"Again, you're welcome.  It's also important to note (it really cannot be overemphasized) is that the taxes that were increased were/are virtually all the REGRESSIVE ones.  The rate of FICA taxation for example on rents, interest, and other ""capital gains"" (i.e. non-payroll income) -- were initially 0%, then later became 0%, and currently are 0%.  Meanwhile the FICA rate on average & median payroll (wages/salaries of ""workers"" and ""mid-level managers"", etc) increased from 1% to 15% -- that's a 15x increase, or put another way, it is an increase of 1,500% during less than a single working career (the cost of absolutely NOTHING ELSE in the history of our society increased at anything like that rate; not even education and health care costs, nor even ""housing"" at the peak of the bubble -- and in actuality, just about everything else {including the notorious ""gasoline"" sold by those ""evil"" petroleum companies} actually DECREASED during the same time frame).  And then, during virtually the SAME time period, those other taxes increased in a similar (if less egregious) fashion. For example in my Midwestern state, there was no sales tax at all circa 1950.  A bit over a decade later, when it was first instituted it was initially set at 3%, but applied only to a select category of goods; subsequently the rate was increased (to 4%, then 5%, then with the addition of various county and municipal ""sales taxes"" to 6% and higher), and more critically, the goods and services that are subject to the tax has increased as well (many of them already with ""hidden/buried"" excise taxes -- so a large portion of the sales tax is actually a ""tax on a tax"").  When you realize that as wealth increases, the average expenditure on taxable goods tends does NOT tend increase in anything like a directly proportional manner (i.e. while a person making $50k a year, may pay more than 2x the total sales tax than someone making $25k a year {simply because a big part of the $25k a year goes to ""basic necessities"" of food, rent, etc}, and it is even possible that the person making $100k a year pays a simple 2x in sales tax of the $50k person... but the $1M a year is HIGHLY unlikely to be paying 10x the sales tax as the $100k a year person) then you begin to realize the way that the ""regressive"" form of those taxes work -- basically ""hobbling"" the middle class and preventing it from reaching ""upper"" middle class status.  Now to be ruthlessly blatantly forthright, it is NOT simply a matter of blaming the ""rich"" -- because the lion's share of those ""taxes"" were and are being used to ""redistribute"" money to an ever increasing number of non-working people (either retirees, or ""disabled"" former workers, etc) -- the vast majority of which were things ""demanded"" by the general population.  Hence the TANSTAAFL reality.  The means that the ""rich/elites"" have used to milk & bilk the system may be *indirectly* linked to those taxes, but in general are actually much more likely to be based on other things (access to leverage/credit & the socialization of bad bets/losses, avoidance of ""wages"" and emphasis on ""capital gains"", etc).  Doesn't mean the elites/wealthy AREN'T gaming/scamming the system (indeed, many of them are) -- but at least a significant part of the ""blame"" for the burdensome tax system lies with the people themselves.  As another example of the same thing, take ""healthcare insurance"" -- people want their ""insurance"" to not only cover the rare, large expenses (cancer treatment, major accident trauma, etc); but also to cover their ""annual checkups"", etc. -- and then are shocked (shocked I say) when their insurance premiums go UP.  Well, what do people expect? If virtually everyone goes for an annual checkup, and that checkup costs per policy are say $300 a year, then how can premiums NOT go up by approximately $300 (+ administration costs)?  Did they expect the money to pay those things to magically appear out of nowhere?  Seriously; you demand something and eventually (one way or another) you are going to pay for it.  ---  So in your father and grandfathers eras, they were able to support a larger family in no small part because they were NOT paying for all of those ""safety net"" things.  In addition, for what little ""safety net"" *did exist* at the time, the people collecting on it were [demographically tiny versus the larger working/paying class](http://www.ssa.gov/history/ratios.html) (i.e. in 1940 each retiree on social security was ""supported"" by nearly 160 workers; by 1950 the ratio was a tenth of that 1 retiree supported by 16 workers; by 1965 it was a quarter of that {1/40th of the 1940 ratio}, 1 retiree to 4 workers; and currently {2009} it is a 1 to 3 ratio {and set to get a LOT worse as the ""Baby Boomer Bulge"" retires en masse in the coming decade+}.)  So basically, your single income job still IS supporting a large ""family"" -- you just aren't supporting them *directly* any more {instead you pay the government, and they get checks ""from the government""}; and the ""family"" you are supporting is probably NOT biologically related to you (i.e. they are someone *else's* kids, parents, etc).  And then, just as importantly, since you are no longer *directly* supporting a large family, YOU have essentially ZERO control over the hows/whens/whys of how the money gets spent (whereas your father and grandfather DID get to decide) -- instead the monies are being tossed as ""entitlements"" to the recipients, who, since they have been told (and certainly WANT to believe) that they are just getting ""what they are due"", don't feel that anyone has any RIGHT to tell them how to spend it.  (Sorta like as if when your father and grandfather were working, as if their wife, and each of their kids {as well as great grandpa Joe in the back bedroom, and maybe the ""disabled neighbor"" Dave} was LEGALLY GRANTED a government mandated ""allowance"" of 1/10th of your dad/grandad's paycheck -- and instead of your dad/grandad getting his full paycheck, the government required his employer to cut several paychecks paying those ""allowances"" directly to the wife, kids {whose checks would go directly to their schools}, grandpa joe, neighbor Dave, etc -- and they {other than the kids} were then able to spend it on whatever they wanted, and your dad/grandad wouldn't have been able to say ""boo"" about it.)  Because when it comes right down to it... that's what has happened; there's just multiple layers of official/bureaucratic ""obfuscation"" in the middle that hide the transfers under various euphemisms."


