"The following is from Wikipedia - Term life insurance (with very minor editing) Because term life insurance is a pure   death benefit, its primary use is to   provide coverage of financial   responsibilities, for the insured.   Such responsibilities may include, but   are not limited to, consumer debt,   dependent care, college education for   dependents, funeral costs, and   mortgages. Term life insurance is   generally chosen in favor of permanent   life insurance because it is usually   much less expensive (depending on the   length of the term). Many financial   advisors or other experts commonly   recommend term life insurance as a   means to cover potential expenses   until such time that there are   sufficient funds available from   savings to protect those whom the   insurance coverage was intended to   protect. For example, an individual   might choose to obtain a policy whose   term expires near his or her   retirement age based on the premise   that, by the time the individual   retires, he or she would have amassed   sufficient funds in retirement savings   to provide financial security for   their dependents. This suggests the questions ""why do you have this policy?"" also ""how many term life policies do you need?"" or ""how much insurance do you need?"" Clearly you will be better off investing the premiums in the market.  Your beneficiaries may be better off either way (depends when you die and to a lesser extent on market performance). If you are not able to retire now but expect to be able to later, you should strongly consider having sufficient insurance to provide income replacement for your spouse.  This is a fairly common why."


"How can you dismiss this argument as political?  That's not even a consideration when thinking about this.  I think this based on what I've read--you keep saying ""look at the government data""--what the hell kind of vague BS is that?    For example, Seth Klarman in his book ""Margin of Safety"" talks about the dangers of deregulation from an investment point-of-view.    Perhaps even better, James Montier in ""Value Investing"" has pages and pages and data that show a clear pattern of widespread deregulation and the following bust.    Going back to the late 80s S&L crisis, you do realize that banks were't able to invest in such speculative securities prior to the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act, right?"


This is the damaged goods (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crippleware) setting in economics. It makes perfect sense from the manufacturing point of view, since is damn expensive to have lines dedicated for different products.  I don't know if I agree with it, but it is good business to do so. Is the same principle of paying more to have a better seat in an airplane, is the same service but with better conditions and service.


I think a lot of it is our spending and the things and services we now consider needed or at least normal. Our grandparents didn't have cell phones, cable, xboxes, organic food, laptops, DSL service, 2 cars per family, yearly vacations to Europe, aging parents (and grandparents), day care, 3D movies.. I could go on and on. Cut all that stuff out and you could probably live on one middle class salary.


"> but the invasion of Iraq was, by definition, a military venture intended to overthrow their leader and change the regime.  No, it was a government venture using the military as a tool. But even if it were a military venture, you would be right - the invasion was, not the occupation and attempt to stabilize/rebuild. That was a joint venture.  >The US military acts for the US government, as do other departments and to muddle the question by listing departments is to miss the point – which is privatization of government functions, be they military or just involved in military ventures.  Painting the construction of a school, built by Iraqi contractors, directed by the State Department, and funded through USAID as a ""military venture"" is absurd.  >If the contractors weren’t really required but were hired anyway….I don’t know how that’s defended.  Of course that occurred. The government is incredibly wasteful. An example that actually involved security contractors is the one I already gave. 10 Ugandans to stand around a checkpoint (1 or 2 of them lazily checking the drivers credentials or slowly walking around the vehicle pretending they know what they are looking for), another 2 to standby for whatever, and the last 6-7 to literally do nothing. The same job can be done by 2 U.S. personnel.  So you have +8 bodies, +192 manhours per day, but you have a net cost decrease. That's why it was done, and that's why the total personnel count in and of itself does not tell much of a story."


Huh? You reserve your room just like Airbnb and then check in anytime. Most big hotels have a desk staffed 24/7. With Airbnb you and the host have to prearrange a time. And if you're late and the host has somewhere else to be...  Lucky hosts we had were understanding and left the key under the mat.


I think you don't understand the Boston area.  Sure Boston has tight roads, but only certain areas.  The seaport is pretty much a grid now.  Also, Amazon most likely won't be building a campus in any city center.  Whether they go to Toronto or Pittsburg or Austin, they will be building on the outskirts of the city or a place where there is land.  Even Austin doesn't have land right in the downtown.  Boston is like the city center of all those other cities.  You could build an entire campus from the ground up 15 miles from the center of Boston and not need to deal with traffic or tight roads or any issues you mentioned.  I mean, they're building a Wynn casino 3 miles from the city center.  Boston is a tiny land area.  If you plopped the land area of Toronto on Boston it would encompass a ton of towns that aren't boston.  And as for the location away from Seattle.  My assumption is that they want a second headquarters not near their old one.  Having an operations base on both coasts makes sense.  I don't know what their criteria are, but Boston and the greater Boston area has pretty much everything they would want.  Especially access to talent.


I work from home when I'm not on the road. I don't think I could go back to a desk job. Trust your employees to have discipline and do a good job and you will be rewarded. Those who abuse the system will be weeded out naturally.


"Here we go again! Why, oh why, would someone just open a bank account in your name with that much money for no good reason?  Unless there's a very rich relative in your family tree, this can not come to a good ending.  Besides, if this was money being left to you by someone as part of an inheritance, you'd hear from attorneys from the estate. Notwithstanding everything @NickR posted about the details of what makes it suspicious, ask yourself why a banker would contact you by email about an account with this much money in it.  The bank would, at the very least, send you a registered/certified letter on official stationery.   So what happens here is when you give them your banking information, whoever it is that's doing this will clean out your account, and that's for starters.   They will ask for enough information to steal your identity too, and if you have good credit, that'll be gone in a heartbeat. The best scams (meaning the most successful ones) always appeal to peoples' greed, using large amounts of money that just miraculously belong to the victim, if only they'd give a little information to ""transfer"" the money.   Worse yet, most of these scams will come up with some kind of ""fee"", ""tax"" or other expense that you have to pre-pay in order to make the transfer happen, so this just adds insult to injury when you find out (the hard way!) you've been scammed. DO NOT reply to the email you received or, if you already have, don't send any more responses.  If they think they may have you on the hook then they won't stop trying, and it will become very messy very quickly. THIS IS NOT REAL MONEY!  It isn't yours, it doesn't really exist, and all it will do is come to no good end if you go any further with it. Stay safe, my friend."


You need to give specific dates! In the United States, you have three years to file an amended tax return. https://www.irs.gov/uac/Newsroom/Ten-Facts-about-Amended-Tax-Returns Did the restaurant fail in 2012? If so, that's probably the year to take the loss. If you need to amend your 2012 return, which you filed in 2013, you should have until 2016 to file this. The exact date may be based on when you filed 2012 taxes!


"No because he is simply wrong. He wants to play around with definitions of intelligence to prove his point which is a big sign that just says bullshit. If he wants to get pedantic about the entire thing he should say ""verbal intelligence"" which even then is a dubious and still heavily debated claim. ""Intelligence"" is, at the very least, positively correlated with income."


"I hate to break it to you, but we have had this little thing called ""white flight"" since Eisenhower was president.  Most American cities are now burnt out ghettos.  People with high income potential don't want to live in them.  It has nothing to do with wealthy assholes.  Gangster thugs and the CIA have deliberately destroyed the tax base, because no one with any sense at all wants to be anywhere near them."


We have a ton of student loan debt (mostly mine) and right now, I'm on a strict 'replace' only budget.  I have some shirts I put elbow holes in that I'm only keeping around as a reminder to replace them.  I wait until there is a deal of some sort (50% off or BOGO Free) unless I really need it - a white dress shirt for job interviews for instance. Outside of that, make it a line item in your budget and decide when you will spend it. For example, budget $60/mo for it, but only spend it when it reaches $180 or $300 or either of those amounts AND a sale (memorial day is the next big shopping sale after Easter).  It is totally up to you. Waiting to replace two shirts (gray and green) and a pair of black dress pants.


It is important to understand that when or before you received services from your medical provider(s), you almost certainly signed a document stating that you understand that you are fully responsible for the entire bill, even though the provider  may be willing to bill the insurer on your behalf as a service. In almost all cases, this is the arrangement, so it is very unlikely that you will be able to dispute the validity of the bill, since you did receive the service and almost certainly agreed to be fully responsible for the payments. With regard to the discounts, your medical provides have likely contracted with your insurer to provide services at a certain price or discount level, so I would base all of your negotiations with the providers and/or the collectors on those amounts. They can't legitimately bill you for the full amount since you are insured by a company they have a contract with, and you are not self-pay/uninsured, and the fact that they haven't been paid by your insurer doesn't change that, because the discount likely depends on the contact they have with your insurer and not whether or not they are billed/paid by your insurer. Please note - this is a common arrangement, but I'd recommend that you verify this with your insurer. Unfortunately, payment in 90+ days is often typical by insurance standards, so it's not yet clear to me whether or not your insurer has broken any laws such as a Prompt Pay law, or violated the terms of your policy with them (read it!). However, you need to find out which claims rep/adjuster is handling your claims and follow up with them until the payments are made. It's not personal, so make this person's life miserable until it is done and call them so often that they know it's you by the caller ID. I would also recommend contacting the collector(s), and letting them know that you don't have the money and so will not be able to pay, provide them with copies of the EOBs that state that the insurance company plans to pay the providers, and then ignore their calls/letters until the payments are made. When they call, simply reiterate that you don't have the money and that your insurance company is in the process of paying the bills. You have to expect that you will be dealing with a low-paid employee that is following a script. You are just the next person on their robo-call list, and they are not going to understand that you don't have a pile of money laying around with which to pay them, even if you tell them repeatedly. Make sure that you at no point give them access to any of your financial accounts, such as a checking or savings account, or a debit card - they will access it and clean you out. It is likely that your insurance provider will pay the providers directly since they were likely billed by the providers originally. If the providers have sold the debt to the collectors (and are not just employing a collector for debt they still own), you may have to follow up with the providers as well and make sure that the collection activity stops, since the providers may also need to forward the payments to the collectors once they are paid by the insurance company. Of course, if the insurer refuses to pay the claims, at that point I would recommend meeting with a lawyer to seek to force them to pay.


