acquire more than anyone might need.   I think it all comes down to people wanting what someone else has and calling it unfair because they don't seem to deserve it more than anyone else. I think the real goal we should strive for is liberty and opportunity for anyone to pursue their form of improving their quality of life. Government intervention and distorted views of ""fairness"" tend to hinder that."


I strongly suggest personal referral. Ask all of your friends/family/neighbors/co-workers/dog-sitter what they think of their brokers until you find someone who loves his broker. As for transferring assets, I've found it to be quite easy. It's in the new broker's best interest to get those assets, so he should be more than willing to help.


Cable companies that sell internet access realize that high speed internet enables high speed TV distribution that bypasses cable.  Cable companies  (which operate as de facto monopolies) don't want competition for the highly lucrative and powerful TV distribution business and therefore use whatever dirty tricks they can come up with to frustrate both internet at higher speeds and internet provided by any other entities.  They know it's ultimately a losing battle but they'll remain obstinate for as long as they can.


From what these people are saying, it is impossible for you to put $5,500 in if it were a Roth though, because the money has to be taxed. You are correct that this is wrong.  You can still put $5,500 in a Roth - the tax payment comes when you file, not when you make the investment.  This is when the Roth is better than a Traditional IRA, when you can invest the max either way.  Yes you get the tax break for the Traditional investment, and if you invest the tax savings you'll be in the same spot, all else being equal. If you only have a certain amount (after taxes) to invest, say $3,000 in a 25% marginal tax bracket, then it works out the same either way.  You can either invest $3,000 in a Roth and let it grow tax free, or put $4,000 in a traditional IRA since you can deduct $1,000 (15%) from your taxes when you file. Then your tax-adjusted balance when you withdraw is the same, since you'll have a lot more (33% more in fact) in your traditional IRA but will have to pay tax on the withdrawals.


And meanwhile idiots like Lube go around talking about how we're all fucked. I like to do this quick trading in my Roth, where I don't have to even think about paying taxes on short term gains. Most people can afford the Roth. The people who can't do it are usually the people who don't qualify, in other words upper income people who include the 1%!!!


If your parents' business isn't viable (regardless of what combination of the economy or their management of it caused it not to be viable) it would seem that you'd be throwing good money after bad to save it. If the whole thing gets paid off, then they get rid of the debt, but the economy will still be in the tank and they'll be going in the hole again. If they think they're five years away from retirement, then they're kidding themselves.  They won't be able to retire. They should get bankruptcy advice and should start looking for other sources of income.  Maybe sell their house and get something smaller.  Have their expenses match their income. Sorry if this sounds harsh but it will be difficult for them to recover from this mess if they're in their late fifties.


"What you're looking for are either FX Forwards or FX Futures.   These products are traded differently but they are basically the same thing -- agreements to deliver currency at a defined exchange rate at a future time.   Almost every large venue or bank will transact forwards, when the counterparty (you or your broker) has sufficient trust and credit for the settlement risk, but the typical duration is less than a year though some will do a single-digit multi-year forward on a custom basis.  Then again, all forwards are considered custom contracts.  You'll also need to know that forwards are done on currency pairs, so you'll need to pick the currency to pair your NOK against.  Most likely you'll want EUR/NOK simply for the larger liquidity of that pair over other possible pairs. A quote on a forward will usually just be known by the standard currency pair ticker with a settlement date different from spot.  E.g. ""EUR/NOK 12M"" for the 12 month settlement. Futures, on the other hand, are exchange traded and more standardized.  The vast majority through the CME (Chicago Mercantile Exchange).  Your broker will need access to one of these exchanges and you simply need to ""qualify"" for futures trading (process depends on your broker).  Futures generally have highest liquidity for the next ""IMM"" expiration (quarterly expiration on well known standard dates), but I believe they're defined for more years out than forwards.   At one FX desk I've knowledge of, they had 6 years worth of quarterly expirations in their system at any one time.  Futures are generally known by a ticker composed of a ""globex"" or ""cme"" code for the currency concatenated with another code representing the expiration.  For example, ""NOKH6"" is 'NOK' for Norwegian Krone, 'H' for March, and '6' for the nearest future date's year that ends in '6' (i.e. 2016).   Note that you'll be legally liable to deliver the contracted size of Krone if you hold through expiration!  So the common trade is to hold the future, and net out just before expiration when the price more accurately reflects the current spot market."