"This answer is about the USA. Each time you sell a security (a stock or a bond) or some other asset, you are expected to pay tax on the net gain. It doesn't matter whether you use a broker or mutual fund to make the sale. You still owe the tax. Net capital gain is defined this way: Gross sale prices less (broker fees for selling + cost of buying the asset) The cost of buying the asset is called the ""basis price.""  You, or your broker, needs to keep track of the basis price for each share. This is easy when you're just getting started investing. It stays easy if you're careful about your record keeping.  You owe the capital gains tax whenever you sell an asset, whether or not you reinvest the proceeds in something else. If your capital gains are modest, you can pay all the taxes at the end of the year. If they are larger -- for example if they exceed your wage earnings -- you should pay quarterly estimated tax. The tax authorities ding you for a penalty if you wait to pay five- or six-figure tax bills without paying quarterly estimates.  You pay NET capital gains tax. If one asset loses money and another makes money, you pay on your gains minus your losses. If you have more losses than gains in a particular year, you can carry forward up to $3,000 (I think). You can't carry forward tens of thousands in capital losses.  Long term and short term gains are treated separately. IRS Schedule B has places to plug in all those numbers, and the tax programs (Turbo etc) do too. Dividend payments are also taxable when they are paid. Those aren't capital gains. They go on Schedule D along with interest payments. The same is true for a mutual fund. If the fund has Ford shares in it, and Ford pays $0.70 per share in March, that's a dividend payment. If the fund managers decide to sell Ford and buy Tesla in June,  the selling of Ford shares will be a cap-gains taxable event for you.  The good news: the mutual fund managers send you a statement sometime in February or March of each year telling what you should put on your tax forms.  This is great. They add it all up for you. They give you a nice consolidated tax statement covering everything: dividends, their buying and selling activity on your behalf, and any selling they did when you withdrew money from the fund for any purpose.   Some investment accounts like 401(k) accounts are tax free. You don't pay any tax on those accounts -- capital gains, dividends, interest -- until you withdraw the money to live on after you retire. Then that money is taxed as if it were wage income. If you want an easy and fairly reliable way to invest, and don't want to do a lot of tax-form scrambling, choose a couple of different mutual funds, put money into them, and leave it there. They'll send you consolidated tax statements once a year. Download them into your tax program and you're done. You mentioned ""riding out bad times in cash.""  No, no, NOT a good idea. That investment strategy almost guarantees you will sell when the market is going down and buy when it's going up. That's ""sell low, buy high."" It's a loser. Not even Warren Buffett can call the top of the market and the bottom.  Ned Johnson (Fidelity's founder) DEFINITELY can't."


CDC estimates 48 million people get sick, 128,000 are hospitalized, and 3,000 die from foodborne diseases each year in the United States. Chipotle got a lot of heat because of their switch from GMO. Media pushed narrative. Ill informed people about GMOs and non-GMOs.


Here are some pros and cons.  Note the list is not comprehensive, but should be a good start. Pros: Alternative to Fiat Money supply - it is an international currency and can be thought of as a protection against having your money in dollars or pounds for example.  Some people think that it will eventually replace fiat money supply.  This is unlikely to happen any time soon. Move money anywhere - Anyone who has an internet connection can download a wallet and receive bitcoins. Route into Altcoin market - A lot of money is being made in alternative cyrptocurrencies such as etherium, often the best way to buy these is with Bitcoin. Potential massive gains - Bitcoin has gone from 1 dollar 7 years ago to over 2000 dollars, some think it may go even much higher in the future. Fixed money supply - Fixed cap of bitcoins, there will never be more than a fixed amount (unless code changes) which is one reason why it has gained so much value. Secrecy - Some cryptocurrencies are anonymous - which means you can hide your wealth and move it about. Negatives: Storage of bitcoins - If you hold your wallet on your computer and lose it without a backup, you have lost everything.  If you hold it on an online exchange and they go down/something bad happens you could lose it.   Regulation is in its infancy.   There is also a pro here - if you have access to your wallet then no one can freeze your account like a bank potentially could. Tax/Legal implications - Legislation against bitcoins could occur and can cause issues for users.  Tax implications can be confusing and an issue. Massive swings - price can go up massively and also down massively - it is not currently a stable investment. Negative ties - Some people associate bitcoin with money laundering and buying drugs - slightly unfairly as it is nothing you can't do with cash (and cash doesn't have a permanent record of your transaction) - but it does have this negative connotation. Summary. Could be worth investing in bitcoin, could potentially make good gains.  Could also lose everything or get in trouble with authorities if they suspect you of financial crime.  I wouldn't invest anything you couldn't afford to lose and I would be mindful of the risks.


You win, you are more pedantic than me. I give up.   Edit: okay, I think I can be more pedantic than you here actually.  Corporations don't even have to follow the law as long as their revenue from breaking the law is greater than the consequences of breaking said law.   Ethics come from proper regulation.


"I've consulted with 5-6 accountants and people who've had the issue before. The advice I received boils down to: ""If you do not attach your 83b with your personal tax return it is not effective. However you can still correct the requirement to file it along with your tax return, because you are within the 3 year window of when the return was originally due."" So you can amend your return/file it late within a certain window and things should be OK. The accountants that have confirmed this are Vanessa Kruze, Wray Rives and Augie Rakow - all of them corporate and credible accountants. You also need to keep onto the confirmation the IRS sent you in case of an audit. There is nothing on IRS.gov about attaching your 83b on a filed late or amended return but those accountants are people who say they've seen it happen frequently, have consulted with the IRS for solutions and that's the one they'd advise one to do in such situation. disclaimer: I am not a CPA"


We provide zinc plating services to a wide range of industries. Zinc plating is one the best ways to protect component against corrosion and abrasions even with its low thickness. We only use quality zinc plating solution and with our highly experienced team we ensure your work is completed in no time.


I am not speaking of the responsibility or sustainability of being frugal but just that people with more money buy newer stuff more frequently including cars and that in a decade where the US used to be praised as a beacon of hope for success in innovation the American dream has been slowly dying over the past decade.


"If you intend to do business ""outside the country"", why establish an LLC ""here"" at all?  You should establish a business in your home country if you desire business organization for sequestering liabilities or something.  With or without a business organization, you will presumably be taxed for domestic income ""there"", wherever that is."


No Joke. The 9/11 terrorists stayed in short term rentals for a week before carrying out the attacks.  These rentals were hotels.  I think hotels are probably facilitating terrorism by offering terrorists short term rentals.  The FBI should investigate their complicity in the 9-11 attacks.  I think this ad is a deflection from their clear guilt and complicity in the 9-11 attacks.


Most of the commercial sectors hire janitorial services to a professional organization, which are well equipped with machinery and tools to perform the task in an effective way. If you want to the janitorial service in Honolulu, then A alberts company is the best for cleaning service. There are many companies provides Janitorial Service Honolulu, but we believe in providing chemical free cleaning in a sustainable way. We offer high-quality cleaning services in commercial, high rise, Construction and Residential sector.


Perfect super clear, thank you /u/xlct2  So it is like you buy a bond for $X, start getting interest, sell bond for $X :)  I was thinking there could be a possibility of a bond working like a loan from a bank, that you going paying as time goes by :D


10 whole families eh?  If I show you 10 people who struck it rich as triple diamond Amway multilevel marketing gurus, would you and I then agree that Amway is the way to make money in this world?  How about if I show you 10 companies that paid negative corporate taxes for the last decade?  How about 10 billionaire families who didn't pay a dime in taxes due to creative offshoring of assets?