I think that was the initial theme of the thread in the other comments. If they are losing the game on pricing which they are to online retailers. They need to excel where they can which is service (the most popular gripe on reddit is the moster cables/employees who dont know anything) they can fix this easy by not hiring morons or normal smart people and forcing them to lie and stop scamming the few customers they have. This is where circuit city failed. They fired the smart commission employees replaced them with cheap salesbots 3000 and they lost the customers they had to online. Best Buy is just a rinse and repeat of this.


"I have done several days of additional research on this and found out that it appears I can deduct the cost of the books against a single year's royalty income by claiming a Section 179 deduction. The steps are as follows: (1) Write the maximum amount of property you can claim under section 179 on line 1 of Form 4562. (2) Add up the total cost of section 179 property you began using during the tax year, including books, and record the amount on line 2. (3) Write the limit of your deductions on line 3. (4) Subtract the amount on line 2 from the amount on line 3 and record it on line 4. If line 3 is larger than line 2, simply write ""0"" on line 4, then subtract the amount on line 4 from the amount on line 1 and record on line 5. Step 5 (5) Describe the property and books on line 6 and record the cost of each in section b. Write the amount of the expense you are claiming for each item in section c of line 6. You can claim the entire cost of the books. (6) Add the amount in line 6 c to any amounts on line 7 and write the total on line 8. Write either the amount on line 8 or the amount on 5 on line 9, depending on which is smaller. (7) Write the amount of your Schedule C income on line 11, unless it is greater than $500,000. On line 12, write the amount of your deduction, which is the total of line 9 plus any carry-over you may have had from the previous year. (8) Record the amount of your deduction for section 179 books and property on line 13 of your Schedule C, not line 22. Include form 4562 when you hand in your tax return. source: ""How to Deduct Books for Self-Employed"" by Emily Weller"


So are you saying property rights in these struggling African countries are lacking then? I'm just curious what your opinion is. I do believe property rights do give people an unparalleled incentive to improve the things around them, since they feel ownership


In many countries it is a legal requirement or in some other way mandatory for the banks to ban the owner(s) of an account to allow a third party to use the account. In some countries if you willing give someone access in this way you get no compensation what so ever and you'll be lucky if they catch the crooks and even luckier if you get any of your money back. Don't forget the possibility of jail time due to the criminal activities going on under your name.


The problem with the cash value is that it's really slow to accumulate. For the first many years you'll just be paying premiums which are front loaded until the insurance company gets their money back. Whole life is NOT an investment, regardless of what your 'advisor' says. It's insurance, and expensive insurance at that.


The Avalanche method does not work because most people don't have enough money to make an avalanche.  If you somehow had a windfall that was greater or equal to your highest credit card balance, then by all means pay that one off.   However, most people do not have that kind of situation.  Instead they should use the debt snow ball method.  They only have regular income that is typically much smaller then the balances. Another part of your plan that is especially troubling is that you are continuing to utilize credit cards.  You need to cut them up, and stop using them.  First of course save $1000 for a small emergency fund, the pay them off smallest to largest.  Do a budget each and every month.  Work an extra job or three.  Any extra money that hubby brings in goes towards one of the credit cards. BTW you don't have a math problem you have a behavior problem.


As you mentioned in the title, what you're asking about comes down to volatility.  DCA when purchasing stock is one way of dealing with volatility, but it's only profitable if the financial instrument can be sold higher than your sunk costs.  Issues to be concerned with: Let's suppose you're buying a stock listed on the NYSE called FOO (this is a completely fake example).  Over the last six days, the average value of this stock was exactly $1.00Note 1.  Over six trading days you put $100 per day into this stockNote 2: At market close on January 11th, you have 616 shares of FOO.  You paid $596.29 for it, so your average cost (before fees) is: $596.29 / 616 = $0.97 per share Let's look at this including your trading fees: ($596.29 + $30) / 616 = $1.01 per share. When the market opens on January 12th, the quote on FOO could be anything.  Patents, customer wins, wars, politics, lawsuits, press coverage, etc... could cause the value of FOO to fluctuate.  So, let's just roll with the assumption that past performance is consistent: Selling FOO at $0.80 nets: (616 * $0.80 - $5) - ($596.29 + $30) =  $123.49 Loss Selling FOO at $1.20 nets: (616 * $1.20 - $5) - ($596.29 + $30) =  $107.90 Profit Every day that you keep trading FOO, those numbers get bigger (assuming FOO is a constant value).  Also remember, even if FOO never changes its average value and volatility, your recoverable profits shrink with each transaction because you pay $5 in fees for every one. Speaking from experience, it is very easy to paper trade.  It is a lot harder when you're looking at the ticker all day when FOO has been $0.80 - $0.90 for the past four days (and you're $300 under water on a $1000 portfolio).  Now your mind starts playing nasty games with you. If you decide to try this, let me give you some free advice: Unless you have some research (such as support / resistance information) or data on why FOO is a good buy at this price, let's be honest: you're gambling with DCA, not trading. END NOTES:


"According to the IRS, it appears there is no issue in a spouse under EE or EE+Child(ren) coverage contributing to an FSA while you contribute to an HSA under an EE Only HDHP account: https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rr-05-25.pdf ""In Situation 1, H has HDHP self-only coverage and no other health coverage, is not enrolled in Medicare and may not be claimed as a dependent on another taxpayer’s return. Although W has non-HDHP family coverage, H is not covered under that health plan. H is therefore an eligible individual as defined in section 223(c)(1). The special rules for married individuals under section 223(b)(5) do not apply because W’s nonHDHP family coverage does not cover H. Thus, H remains an eligible individual and H may contribute up to $2,000 to an HSA (lesser of the HDHP deductible for self-only coverage or $2,650) for 2005. H may not make the catch-up contribution under section 223(b)(3) because H is not age 55 in 2005. W has non-HDHP coverage and is therefore not an eligible individual."" Some more information directly from IRS form 969 published for 2015 tax returns: https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p969.pdf Qualifying for an HSA To be an eligible individual and qualify for an HSA, you must meet the following requirements. You must be covered under a high deductible health plan (HDHP), described later, on the first day of the month. You have no other health coverage except what is permitted under Other health coverage, later. You are not enrolled in Medicare. You cannot be claimed as a dependent on someone else's 2015 tax return. Under the last-month rule, you are considered to be an eligible individual for the entire year if you are an eligible individual on the first day of the last month of your tax year (December 1 for most taxpayers). If you meet these requirements, you are an eligible individual even if your spouse has non-HDHP family coverage, provided your spouse's coverage does not cover you."


The numbers you have quoted don't add up. For Rs 30,000 / month is 3,60,000 a year. The tax should be around 11,000 again this will be reduced by the contributions to PF. You have indicated a tax deductions of 18,000. There are multiple ways to save taxes. Since you are beginner, investments into section 80C should give you required tax benefits. Please read this article in Economic Times


Cars are not houses.  The comparison is apples to oranges.   Bad car loans actually can be good business for car dealers.  When someone defaults on their car loan they very quickly lose the car.  That car is then resold.   Default on a home loan and you don't even have to leave the house, and there is no way for them to take the house back from you.  It often takes a year or two for the bank and lawyers to get you kicked out of the house.   A car however is on wheels, it can easily be moved and taken back.  This article is some poorly researched 'sky is falling' click-bait.


Save a little if you want but pay most of your way through college if you can.  Debt sucks bad and I try to avoid as little as possible.  I'm willing to bet that any money you invested while in school would be trumped by a only a few hours of overtime once you're out of college and making money (assuming you've chosen a path that is valuable today and through most of your future).  I worked full time and attended school full time when I was in college..those 3-4 hour nights of sleep were worth it not that I see people paying $1k/month for the next 10 years on loans... assuming you can handle it.


Your employer pays the expected (but estimated) taxes for you. So the chances are you don't own more; but that might be different if you have other sources of income that he doesn't know about (interest on savings or a side-job or whatever). Also, you could have deductions that reduce the taxes you owe, which he again doesn't know, so you overpay. If you don't file, you don't get them back. Most tax software companies offer free usage of their tool for standard filings, and you can use it to find out your tax situation, and then buy the tool only when you want to file. If you use one of those, you can type in all your data, and depending on the result, decide to buy it and file right away. Note that if it turns out you owe taxes, you must file (and pay), but of course you can do it manually instead of buying the tool. If it turns out you get money back, it is your decision to file - you probably don't care for a small amount, but if you get 1000 $ back, you might want to file - again, buying the software of doing it manually.


One more thing to favor the card. Extended warranty, or damage coverage. An iPad, if dropped on a hard surface, stands a good chance of breaking. Apple isn't going to cover that, as it's not a defect. Many credit cards offer free coverage for breakage of this type as well as doubling the warranty up to a year. This second year of coverage is worth about 10% of the item cost.  To be clear, I'm talking about running the expense through a card and paying in full, some call it credit no different than those who carry a balance month to month and pay 18% interest. I believe if I have the money to spend on an item, and use the card to get that coverage along with the benefits others posted, it's a convenience, nothing more. Some people who use certain budgeting methods like to set up a payment each week so the bill comes in close to zero. Whatever works.