Non-target undergrad in the south, but I networked with right people. Through the finance clubs I got an equity research role for the school's investment fund and leveraged that for an interview at a home developer but the partners there ultimately went with someone else. They happened to be investors at the firm I currently work at and thought my background would make me a good fit. Once I started working there, I took on as many projects/responsibilities as I could. I'm actually in the process of partnering up with the trader to take on some outside investors and get his algos running. He's been trading for ~25 years and I couldn't believe what his returns were at first, so I'm fairly excited to work with him.


I disagree strongly with the other two answers posted thus far. HFT are not just liquidity providers (in fact that claim is completely bogus, considering liquidity evaporates whenever the market is falling). HFT are not just scalping for pennies, they are also trading based on trends and news releases. So you end up having imperfect algorithms, not humans, deciding the price of almost every security being traded. These algorithms data mine for news releases or they look for and make correlations, even when none exist.  The result is that every asset traded using HFT is mispriced. This happens in a variety of ways. Algos will react to the same news event if it has multiple sources (Ive seen stocks soar when week old news was re-released), algos will react to fake news posted on Twitter, and algos will correlate S&P to other indexes such as VIX or currencies. About 2 years ago the S&P was strongly correlated with EURJPY. In other words, the American stock market was completely dependent on the exchange rate of two currencies on completely different continents. In other words, no one knows the true value of stocks anymore because the free market hasnt existed in over 5 years.


"Simplest way to answer this is that on margin, one is using borrowed assets and thus there are strings that come with doing that. Thus, if the amount of equity left gets too low, the broker has a legal obligation to close the position which can be selling purchased shares or buying back borrowed shares depending on if this is a long or short position respectively. Investopedia has an example that they walk through as the call is where you are asked to either put in more money to the account or the position may be closed because the broker wants their money back. What is Maintenance Margin? A maintenance margin is the required   amount of securities an investor must hold in his account if he either   purchases shares on margin, or if he sells shares short. If an   investor's margin balance falls below the set maintenance margin, the   investor would then need to contribute additional funds to the account   or liquidate stocks in the account to bring the account back to the   initial margin requirement. This request is known as a margin call. As discussed previously, the Federal Reserve Board sets the initial   margin requirement (currently at 50%). The Federal Reserve Board also   sets the maintenance margin. The maintenance margin, the amount of   equity an investor needs to hold in his account if he buys stock on   margin or sells shares short, is 25%. Keep in mind, however, that this   25% level is the minimum level set, brokerage firms can increase, but   not decrease this level as they desire. Example: Determining when a margin call would occur. Assume that an   investor had purchased 500 shares of Newco's stock. The shares were   trading at $50 when the transaction was executed. The initial margin   requirement on the account was 70% and the maintenance margin is 30%.   Assume no transaction costs. Determine the price at which the investor   will receive a margin call. Answer: Calculate the price as follows: $50 (1- 0.70) = $21.43 1 - 0.30 A margin call would be received when the price of Newco's stock fell   below $21.43 per share. At that time, the investor would either need   to deposit additional funds or liquidate shares to satisfy the initial   margin requirement. Most people don't want ""Margin Calls"" but stocks may move in unexpected ways and this is where there are mechanisms to limit losses, especially for the brokerage firm that wants to make as much money as possible. Cancel what trade? No, the broker will close the position if the requirement isn't kept. Basically think of this as a way for the broker to get their money back if necessary while following federal rules. This would be selling in a long position or buying in a short sale situation. The Margin Investor walks through an example where an e-mail would be sent and if the requirement isn't met then the position gets exited as per the law."


Yes I feel like a lot of people are intimidated of going to a local sports bar so BWW is a safe choice. If you notice most of the people there seem to skew younger. Once they get older, they go to local pubs. BWW is an intro bar / restaurant.


There's never been a good micropayment system on the internet.  Credit card and paypal transaction costs are too high, and the whole thing takes too long.  The hassle of a credit card transaction only makes sense if you are making a major (5$ and up) purchase.  For micropayments there should be no lower limit on amounts, and contributing should take under a second.  Like a button that contributes 5 cents.