Imagine if the postal service set up free wi fi at each office supported by ads. Right now those clicks could be paying offset the debts and provide access to those in the rural areas.  Then add the schools and government buildings we might be higher in the internet food change.


My understanding (I've never filed one myself) is that the 1040ES is intended to allow you to file quarterly and report unpredictable income, and to pay estimated taxes on that income.   I was in the same sort of boat for 2016 -- I had a big unexpected income source in 2015, and this took away my Safe Harbor for 2016.  I adjusted my w-2 to zero exemptions (eventually) and will be getting a refund of about 1% of our income. So lets say you make 10000 in STG in March, and another 15000 in STG in April.  File a quarterly 1040-ES between March 31 and April 15.  Report the income, and pay some tax.  You should be able to calculate the STCG Tax for 10k pretty easily.  Just assume that it comes off the top and doesn't add at all to your deductions.  Then for April, do the same by June 15. Just like your W-2 is used to estimate how much your employer should withhold, the 1040ES is designed to estimate how much extra you need to pay to the IRS to avoid penalties.  It'll all get resolved after you file your final 1040 for the 2017 calendar year.


In real estate,loan consolidation essentially means taking out a large loan on one property from the proceeds of which you pay off all the other mortgages. Unless you are able (or willing) to reveal how much more you can borrow against your home or the third property (who has the remaining interest in the third property, and would they be willing to mortgage the property?) there is no way of discussing how much you might be able to borrow and against what.


"But what if I am getting paid salary from a source in India? In other words, it may be that in India a research assistant at a college on average earns a third of what a research assistant like me earns here in US. In that case, even if my cost of living there is much less, so is my salary. There are sites that provide a good guidance for what the average salary for an profession with x years of experience would be. Of course some would get paid more than average. So you can try and make a logic, if in US say you are being paid more than average, you would be paid more than average elsewhere. Plus If moving from Developed to Developing country, one has the Advantage of positive pedigree bias.  There are also websites that would give the Purchasing Power Parity for quite a few currency pairs. The Real difficulty to find is whether the Lifestyle you have in a specific country would be similar in other country. If you compare like for like it becomes slightly skewed. If you compare equivalence, then can you adjust.  A relevant example my friend in US had a Independent Bungalow in US. It was with Basement and attic, 2 levels of living space with 4 bedroom. He shifted to India and got a great salary compared to normal Indian salary. However this kind of house in India in Bangalore would be affordable only to CEO's of top companies. So is living in a 3 room apartment fine? There are multiple such aspects. Drinking a Starbucks coffee couple of times a day is routine for quite a few in US. In India this would be considered luxury. A like for equivalent comparison is ""One drinks 3-4 mugs of Coffee"" in US, and average Indian drinks ""Tea/Coffee 3-4 mugs"". In India the local Tea / Coffee would be Rs 10 - Rs 20. A Starbucks would come with starting price of Rs 150. The same applies to food. A McBurger in India would be around Rs 100. The Indian equivalent Wada Pav is for Rs 10. A Sub Way would be Rs 150. A Equivalent Mumbai Sandwich around Rs 25. I personally am picky about food, so it doesn't matter where I go, I can only eat specific things, which means I spend a huge amount of money if I am outside of India. When I was in US, I couldn't afford a maid, driver or any help. In India I have 2 maids, a cooking maid and a driver. Plus I get plumber, electrician, window cleaner, and all the help without costing me much. Things that I absolutely can't dream in US. My colleague in UK preferred to stay in a specific locality as it has a very good Church. So if its important, one may find few good ones in India if one is Roman Catholic, if one follows Lutheran, Greek Orthodox, tough luck.  Citizenship: Does it matter ... A foreign national may never get an Indian citizenship. Children don't qualify either unless both parents are Indian. Health Care: Again is quite different. One may feel Health care in US is not good or very expensive ... but there are multiple aspects of this. So in essence its very broad there is traffic, cleanliness, climate, culture, etc ... PS: A research assistant in India is poorly paid, because colleges don't have funds. Research in fundamental science is quite low. Industry to university linkages are primitive and now where close to what we have in US."


>Before I begin, I will point out that the Journal’s own analysis found that 5-star funds outperform 4-star funds which outperform 3-star funds which outperform 2-star funds which beat 1-star funds. That’s not a mirage. That’s tilting the odds in investors’ favor.  > -Morningstar  It's as if the CEO hasn't read the article at all. A stark contrast with:   >For funds that had an overall five-star rating at any point, the Journal found that their average Morningstar rating for the following five years was three stars—in other words, halfway between the top and the bottom.  >.....Of those that merited the five-star badge, a mere 10% earned five stars for their performance over the following three years. Only 7% merited five stars for the following five years, and 6% did for 10 years.  >-WSJ  Another excerpt...  >When funds picked up a fifth star for the first time during the period included in the Journal’s analysis, half of them held on to it for just three months before their performance and rating weakened.  >For all of the measured periods—three, five and 10 years—five-star domestic equity funds were more likely to turn in a one-star performance than a top one.  >That means a five-star rating for the equity funds was no more an omen of success than it was one of failure.   >-WSJ


"Businesses wouldn't do HFT if it wasn't profitable. So HFT systems must be producing revenue, and quite a bit of it.   That money has to come from *somewhere*.   In a zero-sum market, then the money comes from other investors. If the market ""creates"" wealth then it's diluting the value of the investments. Either way, it's a percentage ""cost"" to other investors."


"> Despite the fact that this correlation between immigration and wages is well-documented  Link does not go to proper documentation. Link goes to another article on the same site, with the title ""3 Reasons Why Mass Immigration Is Bad For The Economy"" and subtitle ""Is Immigration Good for the Economy?  No, Not Always"". Please make up your minds.  > The evidence suggests otherwise, including new data reported by Fox.  It looks like this bit is the closest thing there to proper data:  > Just how bad is it? According to the National Association of Home Builders, more than 56 percent of developers nationwide are reporting labor shortages.   > NAHB says the problems started when the recession hit and domestic construction workers dropped out of the market to find other jobs. At the same time, immigrant workers went back to their home countries. But as the economy has picked up and the construction industry has heated up, those workers have remained missing.   Yeah, that's not even close to as clear as they're making it out to be.  > In fact, according to Ted Wilson of Residential Strategies Inc. construction costs have risen by 30% this year—the majority of which is due to higher wages and increased overtime pay.  Heh. That Fox article says wages are about 60% of costs. A bit of math says that a 30% increase in costs that was due *entirely* to wage increases would mean wages had gone up by 50%. That's a missed opportunity by the article writers -- the headline really should say that wage-growth is ""up to 50%"". ;)  (Math: given $100 costs, $60 would be labor. A 30% increase is +$30. If that's all from labor, it would have gone from $60 to $90, and 90 / 60 == 1.5, or a 50% increase.)  .  Also, back to the leading paragraph:  > There is a strong correlation between immigration—particularly illegal immigration—and wages.  This should be obvious to anyone familiar with the fundamental principle of supply and demand: more supply (workers) means lower prices (wages), and vice versa.  There's an example of how it's nowhere near that simple at http://voxeu.org/article/impact-immigration-barriers-native-workers :  > Many claim that immigrants negatively affect the labour market prospects of native workers in advanced countries. This column studies a large change in immigration restrictions in the US – the 1965 exclusion of almost half a million Mexican seasonal farm workers (braceros) from the US labour market. The bracero exclusion did not increase the employment or wages of native workers, and technology adoption was one of the adjustment channels.   (Note I'm not saying *wrong* this time -- the VoxEU article is specifically about a case where there was existing technology available to replace the lost workers.)"