You can invoice your advertisers and use the date of the invoice for tax purposes.  Some advertisers may want to pay monthly, weekly etc so that would require multiple entries as income on the relevant dates.


For some reason, I've always had a negative feeling about Chase; I don't really know why, but I think I'll continue to avoid them.  :)  My banks seem to be West Coast banks, mainly Wells Fargo who I've used since the 70s (because they had a small branch in Yosemite Valley, a place I frequented at that time).  I haven't had as much luck with other banks, mainly HSBC which I used briefly.  Maybe the west coast banks are more laid back or something.    Or maybe it's just Chase being incompetent.  Banks like that deserve to fail.


I have a different take on this. If it would only take 3 months to save up to pay for it, line up the work now. Shop with your spouse to find the exact floor you want. By the time you hire the store to do the install, a month will have gone by, by the time the charge bill comes in, you'll be able to pay 2/3 off, and pay in full next month. Note: I see this was asked in December. For those carrying no debt at all, I'm not adverse to a purchase of this type getting partially floated on a credit card for a month or two. Not a pair of shoes, or golf clubs, but a kitchen floor? The $10 interest is worth it to not walk over a ripped up floor in your home.


"Aside from the funky/retro thing, Polaroid still has one thing that hasn't been accomplished with digital: Instant unaltered records.  Insurance companies used polaroid film because a polaroid in a file was a guarantee that the picture was an accurate representation. With developed film, you could always ""edit"" things out in the darkroom. With digital, the path from shutter to print offers more option for cheating than every before.  We *can* fix this in the digital world, but haven't so far - and until we do, Polaroid still has a place."


Funny, I warned everyone on Reddit to short Facebook before the IPO - [MULTIPLE TIMES](http://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/txj48/facebook_stock_down_by_10_in_15_minutes_of/c4qo194) - and no one wrote a USA Today article about me.  In fact, before the stock tanked, I had 100% downvotes from all you honest Redditors...


Well I mean there's no perfect solution. Women being disadvantaged is just a result of biology, and there's only so much you can do. It's even possible that mandatory paternity is a net negative for society as a whole due to less productivity at the expense of greater equality.


You should examine the letter more closely.  Most letters in this area are ones which inform you of a proposed settlement of a class action (not the initiation of a class action), and that you may be a member of the class.  A main point of such a letter is normally that if you take no action, you will be included in the settlement class.   Usually there are no major consequences to not opting out of the class other than you will lose the ability to get a lawyer and sue the defendants for the actions in question. To obtain benefits from the settlement, you will typically be required to submit documentation of the nature of your membership in the class.  This may be easy or hard.  The benefits are described in the materials, and could be substantial but usually are close to trivial, such as a coupon for $10 off when purchasing another product from the defendant.


Advertising on the internet is dead. It's dying. People just haven't accepted that yet. Ad blockers are going to become increasingly common, not less common, and all of the methods used to attack ad blockers are seen as hostile toward the consumer. That stuff is going to become passe in time. 13 years is nothing. You must be young.


Основно, ние предоставяме най-добрата банка за захранване и USB флаш устройство. Ако искате да Power банка за мобилни, Тогава можете да дойдете на нашия уеб сайт компания. Много непрекъсваеми токозахранващи устройства са предназначени да тестват своите батерии на всеки 24 часа и ще чуят звукова сигнализация, ако бъде открита неизправност или състояние на батерията. Как работи това е, че тестът натоварва набора от акумулаторни батерии и се наблюдава мониторинг на разреждането. Това е основен тип тест, обаче, и не може да се разчита, за да даде подробности - освен цялостна индикация за състоянието на комплекта батерии. Външните батерии обикновено се уравновесяват, но отделните блокове батерии могат да се повредят по-рано от другите и да не могат да поддържат разумно ниво на зареждане, което може да доведе до пълна загуба на батерията при условия на натоварване и енергийни банкови услуги.


"In a Traditional IRA contributions are often tax-deductible. For instance, if a taxpayer contributes $4,000 to a traditional IRA and is in the twenty-five percent marginal tax bracket, then a $1,000 benefit ($1,000 reduced tax liability) will be realized for the year. So that's why they tax you as income, because they didn't tax that income before. If a taxpayer expects to be in a lower tax bracket in retirement than during the working years, then this is one advantage for using a Traditional IRA vs a Roth. Distributions are taxed as ordinary income. So it depends on your tax bracket  UPDATE FOR COMMENT: Currently you may have heard on the news about ""the fiscal cliff"" - CNBC at the end of the year. This is due to the fact that the Bush tax-cuts are set to expire and if they expire. Many tax rates will change. But here is the info as of right now: Dividends: From 2003 to 2007, qualified dividends were taxed at 15% or 5% depending on the individual's ordinary income tax bracket, and from 2008 to 2012, the tax rate on qualified dividends was reduced to 0% for taxpayers in the 10% and 15% ordinary income tax brackets. After 2012, dividends will be taxed at the taxpayer's ordinary income tax rate, regardless of his or her tax bracket. - If the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire. - Reference - Wikipedia Capital Gains tax rates can be seen here - the Capital Gains tax rate is relative to your Ordinary Income tax rate For Example: this year long term gains will be 0% if you fall in the 15% ordinary tax bracket. NOTE: These rates can change every year so any future rates might be different from the current year."


how could I transfer the money from UK There are multiple ways, walk into your Bank and ask them to wire transfer to the Bank Account in India. You would need the SWIFT BIC of Bank in India, Account Number, etc. Quite a few Banks [State bank of India, HDFC, ICICI etc] also offer remittance service. Visit their website for more details. does it cost the tax and how much Assuming your status is NRI [Non Resident], there is no tax implications of this in India.


"the auto industry maybe has to worry about safety standards, however these standards have been set for decades. It's not like they're making new ""kinds"" of cars that would be unsafe by adopting a completely different design or principle. But for drugs, every mechanism in health is different. A body is much more complex and still not completely understood, so while you may have a drug that can affect a certain biological pathway, it may also destroy another that you may not notice until 10 years from now when it's too late. The company would then have to pay a settlement, such as [Merck and Vioxx](http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5470430) resulting in a ~$5 billion loss.  Pharma isn't cheap to research, which is why pharma research is dying :("


Based on that logic, go to a casino and bet it all on black...you have a better chance of being right...certainly it will minimize the duration of the pain...   I hope to gonzo that you have better research behind this decision than a simple feeling...don't forget that with options it doesn't matter if you are right or wrong as to if gold will drop or go up in price...what matters is WHEN that will happen...options have a limited life...If you think this is a bubble then so be it, but make sure you have done your homework with regard to TIMEFRAME!


So if I understand your plan right, this will be your situation after the house is bought: Total Debt: 645,000 Here's what I would do: Wait until your house sells before buying a new one.  That way you can take the equity from that sale and apply it towards the down payment rather than taking a loan on your retirement account.   If something happens and your house doesn't sell for as mush as you think it will, you'll lose out on the gains from the amount you borrow, which will more than offset the interest you are paying yourself. AT WORST, pay off the 401(k) loan the instant your sale closes. Take as much of the remaining equity as you can and start paying down student loans.  There are several reasons why they are a higher priority than a mortgage - some are mathematical, some are not. Should I look to pay off student loans sooner (even if I refi at a lower rate of 3.5% or so), or the mortgage earlier ...   My thoughts are that the student loans follow me for life, but I can always sell and buy another home So you want this baggage for the rest of your life?  How liberating will it be when you get that off your back?  How much investing are you missing out on because of student loan payments?  What happens if you get lose your license?  What if you become disabled?  Student loans are not bankruptable, but you can always sell the asset behind a mortgage or car loan.  They are worse than credit card debt in that sense.  You have no tangible asset behind it and no option for forgiveness (unless you decide to practice in a high-need area, but I don't get the sense that that's your path). The difference in interest is generally only a few payment' worth over 15 years. Is the interest amortized the same as a 15 year if I pay a 30 year mortgage in 15 years?  Yes, however the temptation to just pay it off over 30 years is still there.  How often will you decide that a bigger car payment, or a vacation, or something else is more important?  With a 15-year note you lock in a plan and stick to it. Some other options:


"I don't recommend balance transfers. Like many credit card things, they distract you with shiny (""0 percent interest!"") and ream you on a 'balance transfer fee'.  If you have a decent credit score and working relationship, talk to banks about opening what's called a 'signature loan,' and use that to shift the debt to a lower rate. A local credit union advertises rates 'as low as' 9.75 percent. Which is itself a shiny that you may not qualify for.  The really low loans rates you see are secured loans; if you don't pay, they can take the collateral."


"Traders = every market participant. Not some shadow figure that excludes you just because you passively drop cash into a 401k Vanguard fund every paycheck. So yes, if everyone stopped trading then the price won't move. Trades are 100% responsible for the prices you see on charts and tickers. A stock won't be worth ""$100"" if nobody ever traded $100 for it. It only has that price now or in the past because somebody placed an order for it at $100 and somebody else filled that order at $100"


"Yes, you can certainly keep it in a savings account until you spend it. You'll get much less interest than you will be paying on the loan, but it will be better than nothing. However, you may want to ask if you can use the loan flexibly instead - i.e. only ""draw down"" the money you need when you need it, and not start paying interest until that happens. That would save you a lot more money. Note that the ISA limit is currently £5,760 and the limit is on total deposits so you won't be able to reuse the amount later in the tax year. Since that ends on April 5th that probably won't be an issue for you."