The financial reasons, beyond simply owning your home outright, are: You're no longer paying interest. Yes, the interest is tax-deductible in the U.S. (though not in Canada), but the tax savings is a percentage of a percentage; if you paid, say, $8000 in interest last year, at the 25% marginal rate you effectively save $2000 off your taxes. But, if you paid off your home and had that $8000 in your pocket, you'd pay the $2000 in taxes but you'd have $6000 left over. Which is the better deal? In Canada, the decision gets even easier; you pay taxes on the interest money either way, so you're either spending the $8000 in interest, lost forever as cost of capital, or on other things. Whatever you're earning is going into your own pocket, not the bank's. Similar to the interest, but also including principal, a home you own outright is a mortgage payment you don't have to make. You can now use that money, principal and interest, for other things. Whether these advantages outweigh those of anything else you could do with a few hundred grand depends primarily on the rate of return. If you got in at the bottom of the mortgage crisis (which is pretty much right now) and got a rate in the 3-4% range, with no MIP or other payment on top, then almost anything you can do with the amount you'd need to pay off a mortgage principal would get you a better rate of return. However, you'll need some market savvy to avoid risks.  In most cases when someone has pretty much any debt and a big wad of cash they're considering how to spend, I usually recommend paying off the debt, because that is, in effect, a risk-free way to increase the net rate of return on your total wealth and income. Balancing debt with investments always carries with it the risk that the investment will fail, leaving you stuck with the debt. Paying the debt on the other hand will guarantee that you don't have to pay interest on that outstanding amount anymore, so it's no longer offsetting whatever gains you are making in the market on your savings or future investments.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://hackernoon.com/cryptoeconomics-paving-the-future-of-blockchain-technology-13b04dab971?source=linkShare-2ce646a74d1c-1500791146) reduced by 96%. (I'm a bot) ***** > When you dig deep enough into the concepts underlying blockchain technology and specific systems built on it, you will find that they heavily incorporate cryptoeconomic tools specifically designed to minimize the impact of evildoers and hostile actors.  > Cryptoeconomic Assumptions of BehaviorThe exciting thing about cryptoeconomics is that its terminology and theory are being pioneered day-by-day by blockchain developers and thought leaders.  > To underscore the cutting-edge innovation within this field, some of the terms associated with cryptoeconomics have less than 100 results when googled at the time of writing! While many of the ideas in this area are very theoretical, rest assured that their application will have incredible consequences on the development and adoption of blockchain technology.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6p2tm0/cryptoeconomics_paving_the_future_of_blockchain/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~173828 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*: **cryptoeconomic**^#1 **Bitcoin**^#2 **attack**^#3 **protocol**^#4 **blockchain**^#5"


Usa is at the point where we either tell all the countries that we aren't paying the debt or keep pretending that one day we will be able too. Our economy relies so much on military and government spending that if we cut it too much at once we risk a shock to the market. If we cut slowly we might be able to turn the country's budget to positive and start paying but so much debt and so much spending it could be a hundred plus years.


"Simple answer: Yes  A better question to ask might be ""Should I invest all my savings to buy 4 shares of a single stock."" My answer to that would be ""probably not"". If this is your first venture into the world of owning publicly traded companies, then you're better off starting with some sort of mutual fund or ETF. This will start your portfolio with some amount of diversification so you don't have all your eggs in one basket. If you really want to get into the world of picking individual stocks, a good rule of thumb to follow is to invest $1 in some sort of indexed fund for every $1 you invest in an individual stock. This gives you some diversification while still enabling you to scratch that itch of owning a part of Apple or whatever other company you think is going in the right direction."


"The UTMA is actually very liberal in how custodians can spend the money: ""A custodian may deliver or pay to the minor or expend for the minor's benefit so much of the custodial property as the custodian considers advisable for the use and benefit of the minor . . . .""  A custodian might reasonably consider expending the UTMA money on groceries the benefit the child, for instance."


Over the long run, yeah I agree that that the technology consumers have and their real incomes have gone up. However, people don’t live their lives in the long run, their experiences are firmly centered in the short run. People marry, have children, move, start work, lose work, suffer health problems, divorce, homelessness all in the short run.   When you zoom in from the long run view, life and individual fortunes seem a bit more dependent on luck and relative positioning than long run technological or economic trends. This is exacerbated by our political system where money seems to positively correlate with the ability to wield political power. Folks with political power can engineer changes that can improve their bottom line through zero sum political games (think taxes, regulation, etc) and maybe even turn a short run advantage (starting a successful business, generating wealth) into a longer run advantage (eliminating taxes on inheritance, potentially cementing family wealth for generations).


The simple undeniable truth is that the Jews are at the root cause of all strife and misery and terrorism in the world today.  There is a sufficient body of evidence to seriously challenge the Jewish version of the what you call the Holocaust, don't take my word for it see for yourself  https://www.reddit.com/r/holocaust/  And what ever the case it does not give the Jews the right to establish an apartheid state and violate the Human rights of the Palestinian nation for the last 50 years  And its time for America to question why we have abandoned all that we believe in and all that we hold sacred, so Jews can steal more land, and more importantly why are less than 1% of the population governing the economy and government and dragging us into wars that mean nothing to us.  It needs to be said, and heard