There are two totally different things: There is your limited company, and there is yourself.  Your limited company will absolutely have to pay 20% corporation tax on all its profits. The profits are the income of the limited company (you say it's £5,000 a year) minus all expenses. Usually you would pay yourself a salary, which immediately reduces your profits. And of course the payment to the accountant will reduce the profits.  If the limited company is your only source of income, the usual method is to pay yourself £10,600 salary a year, possible pay money into a pension for yourself which is tax free and reduces the company's profits, pay 20% corporation on the rest, and pay yourself a dividend twice a year. Unless you have another job where you make a lot of money, you should have paid all that money to yourself as income and paid zero corporation tax.  And may I say that if you made £5,000 a year, then there is most likely not enough going on to justify that an accountant charges you £600. You should be able to find someone doing it cheaper; I cannot imagine that he or she had to do a lot of work for this.


Are corporations not already passing along the cost of healthcare to the consumer?  When the employer pays, directly, for the employees health insurance, it goes directly into overhead costs.  Goods and service costs have to rise to meet that.  It's already happened.    Ideally, the healthcare savings would just offset the VAT.  Employee salaries probably wouldn't increase any, even ideally.


If you open an account, you sign a contract, of which you get a copy. That ultimately proves that the account exists. As for the money in an account: Double-entry accounting makes it more or less impossible for that to be simply wrong. An account balance is not just a number; it's a sum of transactions, each of which has a corresponding entry in another account where the money came from or went to. What is possible (but extremely rare given the effort banks go to in order to ensure the correctness of their systems) is for transactions to get lost or stuck (because they often have multiple stages), or to have a wrong source or target, or amount. If a transaction gets lost, it's the same as if it never happened - the money is still in the sender's account and you have to convince them to send it to you. If a transaction got stuck, i.e. money was sent but did not arrive, the sender can request their bank to investigate what happened and fix the problem. If an erroneous transaction shows up on your account, you can do the same. Double-entry accounting ensures that this is always possible.


> mostly-passive funds consisting of a sufficiently diverse array of holdings with historically* low volatility  > 3.Market it with excessive jargon to impress laymen   A quantitative-based global strategy with a wide coverage of asset classes that exhibit returns robustness and high inverted-alpha*. Uses the cutting edge of artificial intelligence to synthetically replicate index portfolios that maximizes benchmark correlation.   ^^*Defined ^^as ^^1/alpha, ^^as ^^alpha ^^-> ^^0 ^^then ^^inverted ^^alpha ^^-> ^^infinity.


As of 2013, Ally bank has a 1% conversion fee when using your card internationally; however the withdrawal limits are pretty low ($500 USD daily at an ATM, and $2,500 when shopping).


They are private businesses, and they open as they want, quite the same as gas stations or supermarkets. You can open a fourth one, if you think there is money to be made. May not be a bad idea, if you know a bit about cyber security.


There are a couple of reasons, including:


"Has anyone done this before? I'm sure someone has, but it doesn't completely remove any price risk.   Suppose you buy it at 10 and it drops to 5? Then you've lost 5 on the stock and have no realized gain on the option (although you could buy back the option cheaply and exist the position). To completely remove price risk you have to delta hedge.  At ATM option generally has a delta of 50%, meaning that the value of the option changes 0.50 for every $1 change in the stock. The downside to delta hedging is you can spend a lot on transaction fees and employ a lot of ""buy high, sell low"" transactions with a highly volatile stock."


"One ""economic reason"" to turn down a raise is if your company gives bonuses based on performance reviews. When you get a raise in salary, your boss usually expects a better performance from you. That being said, if you get the raise, and your performance review is worse, you might get a smaller annual income."


Nice try. No. If you were in the music industry, you might have a case. Depending on the exact job, certain things related to music would be a business expense. I don't see how this would pass an audit as it really is unrelated to the work you do.


The main issue is that anonymous payment is strongly opposed by banking and governments. The price of giving away your identity to hundreds of strangers daily is much higher than coping with stupid ads. Even the price of having your bank know your spending patterns so tightly, is high.


This has international ramifications. This company sold parts according to very specific qualifications, knowing that the parts did not meet those qualifications. Whether the top executives knew or not is immaterial, the effect is the same: Unsuspecting companies have been operating machinery with insufficient materials, creating many unsafe environments.  How many accidents have been caused or made worse by Kobe Steel's actions?


Yeah it's sad. I read in the paper that their Finnish supplier company filed for bankruptcy because Nokia looked to Asia for suppliers. I like Nokia hardware, other phones feel flimsy compared to my N8. The Lumia hardware feels solid too, too bad I'm deterred from buying it because Nokia is going under.


I'm Asian (Korean).  My parents gave me a choice between doctor and world-leading anything.  Want to join a band?  You better be the next fucking U2.  I ended up getting into Stanford for engineering and working for Google.  They won't be happy until I launch a world changing product or become an exec.  It's exhausting.


They have a minimum to discourage applications for that particular card. Every application costs them money because they have to pay the credit agencies to pull the applicant's credit history. So one way they save money and reduce their cost of business is to discourage people from applying if they're not creditworthy enough for that product. Credit card companies tailor their products into different income/credit brackets. Those who have less creditworthiness would be better suited for a different product than what you're referring, similar to those with greater creditworthiness.


"I wrote a longer reply then deleted it. Socialism as a term has developed so many conflicting definitions that it has become almost completely useless. That being said, I don't believe that a group of countries where several still have their royal and noble classes, and their economy is a commodity and market driven economy qualify as meeting the basic tenets of Marx's Socialism. On the other hand, they are certainly leftist and their model is working well for them, and many western countries could be better if they moved toward the Nordic Model, but again they are not ""True Socialism""."