There are loan options for those in your situation.  It is very common.  I am a licensed loan officer nmls 1301324 and have done many loans just like this.  Your schooling is counted as your work history Contrary to popular belief.  We want to write loans and guidelines are easing.  Banks are a different story and their loan officers aren't licensed.  If you talk to a bank you aren't getting an educated loan officer.  They also have what are called overlays that make guidelines stricter.


"From the way you frame the question it sounds like you more or less know the answer already. Yes - you can make a non-deductable contribution to a traditional IRA and convert it to a Roth IRA. Here is Wikipedia's explanation: Regardless of income but subject to contribution limits, contributions can be made to a Traditional IRA and then converted to a Roth IRA.[10] This allows for ""backdoor"" contributions where individuals are able to avoid the income limitations of the Roth IRA. There is no limit to the frequency with which conversions can occur, so this process can be repeated indefinitely. One major caveat to the entire ""backdoor"" Roth IRA contribution process, however, is that it only works for people who do not have any pre-tax contributed money in IRA accounts at the time of the ""backdoor"" conversion to Roth; conversions made when other IRA money exists are subject to pro-rata calculations and may lead to tax liabilities on the part of the converter. [9] Do note the caveat in the second paragraph. This article explains it more thoroughly: The IRS does not allow converters to specify which dollars are being converted as they can with shares of stock being sold; for the purposes of determining taxes on conversions the IRS considers a person’s non-Roth IRA money to be a single, co-mingled sum. Hence, if a person has any funds in any non-Roth IRA accounts, it is impossible to contribute to a Traditional IRA and then “convert that account” to a Roth IRA as suggested by various pundits and the Wikipedia piece referenced above – conversions must be performed on a pro-rata basis of all IRA money, not on specific dollars or accounts. Say you have $20k of pre-tax assets in a traditional IRA, and make a non-deductable contribution of $5k. The account is now 80% pre-tax assets and 20% post-tax assets, so if you move $5k into a Roth IRA, $4k of it would be taxed in the conversion. The traditional IRA would be left with $16k of pre-tax assets and $4k of post-tax assets."


Your quote: There's about 10 trillion in gold  and about 2.8 trillion of US cash  in the world. Neither of these is anywhere large enough to be used for all the transactions in the world.  So how was it commercial banks could lend like crazy for home mortgages??  M1 remaind constant throughout the decade and years , if frac multiplier effect was the cause for m2, why wasn't it until the 2000s that m2 became exponential?   Commercial Banks able to create credit and lend out of thin air to customers thanks to deregulation that caused m2 to explode.  They didn't need no FED.  They didin't need no reserves.  They were able to act regardless of the FED.  The FED responded to them, instead of the other way around.    Before deregulation banks didn't bother creating too much credit loans coz it was too dangerous, they were mostly utilty banks.   After deregulation, creation of exotic derivatives, low interest rates, and high speed internet globalized digital trading,  they went crazy creating credit out of thin air coz it wasn't dangerous because they could sell the home loans.


One way is to think of a REIT as a fully managed portfolio of real estate investments. Risks and returns are averaged across the real estate portfolio and managed by experts, possibly industry leading experts.  REITs have a well documented track record you can research - most individuals do not. Many individuals have learned a hard lesson or two while attempting to generate passive income with real estate. Conversely, some people derive a great deal of satisfaction from owning real estate and have a true passion to do so.  Plus, if you are expecting interest rates to raise and/or rate of inflation to increase in the next 30 years, you may benefit from the financing aspects of the investment as well.  There are some regions/ opportunities that seem to do better than the average REIT a majority of the time, but may not be desirable to you or fit into your budget for various reasons. I'm not sure what your level of experience, knowledge or financial situation , but for everyone considering, there are many additional things to know about investment property compared to a primary residence.  A good place to start with REITs is the prospectus of one that interests you.  Research their holdings, create a model, or otherwise make a connection with the REIT before clicking buy.


If I were these people, I would be getting those target cards out of my hands ASAP.  Since the legalese specified the promotion was not valid on gift cards, they probably have some kind of legal right to deactivate these cards and refund the transactions (whether they try to do this probably depends on how much they got taken for...).


I think dying is too strong a word for sell-side ER. There's no question it's shrinking though. Dying implies it's going to be dead. I believe it will carry on but at a reduced level.  Sell-side equity research derives it's revenues in a really arcane way. It can no longer benefit from i-banking revenues so it's dependent on trading volume. Trading volume is way down so that income is also shrinking.  At the same time, a lot of equity research shops have just become conduits between the buy-side and management. Their research product isn't great.  So why do I think sell-side ER will stick around? Because there are some BBs and independent shops doing real research work that provides value to the buyside. Their product has value. The buyside knows it. Demand for the research from these firms will continue.  If you're really interested in ER, I think you need to start to understand the difference between places doing good ER and bad ER. If you go into a good ER shop and learn how to be a good equity research analyst, you have a valuable skill.   I'm not going to try to paint a rosy picture of the er industry but understand the best time to get your foot in the door is when everybody else is running away. If the industry can tough it out, you'll be in a good spot.


Remember when you got bodied for pretending you understood more about linguistics than you did? Because you maybe skimmed a wikipedia page on Chomsky and thought the criticism there meant people didn't respect him as a linguist? And published authors in the field took you to task for an hour?   If you don't, maybe you should. It feels relevant.


What subsidies are you talking about?  From wikipedia:  >>'The USPS has not directly received taxpayer-dollars since the early 1980s with the minor exception of subsidies for costs associated with the disabled and overseas voters'    More like small businesses are grateful there is a service they don't have to pay excessive administrative taxes to use and are sad the greed in the US is going to wreck yet another piece. The value of privatization is such a horrible scam.


I'll play devils advocate even though i agree that they are overvalued.  EPS is expected to go from .43 in 2016 to $1.20 2017 followed by $1.90 in 2018, this means they are expected to grow at 110% a year over the next two years, an many experts think they will continue to grow at 30-40% a year after that. Now many people don't think a stock is expensive until it hits a PE of 2x its growth rate, if we use a growth rate of 110% then they won pay more than 220x earnings. assuming they are using this years earnings estimates since the year is already more than half over that puts a valuation of $264 per share. If they use a 4 year estimates that EPS will grow at 72% a year the valuation is $172.8.  Before people berate me i don't value stocks in this manner i use DCF, but alot of people who are looking for an easy way out will look at it this way.


Thank you this response introduced me to a lot of new information to research.   I find this a lot more rational than a lot of the replies on here, purely because I don't believe there's a large enough intrinsic difference between people of different races that it would make or break entire countries. I know plenty of unsuccessful white people and plenty of successful black people, I just don't think racism is rational IMO.  Following the money like this is really illustrative of what is truly plaguing these countries. As someone else said and I now believe to be true after reading a little, I think there's a huge huge grown potential in these countries if the governments can get their shit together.


The main factor should be what sorts of emergencies you are trying and also need to protect yourself against. Overall I'd say at least 6-9 months of expenses, adjusted for the above factors. More might be better but I'd probably keep that in a different type of investment vehicle, mainly because it doesn't really need to be accessible instantaneously like your normal emergency fund would need to be.


I'm guessing you're conflating bonus share issuance with stock split.  That seems very common to me, from a quick search; there's even some issues of terminology between the US and Europe, I think - it seems some Europeans may use Bonus Shares to mean Stock Split, as opposed to the more common meaning in the US of Stock Dividend. Sometimes a bonus share issuance is (incorrectly) called a stock split, like in this public announcement from STADA in 2004.  It is a 1:1 bonus share issuance (meaning they issue one bonus share to everyone who has one share now), but it is in essence the same thing as a stock split (a 2:1 stock split, namely).  They combined the 1:1 from bonus share with the wording 'split', causing the confusion. Bonus share issuance, also known as a stock dividend, is covered well in this question/answer on this site, or from a search online.  It has no obvious effect initially - both involve doubling shares out there and halving the price - but it has a substantially different treatment in terms of accounting, both to the company and to your tax accountant.


What you're missing is the continuous compounding computation doesn't work that way.  If you compound over n periods of time and a rate of return of r, the formula is e^(r*n), as you have to multiply the returns together with a mulitplicative base of 1.  Otherwise consider what 0 does to your formula.  If I get a zero return, I have a zero result which doesn't make sense.  However, in my formula I'd still get the 1 which is what I'm starting and thus the no effect is the intended result. Continuous compounding would give e^(-.20*12) = e^(-2.4) = .0907 which is a -91% return so for each $100 invested, the person ends up with $9.07 left at the end.  It may help to picture that the function e^(-x) does asymptotically approach zero as x tends to infinity, but that is as bad as it can get, so one doesn't cross into the negative unless one wants to do returns in a Complex number system with imaginary numbers in here somehow. For those wanting the usual compounding, here would be that computation which is more brutal actually: For your case it would be (1-.20)^12=(0.8)^12=0.068719476736 which is to say that someone ends up with 6.87% in the end.  For each $100 had in the beginning they would end with $6.87 in the end. Consider someone starting with $100 and take 20% off time and time again you'd see this as it would go down to $80 after the first month and then down to $64 the second month as the amount gets lower the amount taken off gets lower too.  This can be continued for all 12 terms.  Note that the second case isn't another $20 loss but only $16 though it is the same percentage overall. Some retail stores may do discounts on discounts so this can happen in reality.  Take 50% off of something already marked down 50% and it isn't free, it is down 75% in total.  Just to give a real world example where while you think a half and a half is a whole, taking half and then half of a half is only three fourths, sorry to say.  You could do this with an apple or a pizza if you want a food example to consider. Alternatively, consider the classic up and down case where an investment goes up 10% and down 10%.  On the surface, these should cancel and negate each other, right?  No, in fact the total return is down 1% as the computation would be (1.1)(.9)=.99 which is slightly less than 1. Continuous compounding may be a bit exotic from a Mathematical concept but the idea of handling geometric means and how compounding returns comes together is something that is rather practical for people to consider.