Now look, maybe your method of massage differs from mine, but, you know, touchin' his wife's feet, and stickin' your tongue in her Holiest of Holies, ain't the same fuckin' ballpark, it ain't the same league, it ain't even the same fuckin' sport. Look, foot massages don't mean shit.


Bartering is a tricky discussion. Yes, it definitely applies when you are self-employed and do a job that you would charge anyone else for, but what if you are helping a friend in your spare time? If you receive something in exchange, the value of the item you received would be your income, but what if you don't receive anything in exchange? If the company bought a computer that they loan to you to do occasional work for them, there's no reason you couldn't take the computer home and have that company retain ownership of the property. They could still expense the depreciation of the computer without giving it to you. If it were a car though, you would have to count mileage for personal use as income. What if you exchange occasional tech support for the use of an empty desk and Internet connection? As long as they aren't renting desks for money to others, there's probably no additional marginal cost to them if they allow you to use the space, so the fair market value question breaks down.


NEVER and I do mean **NEVER** split a business ownership 50/50.  --  Make it 51/49 or whatever you want but never go 50/50 as if there is ever a disagreement You have the power to over rule. If you go 50/50 you will potentially get stuck in a legal battle which you do not want.


I got my degree in chemistry because I didn't know wha I wanted to do but I wanted to challenge myself. It didn't end up being an advantage. I encourage you to consider your major an investment in your future career rather than as a way to challenge yourself. Look at the jobs out there and pick a few paths for yourself, then see which major best fits into ALL the paths you're interested in. You can always do a math minor (which you may reconsider when you hit the crossroads of linear algebra and differential equations). Take advantage of internships, network. A degree is nice piece of paper but most of what you learn in college just doesn't apply to working a real job. Keep that in perspective! But also enjoy yourself.


Nobody here really answered your question.  The custodian of the 401k determines what funds and investment options are available within that 401k.  So if they're eliminating company stock as an option then they can absolutely make you sell out of it.    You may be able to do an in service rollover and transfer your funds to an individual ira but that's not particularly common among 401k administrators.   Aside from that I'd ask why do you want to hold company stock anyway?  Generally I'd advise against this as its imposing a ton of risk on your financial future.  If your company tanks you're out of a job, which sucks.  But it sucks even more if your company tanks and your 401k loses a ton of value at the same time.   Edit: I see you asked who benefits as well.  It may just be a situation of no benefit at all.  Perhaps the plan didn't have enough people investing in company stock to make the option cost effective.  Maybe the administrator decided that allowing people to take on that amount of risk was not in their best interest(it's not).  Could be a ton of reasons but it's unlikely the company did so out of greed.  There isn't a lot of financial benefit for them there.


"Arrogant nonsense like this is the extremism ""crying wolf"" that helped get him elected.  The left is so loud and obnoxious at this point that people stopped listening.  But I guess gathering on liberal sites like reddit and patting each other on the back is still your idea of the best way to change."


"Not to mention the impact of helicopter parenting; it's harder to date if your parents won't let you learn to drive or get a car, activities, homework, and ""family time"" keep you busy literally every waking moment, and your parents actively monitor your internet and phone use."


They are actually both undergraduate texts; however, Investments is FAR more complex.   Essentials of Investments really waters down the statistical and mathematical notation while Investments does not.  Investments also has an entire section (4-5 chapters) called options, futures, and other derivatives while Essentials of Investments does not.   [Of course, if you want to learn about options, futures, and other derivatives, there is a seminal book by John Hull with that exact title.] That notwithstanding, neither book is sophisticated enough to be considered a true graduate school textbook in quantitative investment theory.  No grad schools worth their salt are going to rely too heavily on Investments in a specialized finance curriculum.   It's a great book to start out, though.


"ASSUMING you're talking about a property in the United States, the answer generally would be ""no"".  You aren't actually paying any of the expenses for the property and yet you want to take the deductions for doing so?  That's a rather cheeky move, I'd say! (grin)   It probably would lead to some real strife with your brother, since he would have proper claim to those credit on the basis he's the one footing the bills for the property.  Before you do anything like what you're talking about, it might be best to speak with him, because both of you are running the very real risk of an audit, and if that happens then I can guarantee the IRS will slap the daylights out of you for it.  Your brother, I'm sure, is already claiming all of the deductions he can for what he's putting into the property, and on top of that you want to file for your half.  What half are you referring to, when your out-of-pocket is zero?  So what you're saying is, you think that between you and your brother you should be able to take a credit of 150% of the actual deductions...Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me. I strongly encourage you to talk to a tax professional, but if you get a different answer to this than what I've already given then I'd be stunned.   I hope this helps. Good luck!"


"Two points. Someone has mentioned ""don't do the starbucks coffee"" thing... Try not to pay for fast food, either. They might not like you having cooking equipment in your dorm, but things like sandwiches and cereal don't require that (and often there is a common kitchen). Did you know oatmeal is so cheap it's basically free? Also dirt cheap and ridiculously nutritious: beans, lentils. There's certainly the ""ramen noodles"" stereotype but even beyond that, if you can learn how to cook a few decent things for yourself, you can do quite well. Oh, did I mention rice? On a related note, skip the bottled water and the sodas. (Especially the sodas, which can do you little good.) Snack on vegetables (carrots, celery, etc). They're not always cheaper than the cheapest of the cheap snacks that exist, but they're actually good for you. A big bag of carrots will give you a lot to munch and is reasonably cost-effective. Besides, I know you need more of them in your diet. Really. Finally, consider a summer job / internship. Not only will it earn you money now, but it might land you a much nicer job straight out of college, saving you years of earning less. (This goes triple for anyone studying computer science/engineering, by the way!!!) If that doesn't work out, consider summer-session classes. Sometimes they can work out cheaper than the regular kind."


Assuming your country is the United States there is.  See schedule C line 9 and the corresponding instructions.   There are many rules associated with this, in some cases the entire purchase can be written off but typically if the truck is only used for business.  Most people write off partial usage in the form of credits for mileage. You are best to consult with a CPA once your business earns a profit.  Good luck.


You will need to check the language of your sales contract. Most of the time, it will be written that the pro-rated property taxes will be part of closing costs. In general, If you've already paid taxes, then the buyer will pay you the pro-rated portion of that, from the closing date through the end of the year. If you haven't, then you would usually be charged the pro-rated amount to be held in the buyer's mortgage company escrow account, with the remainder being collected from the buyer at a later date. For your income tax purposes, you can deduct that tiny amount of the paid property taxes from your income (assuming itemized deductions). Doing some research on property tax for the state of Georgia brings up this interesting note: If you owned property on January 1, you are responsible for the ad valorem tax for the entire year even if you sell the property on January 2.  Georgia law does not allow a refund for partial year residents. This leads me to believe that your sales contract would have it written in that the buyer paid you almost the entire year's property taxes in anticipation that you would be responsible for the property taxes, as you owned the property on January 1st. Again, you should consult with the settlement attorney and review your contract.


[Spectacles](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectacles_%28product%29) are glasses/sunglasses with a built in camera/video recorder, which look surprisingly un-bulky. The price is just around $120, so a bit pricey. You can get [a crappy kids spy version for only $60](https://www.amazon.com/SPY-NET-Stealth-Video-Glasses/dp/B004X4X3N0) for the last couple years. The price is probably worth it for the lightweight, more reasonable look, and probably better quality, but it is probably seen as just a novelty for most, which doesn't garner such a price point. Their focus on Snapchat also might have been narrowing to the market.  (I had no clue and just looked into it myself. I got my kids one the spy glasses a few years ago.)


Checkout the worksheet on page 20 of Pub 535.  Also the text starting in the last half of the third column of page 18 onward. https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p535.pdf The fact that you get a W-2 is irrelevant as far as I can see.  Your self-employment business has to meet some criteria (such as being profitable) and the plan needs to be provided through your own business (although if you're sole proprietor filing on Schedule C, it looks like having it in your own name does the trick).  Check the publication for all of the rules. There is this exception that would prevent many people with full-time jobs on W-2 from taking the deduction: Other coverage. You cannot take the deduction for any month you were eligible to participate in any employer (including your spouse's) subsidized health plan at any time during that month, even if you did not actually participate. In addition, if you were eligible for any month or part of a month to participate in any subsidized health plan maintained by the employer of either your dependent or your child who was under age 27 at the end of 2014, do not use amounts paid for coverage for that month to figure the deduction. (Pages 20-21).  Sounds like in your case, though, this doesn't apply. (Although your original question doesn't mention a spouse, which might be relevant to the rule if you have one and he/she works.) The publication should help.  If still in doubt, you'll probably need a CPA or other professional to assess your individual situation.


Before doing anything else: you want a lawyer involved right from the beginning, to make sure that something reasonable happens with the house if one of you dies or leaves. Seriously, you'll both be safer and happier if it's all explicit. How much you should put on the house is not the right question. Houses don't sell instantly, and while you can access some of their stored value by borrowing against them that too can take some time to arrange. You need to have enough operating capital for normal finances, plus an emergency reserve to cover unexpectedly being out of work or sudden medical expenses. There are suggestions for how much that should be in answers to other questions. After that, the question is whether you should really be buying a house at all. It isn't always a better option than renting and (again as discussed in answers to other questions) there are ongoing costs in time and upkeep and taxes and insurance. If you're just thinking about the financials, it may be better to continue to rent and to invest the savings in the market. The time to buy a house is when you have the money and a reliable income, plan not to move for at least five years, really want the advantages of more elbow room and the freedom to alter the place to suit your needs (which will absorb more money)...  As far as how much to put down vs. finance: you really want a down payment of at least 20%. Anything less than that, and the bank will insist you pay for mortgage insurance, which is a significant expense. Whether you want to pay more than that out of your savings depends on how low an interest rate you can get (this is a good time in that regard) versus how much return you are getting on your investments, combined with how long you want the mortgage to run and how large a mortgage payment you're comfortable committing to. If you've got a good investment plan in progress and can get a mortgage which charges a lower interest rate than your investments can reasonably be expected to pay you, putting less down and taking a larger mortgage is one of the safer forms of leveraged investing... IF you're comfortable with that. If the larger mortgage hanging over you is going to make you uncomfortable,  this might not be a good answer for you. It's a judgement call. I waited until i'd been in out of school about 25 years before I was ready to buy a house. Since i'd been careful with my money over that time,  I had enough in investments that I could have bought the house for cash. Or I could have gone the other way and financed 80% of it for maximum leverage. I decided that what I was comfortable with was financing 50%. You'll have to work thru the numbers and decide what you are comfortable with. But I say again, if buying shared property you need a lawyer involved. It may be absolutely the right thing to do ... but you want to make sure everything is fully spelled out... and you'll also want appropriate terms written into your wills. (Being married would carry some automatic assumptions about joint ownership and survivor rights... but even then it's safer to make it all explicit.) Edit: Yes, making a larger down payment may let you negotiate a lower interest rate on the loan. You'll have to find out what each bank is willing to offer you, or work with a mortgage broker who can explore those options for you.


Colonic Hydrotherapy is an internal bath to help cleanse the colon (large intestine) of poisons, gas, accumulated faucal matter, harmful bacteria and mucus deposits. Filtered water is gently introduced into the colon and special massage techniques are used to help to expel waste products and compacted deposits. Colonic Hydrotherapy has been practiced for thousands of years and has its origins in Egypt, Greece and India. It is an integral part of a modern naturopathic approach to health and was used in hospitals until the 1970's. It is a very safe and gentle treatment and it is ultimate detox.


So the reason that money disappeared is that someone was charitable? In your example of making 12 non-printed Loddars, the farmer gained meat and the hunter gained shoes, but the shoemaker never got his apples - he just lost shoes.    It seems that value never disappeared from the planet. It is just that some got more than some others.    So is the reason that countries suffer financial problems the gap between the rich and the poor?


Because they could move, the same reason you don't raise it today. If demand for housing doesn't increase then if you raised your rent by 50% after minimum wage went up that much you would be well above the market rate. Also in your scenario you know your renters are minimum wage workers who just got a raise. Most landlords don't know that much detail about their renters finances.