This is nonsense and just a game to squeeze more money from consumers.  A convential car needs to change oil every so often. You get a warning light in the dashboard for that in most cars.   If you decide to not change oil as needed, it's your business and your problem that you shortened your car's life.  Do you want conventional cars to stop working when oil change is due?   Basically Tesla is crippeling the car and does not let the consumer to FULLY use the car they own, if they choose to do that.


These are some pretty basic and well-known techniques using NLP that have been studied for years in academic journals. It's interesting, but the article makes it seem like no one had ever thought of this before.


A bigger down payment is good, because it insulates you from the swings in the real estate market.  If you get FHA loan with 3% down and end up being forced to move during a down market, you'll be in a real bind, as you'll need to scrape up some cash or borrow funds to get out of your mortgage.


"You can definitely open an IRA and roll the money over. I suggest instead of trying opening online calling the institution and asking what would be the procedure in your specific case. If not, I will have to cash out my 401K. Who do I contact to find out   if my country has some sort of deal with the US in regards to taxes? I   would of course prefer to not pay the penalty (20 % federal + 10 %   state tax), and instead reinvest the money in a retirement fund in my   country. US embassies some times have listings of tax advisers who work with US expats in the countries they cover. You can check for such a list on the website of your local US embassy. These people will be able to answer this question. However it is highly unlikely that you'll be able to avoid the tax and penalty in the US in this scenario. It is not likely that you could ""roll-over"" into a foreign retirement fund (from your country's laws perspective), but maybe your country has some solution for this."


Concerning the Broker: eToro is authorized and registered in Cyprus by the Cyprus Securities Exchange Commission (CySEC). Although they are regulated by Cyprus law, many malicious online brokers have opened shop there because they seem to get along with the law while they rip off customers. Maybe this has changed in the last two years, personally i did not follow the developments. eToro USA is regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and thus doing business in a good regulated environment. Of course the CFTC cannot see into the future, so some black sheep are getting fined and even their license revoked every now and then. It has no NFA Actions: http://www.nfa.futures.org/basicnet/Details.aspx?entityid=45NH%2b2Upfr0%3d Concerning the trade instrument: Please read the article that DumbCoder posted carefully and in full because it contains information you absolutely have to have if you are to do anything with Contract for difference (CFD). Basically, a CFD is an over the counter product (OTC) which means it is traded between two parties directly and not going through an exchange. Yes, there is additional risk compared to the stock itself, mainly: To trade a CFD, you sign a contract with your broker, which in almost all cases allows the broker A CFD is just a derivative financial instrument which allows speculating / investing in an asset without trading the actual asset itself. CFDs do not have to mirror the underlying asset's price and price movement and can basically have any price because the broker quotes you independently of the underlying. If you do not know how all this works and what the instrument / vehicle actually is and how it works; and do not know what to look for in a broker, please do not trade it. Do yourself a favor and get educated, inform yourself, because otherwise your money will be gone fast. Marketing campaigns such as this are targeted at people who do not have the knowledge required and thus lose a significant portion (most of the time all) of their deposits. Answer to the actual question: No, there is no better way. You can by the stock itself, or a derivative based on it. This means CFDs, options or futures. All of them require additional knowledge because they work differently than the stock. TL;DR: DumbCoder is absolutely right, do not do it if you do not know what it is about. EDIT: Revisiting this answer and reading the other answers, i realize this sounds like derivatives are bad in general. This is absolutely not the case, and i did not intend it to sound this way. I merely wanted to emphasize the point that without sufficient knowledge, trading such products is a great risk and in most cases, should be avoided.


You'd invest through NASDAQ OTC market--I use Vanguard and it allows me to invest through there; I'm sure other online brokers have it too. If you search the companies you'll see the listing on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange and the NASDAQ OTC. The prices will be different--just because it goes up in HK doesn't mean it goes up in NASDAQ. There are also a few listed in the US--SINA, Weibo Corp., JD.com.  From there, start looking at the major Chinese tech companies to see what they're worth.


"> But that rise has only been large enough to cancel out the slight fall in the 2000s under Helen Clark, when Working for Families and other schemes tilted the balance back towards fairness.  I don't think you help your case when your argument says literally ""large enough to cancel out...fairness."""


"I believe it's still pretty general, and just mentions life sciences as a possible use. Some of the course may be in that context. The ""difficulty"" on the side says the course is intermediate, so there might be a possibility that it'll be maybe a little rough for beginners to R, and possibly very difficult for beginners to programming on the whole."


Do not confuse the DIV (%) value and the dividend yield. As you can see from this page, the DIV (%) is, as you say, 165%.  However, the dividend yield is 3.73% at the time of writing.  As the Investopedia page referenced above says: The payout ratio is calculated as follows: Annual Dividends per Share / Earnings per Share. which means that the dividends being paid out are more than the earnings of the company: In extreme cases, dividend payout ratios exceed 100%, meaning more dividends were paid out than there were profits that year. Significantly high ratios are unsustainable.


"> If he's also a top notch electrician, I listen to him when he gives me electrical wiring advice, I just don't let him choose where we go for dinner.  ""Now most folks will tell you that fuses are rated for 20 Amps, but they're just being over-cautious. I go to 25 and even 30 Amps all the time with no problem""  Do you trust *that* electrical opinion? Does his restaurant choice affect how you feel about it?   Compare that to another friend who steered you away from another restaurant because he ""heard someone got sick there once."" He also drives the car rated #1 for safety and can tell you exactly why. He always lectures you for riding a bicycle without a helmet, and offers to sharpen your kitchen knives because a sharp knife is less likely to slip and cut your finger.   When *that* guy says you can go to 30A on a fuse, how do you feel about his opinion as an electrician?   Still say that non-electrician decisions have zero bearing on how you feel about his abilities as an electrician?   BTW, I'm done here. I've made my point. We can agree to disagree."


Funny, cause from where I'm at, it's rare for a brick and mortar to beat Amazon's prices. Best buy,  RC willey, Walmart, Target, etc, none compare to the service, price, convenience, that I can get from Amazon. Take for example last month. I purchased 2 chromecasts in 2 weeks, then they dropped the price from 35 to 30, I got on the chat, in 5 minutes I had a refund of 5$ on both them. They not only price match others, but they stand behind what they sell much much better then any brick and mortar I've been in.


A pattern of high level people buying or selling is a sign, positive or negative. An individual, not so much. He can be selling to diversify, trying to keep his investments from being all in the company. He can be selling to pay his large bills. Same reasons any of us might be selling an investment to have cash to use.


"Wells Fargo uses a service called clearXchange (update: it is now called Zelle) to do this transfer without an account number. This is the same service Bank of America uses, so when you configured your account to be linked to clearXchange, Wells Fargo customers can use it the same way Bank of America customers can.  This also applies to Chase bank. Since your bank is a member, they've integrated the service into your online bill pay: If your bank is a clearXchange member, you will need to use your current online or mobile banking service to send and receive payments. If you hadn't previously configured it through BofA, you'd have been taken to their site to register an account in order to receive the money, it seems. They explicitly point out here that they will automatically deposit any money you receive through their service without your having to ""accept"" the payment like you would from other P2P pay services.  If you don't want to use this service anymore, I suggest contacting your bank, but if they can't or won't help you, you can contact clearXchange customer service to have your account closed."


"You are obviously not listening at all. Where did I give the impression that I want politicians or the military or the ""security"" apparatus? Typical statist in one ear and out the other. You are so far off it isn't even funny. I would be opposed to anything forced on people by the government or voter's. I bet you still think there are only two sides to the debate. Shows how far out of the loop you really are. Head firmly in the clouds.  Edit.. I have looked at all the ""stuff"" you linked I bet you didn't bother at all to even listen to one of my sources. Because nothing matters except what you want and how you are going to force that on everyone around you. Little tyrant in the making.  I bet you make a lot of wrong assumptions in your life."


There is nothing called free lunch. The 2% fee indirectly covers the cost of funds and in effect would be a personal loan. Further the repayment period would typically be 3 months and roughly would translate into 7-9% loan depending of repayment schedule etc. There is no harm in trying to get the fee waived, however one thing can lead to another and they may even go and do an credit inquiry etc, so be cautious.