But.. what I really want to know.... is it illegal, particularly the   clause REQUIRING a trade in to qualify for the advertised price? The price is always net of all the parts of the deal. As an example they gave the price if you have $4000 trade in. If you have no trade in, or a trade in worth less than 4K, your final price for the new car will be more. Of course how do you know that the trade in value they are giving you is fair. It could be worth 6K but they are only giving you a credit of 4K. If you are going to trade in a vehicle while buying another vehicle the trade in should be a separate transaction. I always get a price quote for selling the old car before visiting the new car dealer. I do that to have a price point that I can judge while the pressure is on at the dealership.. Buying a car is a complex deal. The price, interest rate, length of loan, and the value of the trade in are all moving parts. It is even more complex if a lease is involved. They want to adjust the parts to be the highest profit that you are willing to agree to, while you think that you are getting a good deal. This is the fine print: All advertised amounts include all Hyundai incentives/rebates, dealer   discounts and $2500 additional down from your trade in value. +0% APR   for 72 months on select models subject to credit approval through HMF.   *No payments or 90 days subject to credit approval. Value will be added to end of loan balance. 15MY Sonata - Price excludes tax, title,   license, doc, and dealer fees. MSRP $22085- $2036 Dealer Discount -   $500 HMA Lease Cash - $500 HMA Value Owner Coupon - $1000 HMA Retail   Bonus Cash - $500 HMA Military Rebate - $500 HMA Competitive Owner   Coupon - $400 HMA College Grad Rebate - $500 HMA Boost Program - $4000   Trade Allowance = Net Price $12149. On approved credit. Certain   qualifications apply to each rebate. See dealer for details. Payment   is 36 month lease with $0 due at signing. No security deposit   required. All payment and prices include HMA College Grad Rebate, HMA   Military Rebate, HMA Competitive Owner Coupon and HMA Valued Owner   Coupon. Must be active military or spouse of same to qualify for HMA   Military Rebate. Must graduate college in the next 6 months or within   the last 2 years to qualify for HMA College Grad rebate. Must own   currently registered Hyundai to qualify for HMA Valued Owner Coupon.   Must own qualifying competitive vehicle to qualify for HMA Competitive   Owner Coupon.


That Economist quote only offers a very weak argument.  It doesn't argue from anything fundemental, it just says they think corporations borrow too much and the tax-code should remove this insentive to borrow.  That's an arguement based on a feeling and weak.   There's absolutely a logical consistency to allow a deduction for interest at the corporate level and not dividends.  As mentioned, interest is an expense to a financier, dividends are distributed residual income.


Có những người kinh doanh, đầu tư, giao dịch chỉ có thua lỗ … họ không biết tại sao ? => Thuyết Ngũ Hành có thể lý giải nguyên nhân cho chúng ta biết…  Làm việc gì cũng phải thuận theo tự nhiên thì mới Thành Công !


It sounds like something is getting lost in translation here. A business owner should not have to pay personal income tax on business expenses, with the caveat that they are truly business expenses. Here's an example where what you described could happen: Suppose a business has $200K in revenue, and $150K in legitimate business expenses (wages and owner salaries, taxes, services, products/goods, etc.) The profit for this example business is $50K. Depending on how the business is structured (sole proprietor, llc, s-corp, etc), the business owner(s) may have to pay personal income tax on the $50K in profit. If the owner then decided to have the business purchase a new vehicle solely for personal use with, say, $25K of that profit, then the owner may think he could avoid paying income tax on $25K of the $50K. However, this would not be considered a legitimate business expense, and therefore would have to be reclassified as personal income and would be taxed as if the $25K was paid to the owner. If the vehicle truly was used for legitimate business purposes then the business expenses would end up being $175K, with $25K left as profit which is taxable to the owners. Note: this is an oversimplification as it's oftentimes the case that vehicles are partially used for business instead of all or nothing. In fact, large items such as vehicles are typically depreciated so the full purchase price could not be deducted in a single year. If many of the purchases are depreciated items instead of deductions, then this could explain why it appears that the business expenses are being taxed. It's not a tax on the expense, but on the income that hasn't been reduced by expenses, since only a portion of the big ticket item can be treated as an expense in a single year.


I'm not familiar with Gnucash, but I can discuss double-entry bookkeeping in general. I think the typical solution to something like this is to create an Asset account for what this other person owes you. This represents the money that he owes you. It's an Accounts Receivable. Method 1: Do you have/need separate accounts for each company that you are paying for this person? Do you need to record where the money is going? If not, then all you need is: When you pay a bill, you credit (subtract from) Checking and debit (add to) Friend Account. When he pays you, you credit (subtract from) Friend Account and debit (add to) Checking. That is, when you pay a bill for your friend you are turning one asset, cash, into a different kind of asset, receivable. When he pays you, you are doing the reverse. There's no need to create a new account each time you pay a bill. Just keep a rolling balance on this My Friend account. It's like a credit card: you don't get a new card each time you make a purchase, you just add to the balance. When you make a payment, you subtract from the balance. Method 2: If you need to record where the money is going, then you'd have to create accounts for each of the companies that you pay bills to. These would be Expense accounts.  Then you'd need to create two accounts for your friend: An Asset account for the money he owes you, and an Income account for the stream of money coming in. So when you pay a bill, you'd credit Checking, debit My Friend Owes Me, credit the company expense account, and debit the Money from My Friend income account.  When he repays you, you'd credit My Friend Owes Me and debit Checking. You don't change the income or expense accounts. Method 3: You could enter bills when they're received as a liability and then eliminate the liability when you pay them. This is probably more work than you want to go to.


"So you're making $150,000 per year and you have $245,000 in debts. You're in your late 30s and have $41,000, or less than 1/3 of a year's pay, put away for retirement. That's a bad situation, but not disastrous. Lots of people have recovered from far worse. But like the old joke goes, when you realize that you're deep in a hole, STOP DIGGING. The worst thing you could do right now is liquidate the few assets you have and go deeper into debt. I don't know where you live or what the housing market is there. But the easy answer is: find a cheaper house.  I'm not sure what you mean about ""affect the resale value"". Yes, if you buy a cheaper house it will have a lower resale value. So what? The days when a house was an investment that would skyrocket in value are over. (And even in those days, it didn't help most people. So when you move, you get a big profit on the sale of your house. But the house you're moving to probably went up by a similar percentage, so you really didn't gain anything.) Even if your house did increase in value, unless you sell it, that doesn't help you make the mortgage payments. It's a paper profit. Get yourself out of debt. Step 1 is to stop taking on new debts. And if at all possible, you should be putting bare minimum 6% into your retirement plan. I don't know where you work, but most employers match some percentage of the first 6% you put in. If you don't take advantage of that, you're giving up free money."


If you are not working, I believe you would be getting some money from your family to meet your expenses. In such a case, I would start with maintaining a Cash A/c which would list your monthly expenses and the money you received, which is what I used to do at your age. You can maintain it in a notebook with pen/pencil or using online tools such as Google Sheets. Enter each expense entries each day as debits and entries towards any money you receive as credits. At the end of the month, tally them and see how much you have left. Also, this gives you a clear picture of where your expenses are what is that you can avoid. On longer term, this can help you form an annual budget for your personal finances.


Quant here  The best undergrad for getting into MFE is mathematics, second best physics, etc... I think you get the trend here.  There are computational finance PhDs which blend math, finance and programming which IMO are a much better value for money (because they are free). Also masters level courses concentrate on breadth rather than depth. They are good for consulting, starting out at a desk etc.. PhD programs are for academics and for more in depth model building.  Take math, lots of it. Use your summers to get internships and built networks and experience.