"Well, that's good and bad more regulation, but your not an agency your something better(IMHO) If the lawyer says yes, I'd scrub all mention of the word ""agency"". Being an ""employment business"" is part of your USP. You will presumable have to educate on why this is better, but you may as well use the protected words your entitled too and report any UK agencies calling themselves an employment business to try and undercut you.  Check with your branding/marketing advisors this could be key (Oh and please PM, your launch page/teaser when you get to it)"


It matters because that is the requirement for the 83(b) selection to be valid. Since the context is 83(b) election, I assume you got stocks/options as compensation and didn't pay for them the FMV, thus it should have been included in your income for that year. If you didn't include the election letter - I can only guess that you also didn't include the income. Hence - you lost your election. If you did include the income and paid the tax accordingly, or if no tax was due (you actually paid the FMV), you may try amending the return and attaching the letter, but I'd suggest talking to a professional before doing it on your own. Make sure to keep a proof (USPS certified mailing receipt) of mailing the letter within the 30 days window.


There are a number of UK banks that offer what passes for reasonable interest on an amount of cash held in their current accounts.  I would suggest that you look into these.  In the UK the first £1000 of bank or building society interest is paid tax-free for basic rate taxpayers (£500 for higher rate tax-payers) so if your interest income is below these levels then there is no point in investing in a cash ISA as the interest rate is often lower. At the moment Santander-123 bank account pays 1.5% on up to £20000 and Nationwide do 5% on up to £2500. A good source if information on the latest deals is Martin Lewis' Moneysaving Expert Website


you very well may know better than me, honestly; but with any volatile investment, it is necessarily hard to predict their intermediate term trends. that would be my only caution to you!  if you want speculative positions to hold, you might consider lower priced biopharms (though not pure penny positions). i made a bit of money on CCXI, for example. if you want more engagement/trading activity, consider tech trading or options (my personal favorite).


We live in a community, and as citizens we all have the right to shop in public shops and eat in public restaurants. If that right is abridged, then freedom is abridged. And the freedom to enjoy the public services of one's community is far more important than the freedom to deny services due to one's prejudice. Either way someone loses a bit of freedom. Which is more important? According to you the freedom to do what you will with your property outweighs any and all possible consequences of exercising that freedom. This is a very extreme viewpoint. I know because I once held it.  >Go start a business and get back to us  Yeah I did that. 15 years ago and still going. And I actually hire people. You may not want to make too many assumptions about the person you are debating. As a business owner I would happily choose a world in which I had to hire the best qualified candidate regardless of my prejudices over one in which other business owners could arbitrarily refuse me services that are offered to the general public just because of who I am.  >If a person is refused service for any reason, they can find another store, shop, or vendor.  And what if all the stores in your town have similar policies? Am I to drive to the next town every time I need to go shopping? What if all the shops within 1000 miles have discriminatory policies? How am I to live? The only reason you can make this argument is because of the success of the civil rights act. If it was repealed today you would likely be able to avoid racist restaurants and shops by going elsewhere. If it had never existed that would not be the case.  >THERE IS NO EQUAL OPPORTUNITY IN LIFE FOR SUCCESS  That is why I very specifically said that all citizens must have a REALISTIC opportunity for success, and NOT that there should be EQUAL opportunity (impossible) or equal outcomes (ridiculous and counter-productive). What must be avoided is the creation of an economic status quo that ensures the poor remain poor and the rich remain rich. Such a status quo is just slavery without the whips. Even if the government is not enforcing the status quo, it can be just as hard to break free from.  >Forceful acts by government are ALWAYS far worse than forceful acts in the private sector  It is the results of the act of force that matters, not its source or methodology. This once again is an argument from pure ideology. Because you believe that government force is always worse than the private sector, you are unable to see examples of how the private sector can limit our freedoms in even worse ways. Simply stating that government acts of force are always worse does not prove it so.  >that's exactly where your collectivist sewer leads  I would argue that the centers of poverty you listed are much more a symptom of the systematic undercutting of education, social services and other support systems that once gave the underprivileged a realistic way to improve their lot in life. Now, with blue-collar wages on the decline and public education gutted, poverty gets more entrenched and harder to overcome. You really think it's going to get better for these people if we take away the minimum wage? Do away with public schools? Food stamps? Medicaid? Is there any point at which lack of social mobility becomes a more damaging than minor economic regulations? Is it OK to effectively return to the feudal system if it means nobody will ever have one penny taxed from them and given to someone who wasn't born rich? Nobody made you get born poor so there's no force and therefore everything is right and good? Such a shallow view of our moral obligations as members of a society.  We live in a society. Extreme individualism will lead only to self-destruction just as fast as extreme collectivism. The only rational view is to analyze the facts, weigh the benefits and consequences to any given policy, and make decisions without any preconceived notion of what the solution should look like. In the case at hand, I, and the vast majority of people, think the minor inconvenience of not being able to make discriminatory hiring decisions is far outweighted by the benefits of not having large segments of the population chronically unemployed and impoverished because their race.  The only effective argument against this would be to posit a way in which the benefits of this policy could be achieved (or bettered) without the use of government coercion, and that I haven't seen.  >You'd better grow up fast on this one  Remember, you are talking to someone who thought and argued exactly the same viewpoint you are now espousing for 10 years. I was even a delegate to the national Libertarian convention once. I was a true believer. I did grow up.


Also - Engineering Disciplines (and CS) in most schools require different (more intense) math than the business degrees. The math requirements at UIC for Finance are different than those for CS. He could be taking math classes that, literally, do not count towards a CS degree.   Source:   http://www.cs.uic.edu/~grad/CSCurr-0214.pdf   http://www.uic.edu/ucat/07%20BA%20109-124.pdf


By mentioning GLD, I presume therefore you are referring to the SPRD Gold Exchange Traded Fund that is intended to mirror the price of gold without you having to personally hold bullion, or even gold certificates. While how much is a distinctly personal choice, there are seemingly (at least) three camps of people in the investment world. First would be traditional bond/fixed income and equity people.  Gold would play no direct role in their portfolio, other than perhaps holding gold company shares in some other vehicle, but they would not hold much gold directly. Secondly, at the mid-range would be someone like yourself, that believes that is in and of itself a worthy investment and makes it a non-trivial, but not-overriding part of their portfolio.  Your 5-10% range seems to fit in well here. Lastly, and to my taste, over-the-top, are the gold-gold-gold investors, that seem to believe it is the panacea for all market woes.  I always suspect that investment gurus that are pushing this, however, have large positions that they are trying to run up so they can unload. Given all this, I am not aware of any general rule about gold, but anything less than 10% would seem like at least a not over-concentration in the one area.  Once any one holding gets much beyond that, you should really examine why you believe that it should represent such a large part of your holdings. Good Luck


Agreed. An easy way to practice selling is by joining a direct sales company. Just make sure they are legitimate and require no money to start. It gives you a product to sell (even if its from a catalog) and many times they have online resources that help train you.    Sales is a mental game imo. Getting past personal barriers and facing fears is a major huddle in sales.


There is a theory that the reason this has come to pass over millenia is simply because Europe has harsh winters, whereas South America, and Africa, and most of Asia do not. The theory is that having to deal with winter - including all of the long term planning, logistics, and infrastructure that go with it - was a forcing function on society that caused Europe (and later on it's settlements) to advance more rapidly.    It has nothing to do with skin color and everything to do with seasons.


Is it true that due the to the increase in interest rates that inflation is likely to increase as well? It is typically the reverse where inflation causes interest rates to rise. Interest rates fundamentally reflect the desire for people to purchase future goods over present day goods.  If I loan money to someone for 5 years I lose the ability to use that money.  In order to entice me to loan the money the borrower would have to offer me an incentive, that is, they would have to give me additional money at the end of that 5 years.  This additional money is the interest rate and it reflects the desire of people to spend money in the future versus the present day.  If offered the same amount of money today versus 5 years from now almost everyone would chose to take the money now.  Money in the present is more valuable than the same amount of money in the future. Interest rates would still exist even with a currency that could not be printed. I would still prefer to have the currency today than in the future. If the currency is continually devalued (i.e. the issuer is printing more of the currency) than borrowers may charge additional interest to compensate for the loss in purchasing power when they make a loan. Also, it is hard to compare interest rates and inflation.  Inflation is very difficult to calculate. New products and services, as well as ever changing consumer desires, continually change the mixture of goods in the market so it is nearly impossible to compare a basket of goods today to a basket of goods 5, 10, 20, or 30 years ago.


If you go traditional financing there is a chance it'd be syndicated amongst a bank group. That is going to add a little depth to your credit agreement id imagine. You thinking a term loan with a 7-10 amortization? I've never seen a LOC more than 5 years out.


I always sit and wonder.. hypothetically when robots are literally doing everything and everything has been automated, what will people do? Is it that state of Utopia where we can do whatever we want because we don't have to pay robots? My guess is no judging by how outsourcing to cheaper countries has affected people.


a) Contracts are for future delivery of said underlying. So if you are trading CL (crude oil) futures and don't sell before delivery date, you will be contacted about where you want the oil to be delivered (a warehouse presumably). 1 contract is the equivalent of 1000 barrels. b) 600 contracts depends entirely on what you are trading and how you are trading. If you are trading ES (S&P 500 e-Mini), you can do the 600 contracts in less than a second. c) No fees does not make particular sense. It's entirely possible that you are not trading anything, it's just a fake platform so they can judge your performance. d) The catch typically is that when it's time to pay you, they will avoid you or worst case, disappear. e) Trading is a full-time job, especially for the first 4-5 years when you're only learning the basics. Remember, in futures trading you are trading against all the other professionals who do only this 24/7 for decades. If you are only risking your time with the reward being learning and possibly money, it seems like a good deal. There's typically a catch with these things - like you would have to pay for your data which is very expensive or withdrawing funds is possible only months later.


> Who will pay to train themselves for a low paying job with no job security?  Well, the government better start doing it if they want to keep their tax bases intact.  ...and we all know what sort of quality you're taking about with a government trained worker.  Or, the government could set living wages.  Sure companies are going to leave (and they're probably going to take people with them), but at least you won't be stuck with a bunch of impoverished people all expecting a handout.


">BPI took such a hard hit because they showed the world that they're the type of company willing to sell people really nasty shit just to make a buck (in my opinion).  Honestly, if there was a news expose on 90% of the processed food that is on grocery store shelves, people would have the same reaction. You would be shocked as to what happens in food manufacturing facilities. Yes, there are FDA, USDA, and many other agencies that do both announced and surprise audits of food manufacturers to ensure food safety, but this is just a snapshot in time, and the food is only deemed as safe as to the standards of that company and what the definition of ""safe"" is.  IMO, yes, BPI took a huge hit because of this being called pink slime. Are they manufacturing something that is potentially dangerous for consumption? Possibly. That all depends on who you ask what ""safe for consumption"" means.  Are lobbyists involved? Bet your ass they are. But the market at the time was demanding a type of beef that was super lean. All BPI did was find a way to fulfill that need.  I don't know what the outcome of this will be, but I can absolutely see both sides of the argument. The press needs to be free to report on anything and everything. However, there needs to be regulation regarding what they can and can not say from a slander standpoint. Coming up with a cute catch phrase such as ""pink slime"" is slanderous, and potentially damaging. That's where I agree with you and believe that they should have reported on the factual inclusions in the finished product.   /rant"


In order to make travelling in Andaman’s a little more comfortable we have ‘exclusively’ tied up with Larson the only luxury speed boat in Andaman’s and we can provide   Private Charters (Maximum: 08 persons) between Havelock – Port Blair – Havelock along with other day excursions and overnight trips.


Consult with a CPA in your local community, since determining how your income is reported is dependent on how it was earned, and how much it was and other factors.  The details are personal, should not be shared on the internet, and don't affect the way we can answer this question.   A CPA might be able to help you with some other advice.  Things like how to structure your expenses to minimize tax burden, while staying within the rules.


Monogram adorns  are sort of earrings which have monograms etched on them or they may be constructed from monograms. Monograms are generally discovered on necklaces or earrings and frequently on studs too. We often discover monograms etched in wristbands too, and frequently the entire bracelet is comprised of the call of the individual who putting it. It is like the maximum non-public piece of jewelry having a humans name or their initial name. If you also are looking to get the exceptional monogram gold bracelet, then you can pass although the excellent well-known on line store that focus on offing fine earrings at low cost charges.


> By the time you're ready to hire, you should be past the point where $100k in sweat equity dribbled out over a four-year vesting period is worth bothering with another shareholder.  Really? Why? Most companies I've talked to need hands on deck from day one.  > People on kickstartr are looking for cash, not cheap labor.  Cheap labour isn't avaliable on kickstarter, that's what Craigslist is for. You need both to get a company off the ground.  > Founders usually lack the former and have plenty of their own time to supply the latter.  But they don't have the skills to cover all their bases. That's why they need cheap labour.


"Yes and no.  Losing high-paying jobs to other countries does take money out of the economy.  I have read a few times that this is a small contribution to the hard times ""Main Street"" is currently going through.  Compared to the 2008 crisis and its effects, this is probably fairly small but is still a negative influence on the economy.  If the outsourcing continues unabated, I believe the effects on both the economies and competitiveness of the western nations will become more pronounced.  However, I do see the pendulum swinging back so we'll get back some (but not all) of the lost jobs and wages.  Where we'll land I can't dare predict.  This is just my opinion, of course.  Swing by for a beer someday and we can talk some more :)"


e.g. a European company has to pay 1 million USD exactly one year from now While that is theoretically possible, that is not a very common case. Mostly likely if they had to make a 1 million USD payment a year from now and they had the cash on hand they would be able to just make the payment today.  A more common scenario for currency forwards is for investment hedging.  Say that European company wants to buy into a mutual fund of some sort, say FUSEX. That is a USD based mutual fund. You can't buy into it directly with Euros. So if the company wants to buy into the fund they would need to convert their Euros to to USD. But now they have an extra risk parameter. They are not just exposed to the fluctuations of the fund, they are also exposed to the fluctuations of the currency market. Perhaps that fund will make a killing, but the exchange rate will tank and they will lose all their gains. By creating a forward to hedge their currency exposure risk they do not face this risk (flip side: if the exchange rate rises in a favorable rate they also don't get that benefit, unless they use an FX Option, but that is generally more expensive and complicated).


"Your assertion that you will not be selling anything is at odds with the idea that you will be doing tax loss harvesting.  Tax loss harvesting always involves some selling (you sell stocks that have fallen in price and lock in the capital losses, which gives you a break on your taxes).  If you absolutely prohibit your advisor from selling, then you will not be able to do tax loss harvesting (in that case, why are you using an advisor at all?). Tax loss harvesting has nothing to do with your horizon nor the active/passive difference, really. As a practical matter, a good tax loss harvesting plan involves mechanically selling losers and immediately putting the money in another stock with more-or-less similar risk so your portfolio doesn't change much.  In this way you get a stable portfolio that performs just like a static portfolio but gives you a tax benefit each year.  The IRS officially prohibits this practice via the ""wash sale rule"" that says you can't buy a substantially identical asset within a short period of time.  However, though two stocks have similar risk, they are not generally substantially similar in a legal sense, so the IRS can't really beat you in court and they don't try.  Basically you can't just buy the same stock again. The roboadvisor is advertising that they will perform this service, keeping your portfolio pretty much static in terms of risk, in such a way that your tax benefit is maximized and you don't run afoul of the IRS."


"See if they offer a ""Target Date"" plan that automatically adjusts throughout your career to balance gains against preserving what you've already built up.  You can adjust for more or less aggressive by selecting a plan with a later or sooner target date, respectively. (But check the administrative fees; higher fees can eat up a surprisingly large part of your growth since they're essentially subtracted from rate of return and thus get compounded.) If they don't have that option, or charge too much for it, then yes, you may want to adjust which plan your money is in over time; you can usually ""exchange"" between these plans at no cost and with no tax penalty. NOTE: The tax-advantaged 401(k) investments should be considered in the context of all your investments. This is one of the things an independent financial planner can help you with. As with other investment decisions, the best answer for you depends on your risk tolerance and your time horizon."


Hehe, I feel your pain.. well, 'pain' isn't really the feeling though is it.  I was unemployed for several years when I was younger, and I loved it. It taught me 2 things: you need to be careful with your money, and you don't need money to be happy. I loved the freedom, the carefree attitude I had to the world, the ability to do many things not constrained by having to spend all day in an office, to be with my mates a lot. If your problem is that you are being too miserly ($3 researching better product... we all do that, though not for $3 except on ebay sometimes) then put a cost on your time. If it took you 3 hours to research the $3 saving, and your time is worth even just $10 an hour to you, then you've not saved anything. You've wasted 'money'. If, on the other hand, you're more worried about hoarding money and being unproductive and a bad social citizen, get involved in investing it instead. Let someone else put it to good use, whilst giving you some return.


"My only issue with the whole ""Comcast and TWC are in cahoots to set prices 10x higher than what they should be"" is the fact that Comcast and TWC are hardly the most profitable companies in the US.   I mean, they are large companies with decent revenues, but they aren't making much more than other companies of their size that are in different fields.  If they were really a monopoly setting prices crazy high and exploiting nearly a hundred million Americans on their monthly bill... Wouldn't Comcast have like, crazy have profits that rival the oil companies?  I mean, Comcast has 120,000 employees and a 10 billion USD income. That's perfectly in line with other companies of that size such as CocaCola or P&G.   And hell, TWC reported a net *loss* of 2 billion USD last year. People think they are a monopoly that's overcharging for services... When they aren't even making money?"


"**Yup!**  It's important to note that modern soft contact lenses let through 10 times as much oxygen as the original hard contacts that were in use 20 years ago.  The company you referenced, that's actually owned/run by the original inventor of soft contact daily lenses.  He started it up because he was outraged at the prices being charged by the big name vendors who had licensed his patent.  His story is here:  http://www.daysoftcontactlenses.com/GB/All-about-Daysoft.aspx  Two important things about re-using dailies.  **1)** Don't leave dailies in overnight, buy solution and take them out and wash them each night.  It really makes a difference in terms of complication rates.  You don't have to fill the contact holders up to the top, not even to the ""internal line"", but make sure the contacts are covered.  The latter will save you half on solution.  When I'm on a wilderness trip I will wear my contacts through every other night, because trying to wash my hands completely and the sanitary conditions... well it's just less risk and trouble imho than handling my contacts with potentially not-quite-perfectly-clean hands.  **2)** Don't use a single pair more than 2 or 3 weeks.  The risk of infections and complications gets too high using a single pair of general soft contacts around the one month mark.  This is my recollection of what a medical doctor at an ER near a University posted online 10 years ago.  You see university kids are far more likely/prone to over-use a pair, and he found that all the kids coming to his nearby ER with eye infections - had worn soft contacts for one month or more.  ALSO -- if you're taking them out at night and using solution (as I strongly recommend you do), at the two week part the cost of daily contacts matches the cost of the solution you are using.  So wearing a pair any longer than 2 weeks doesn't actually save you much more money."


I don't think you've worked in sales. The high paying sales jobs usually have to compete in a competitive bid process. Companies don't just select vendors. They are mandated to create a competitive process to rule out what you're talking about. Of course, there are ways around this, but the norm is for a competitive sales process.


"Thanks for the info, things are starting to make more sense now. For some reason I've always neglected learning about investments, now that Im in a position to invest (and am still fairly young) I'm motivated to start learning.   As for help with TD Ameritrade, I was looking into Index Funds (as another commenter mentioned that I should) on their site and am a little overwhelmed with the options. First, I'm looking at Mutual Funds, going to symbol lookup and using type = ""indeces"". I'm assuming that's the same thing as an ""Index Fund"" but since the language is slightly different I'm not 100% sure. However, at that point I need some kind of search for a symbol in order to see any results (makes sense, but I dont know where to start looking for ""good"" index funds).    So my first question is: If I FIND a good mutual fund, is it correct to simply go to ""Buy Mutual Funds"" and find it from there? and if so, my second question is: How do I find a good mutual fund?   My goal is to have my money in something that will likely grow faster than a savings account. I don't mind a little volatility, I can afford to lose my investment, I'd plan on leaving my money in the fund for a several years at least.   My last question is: When investing in these types of funds (or please point me in another direction if you think Index Funds aren't the place for me to start) should I be reinvesting in the funds, or having them pay out dividends? I would assume that reinvesting is the smart choice, but I can imagine situations that might change that in order to mitigate risk...and as I've said a few times in this thread including the title, I'm a complete amateur so my assumptions aren't necessarily worth that much.   Thanks for the help, I really appreciate all the info so far."


This does not really fit your liquidity requirement but consider buying a one or two room apartment to rent out with part of your savings. You will get income from it and small apartments sell quickly if you do need the money. This will help offset the negative interest from the rest. One downside is that other people have the same idea at the moment and the real estate prices are inflated somewhat.


Good for consumers, Foot Locker will be forced to make adjustments to their business model in which I imagine in turn will give consumers great deals on their products.  When you buy directly from Adidas, they already give you 2-4 free shipping just by creating an account with them.  I just bought the Triple Black Japan Boost NMD and they came in two days from Adidas. A month ago, I bought the Multicolor Ultraboost from Foot Locker and it took 1.5 weeks.


Sad part is that you aren't going to make meaningful gains with small account like that unless you are putting everything into one stock and trying to squeeze out 10% gains each trade. At this point, your main focus contributing money into the account regularly. You will be able to trade more frequently as you get more money into the account.


You need to determine for the taxing jurisdiction when the next tax appraisal will be done. In some cases the appraisal is done every year, or two, or three. In other cases it is also done when the property is sold. The county tax office website should contain this information. They will also have information on how to appeal. Most jurisdictions do have a way of looking up not only the rates but the value of the property in question. You will also be interested in determining if the tax value of the property is lower due to local/state laws that limit the growth in value from one assessment to another. A sale of the property could trigger a catchup for the value. It is possible that the degraded value of the home has already been factored into the assessment. It is also possible that it hasn't. Keep in mind that taxes in some jurisdictions can be more complicated because there is also a town/city/county component, and some places that also breakout other items on the tax bill like storm water management, schools, pest spraying. These other items can be based on value, square footage of the lot, or a flat amount. You should get a local opinion on the likelihood of a successful appeal, and how much adjustment you would be able to get. Depending on the sale date and the due date for the taxes, you may be forced to pay the higher tax rate for a while until either the next re-appraisal or the next appeal window.  Note: the fact that it is being auctioned may mean that what you pay for the house may be immaterial because the tax authorities could determine that the motivation to sell quickly could have depressed the value. This type of sale will not impact the value of other houses and can't be used as a basis for determining the value of other properties.


Patent Attorney here. Unfortunately obtaining a patent can be a long and expensive process. With that being said, you will have to do your research to see if this will be profitable or not. I've seen too many people spend a lot of money to obtain a patten and never follow through with selling their idea because of the costs involved. I wish I could tell you more, but I don't have enough information about what you hope to achieve. Feel free to PM if you would like to discuss further.


"Can you explain the mechanics of ""brute force""? No analogies - just say what orders are placed when.  *They meet the ask and get the order because they don't care about getting the best deal.*  This is the part where you demonstrate you have absolutely no idea whatsoever about HFT."


OK, were there any fund managers stupid enough to bet on Facebook? If there are, they should all be out of jobs by now. (They won't be, but they should.)  Facebook was a bad investment on paper, on hype, and on fundamentals. There was no reasonable expectation of it going up on IPO.


"You're right. The tech ""community"" has a hard-on for the mythos of Startup Founder: Hero of the Long Hours.   But, really, Marx must be rolling over in his grave right now, because as developers & designers, we *own* the means of production. They're in. our. heads. And yet we still volunteer to be used as tools for other people to get rich off of.  This would be fine if, in exchange, those other people offered a cushy, secure life. But they almost never do. Because nerds want to be used.   I agree with you there: technology has no point if not to make the world better and our lives easier.   If you can make your employer $75k in a quarter, you already know how to deliver value. You just need to figure out what you need to switch around to do it for yourself instead."


At exactly 105K you can take a deduction of 13/20*5500 = $3575 each and the rest ($1925) as a Roth deposit. No need to have non-deducted money, when you can just make use of both flavors of IRA.


As a previous employee at Target the cashier's were all doing things wrong...you cannot buy AMEX or Visa prepaid cards with target giftcards or you get in big shit.    You are also not supposed to sell giftcards for giftcards.    This should all pop up automatically when the cashier rings it up...so i'm confused.


If I'm buying preferred stock with liquidation preferences, I care what *that class of equity* is worth. I don't give a shit what common is worth.   The article takes a pretty banal point - common may not be worth what other classes are worth - and tries to make it into a conspiracy, which is fucking stupid.


Here's one reason that's being overlooked in answers so far. (@ChrisInEdmonton, this is for your comment on @Chad's answer.) How do credit card companies make money? Sure, there's interest charges, but those are offset significantly by the cost of borrowing money, and by people defaulting on their debt / entering bankruptcy. The other way they make money is by processing transactions. They get a cut of whatever you buy. If you're a high-income person, and you're going to process a lot of expenditures with this credit card, your business is worth more. They will be willing to bribe you with things like cash-back, frequent flier miles, and insurance on your auto rentals, so that they can be your #1 go-to card.  (This works in concert with the way that some credit card vendors with richer clientele overall - American Express - get to charge higher merchant fees for access to these customers' wallets. But that was mentioned in other answers.) If you're not a high-income person, your business is worth less. If you go somewhere asking for credit, they're going to try and give you a card which will earn them the most money - which probably isn't the one where they give you back 50% of their transaction fee in rewards. It's a calculated risk, since they still have to compete against cash, debit cards, and all the other credit card companies, so they don't have you totally over a barrel, but you shouldn't expect as many freebies, either.


Because you already have the answer as part of your question. The wealth is concentrated in the parents generation and they are pulling the rug after them. This is done in various ways: from costs of education to costs of entitlements to costs of housing to salary stagnation.


> as well as enlisting the U.S. intelligence community in their coverup of murdering of a couple hundred citizens of an allied nation and member of NATO?  Okay, let's not weaken the case against Russia here, because I can totally believe the US would do that.  (Would.  Not that it did.)


I'm more shocked that sears is still in business. I occasionally drop in to go to little ceasars and i rarely ever see more than a handful of people there. It's like what wal-mart would look like if it lost 90% of its customers.


"would it make sense to set up multiple bank accounts to avoid going above their thresholds?  Quite possiblly yes but you need to pay attention to the fine print. I don't know what the situation is in poland but in the UK accounts that pay high interest often have strings attached. For example the santander 123 current account pays very good interest but it has an account fee and some other requirements that are difficult to meet if you are not using it as your ""main current account"".  You need to read the terms carefully, if you go over the threshold does the lower rate only apply to money over the threshold? or does it apply to all the money in the account? Are there any other restrictions on how you use the account. Also I don't know if poland has any provisions for limited tax-advantaged savings (like the ISA scheme we have in the UK). If it does then that can add further complications. How to calculate how to maximize the profit here? Well in theory you would get the best account you can and fill it to the threshold. Then the next best account and so-on. You would move any interest paid in an account that was already full to the threshold to the best non-full account (or if the account strongly peanalises going over perhaps move an ammount of money equivilent to the interest just before the interest is paid). In practice that is a lot of work, so if the rates on the different accounts are similar you may want to leave some margin for interest or (in the case of an account that pays the lower rate on the overage while still paying the higher rate on money below the threshold) accepting that some of your money will earn slightly less than idea. Another option some accounts may offer is just to pay the interest to another account, avoiding the need to move it yourself. Finally you should check out your government's limits for compensation in the event of banks going bust. As a general rule you don't want to put more than that ammount in a single bank even if doing so would get you the best interest."


Variable Annuities would be one option though there are SEC warnings about them, for an option that is tax-deferred and intended to be used for long-term investing such as retirement. There is a bit of a cost to gain the tax-deferral which may not always make them worthwhile.


"Sorry, I can't take you and the theory seriously when the document you posted refers to ""the friendzone"" and ""Feminism"" in the first chapter. And I do know and acknowledge the terms The Friendzone is a word created by weak men who don't know how to properly handle a woman. It is a real thing, but the only one who's putting you in it is you. Feminism has become retarded with some people, sadly.  The thing is, none of these things should be used in a socio-economic theory if you want to be taken seriously.  It does interest me for some reason, so I'll read it in depth in the future."