"What do you mean ""Not Coming Back""? It seems to be coming back to 1990 prices, but not fast enough. I'd love to see it come back to 1970 prices.  I don't understand it when people say that ""Housing"" is not improving, when prices go lower. When gas is cheaper, as far as my budget is concerned, it's improving! When food is cheaper, it's also improving! Of course, this is assuming it's really cheaper and not some artifact of unhealthy bioengineering, war, or simply costing ""fewer US dollars"" due to fiscal manipulation. Housing improves when prices go down, because it improves my chances of being able to afford one.  If lower prices are caused by demographics, student debt, and no jobs - I say, it can't come soon enough. I want it!"


Not limiting... I just would not excel at that. I learn socializing a lot slower than others, I like being honest and straight forward above manipulating people with psychology. Heck, I'd say I'm on the spectrum. It goes against what I am to be managing people. It goes against what I believe.  It is a shame the world thinks such paths are superior.


So they created a product that was almost guaranteed to fail for retail investors over time.  In other words, they created a vehicle to allow gambling, and they were the house. They were then fined $3.5m for doing so.    Add that to the sheer number of cons they've been running, and you have regulator capture at its finest.  They are not affraid of being caught, and they are brazen in the scope.  It's time to break them up.   > It's the latest black eye for Wells Fargo. Over the past 13 months, the bank has admitted opening 3.5 million potentially fake customer accounts, forcing up to 570,000 borrowers into unneeded car insurance, and wrongly charging homebuyers fees to lock in mortgage rates.


I agree minimum wage shouldn't be thag high because it takes away the motive to improve and cuts profits. As some one who eorks those jobs very little actual skill is required besides not yelling back st people when their rude. Not that hard


I do not think the bank would consider the 52K as equity.   Typically, a rent-to-own lease is technically a lease-option contract where you lease for a fixed amount and at some point during the lease you have the option to buy it at a discounted price.   I think the bank would consider it a negotiated price.   I know that those down payment assistance plans are considered price negotiation by the IRS for the purpose of basis cost and I suspect this would be similar where your basis is $236,800 and not $296,000.


You have to call Interactive Brokers for this. This is what you should do, they might even have a web chat. These are very broker specific idiosyncrasies, because although margin rules are standardized to an extent, when they start charging you for interest and giving you margin until settlement may not be standardized. I mean, I can call them and tell you what they said for the 100 rep.


Yes. Wash rules are only for losses.


Any portfolio, even one composed of risk-free assets is subject to risk. That said, to short an equity without margin risk, puts can provide.  To replicate a short without excess margin, an at the money put should be used.  To take on less leverage, a deep in the money put can be used.  Puts are not available on equities deemed illiquid by regulation. A long/short portfolio can help mitigate variance risk, but then the problem becomes the risk of a lack of volatility since options decline in value over time and without a beneficial change in the underlying.


No matter what, it is never a bad decision to go 100% debt free.  However, you can make debt work in your favor in some cases (investments, education, etc.), but you need to approach it with a plan and long term strategy. Interest, fees, and loss of value can quickly eat up any gains.


"Yes, it's normal. If you ""buy"" your own disability insurance with after tax money, any payout you get is non taxable. If your employer ""buys"" your disability insurance with their own money, any payout you get is taxable. Since the payout is not 100% of your pre-disability income, most folks strongly prefer that the payout be non taxable. To achieve this, I pay the premiums on behalf of my employees (including myself) and then add that premium to their salary as a taxable benefit. In effect I paid it to them, then took it from them and used it to buy the insurance. (It has no impact on my corporate taxes since I can either deduct premiums or salaries, same either way.) This ensures they won't pay tax if they should collect. And I have had people collect, and it was non-taxable to them."


All websites pull Statement data line by line from central databases.  They get to choose which line items to pull, and sometimes they get the plus/minus wrong and sometimes the Statements they recreate don't add up.  Nothing you can do about it.  All the sites have problems.  I personally think the best is Morningstar eg http://financials.morningstar.com/income-statement/is.html?t=POT&region=can&culture=en-US Use these summary sites at the start of your decision process, but later confirm the facts straight from the Edgar or Sedar for Cdn companies http://www.sedar.com/search/search_form_pc_en.htm


The only way I could see you fighting this is by saying that portion of the contract is unenforceable.   Contracts are only allowed to cover reasonable things. You can't demand someones first born child (illegal) and can't demand they fly to the moon magically (improbability). So the gambit here would be saying that its impossible for people to control what their guests do after staying somewhere. Counter would be: you shold make your guests sign contracts.  Another argument  could be that since the hotel never mentioned any time limits, its overbearing to essentially say 'you can never say anything bad about us *for the rest of time*'.


Unfortunately, I can't simply write a check. Why not? Getting a certified check or a money draft from your original bank would be the safest way of transferring money.  You can also get it wired directly -- talk to your new bank and see if they can get something set up for you.


"Meh, not really.  While there was some idea that housing prices would continue to rise forever, the packaging of bad loans has nothing to do with optimism, that's outright fraud. If you really want to stretch the definition, you might be able to say they had a fantasy that they weren't going to get caught because...well they hadn't for nearly two decades.  Honestly though, just google ""fraud housing market"" or ""mortgage banks"" and you'll find more than enough direct proof of fraud and deception."


I second @DumbCoder, every company seems to have its own way of displaying the next dividend date and the actual dividend. I keep track of this information and try my best to make it available for free through my little iphone web app here http://divies.nazabe.com


"I'm curious and surprised its to their advantage to do this in the US  adding: is the US ""buying work"" via some kind of massive governmental support, similar to Foxconn's new microchip plant in Wisconsin, where [Wisconsin is paying ~237K per job](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/07/27/foxconn-deal-would-cost-wisconsin-230700-per-worker/?utm_term=.0932614d3329&tid=sm_tw) and [Foxconn is exempt from environmental law?](https://www.wpr.org/wisconsin-foxconn-deal-waives-environmental-regulations)"


If I could get places without driving myself, I definitely would. This country is beautiful when seen from the road, but to really see it well, you have to be the passenger, not the driver. The driver has to keep his or her eyes on the road and only glance at scenery. The passengers can look at whatever they want or do whatever they want.  Bring on the self-driving cars!


Yes you can't simply withdraw your super until you are aged 60 (and that may go up slightly on Budget night 13/05/14). But you can roll it over into a SMSF where you decide where you invest your super funds. However, I would advise against you starting a SMSF at this early age with a very small super fund account. The Admin. and audit fees would eat your super account up in one year. It is recommended that you have at least $300,000 to $400,000 in super fund assets before starting a SMSF to make the fees competitive and efficient. Now if you are with a partner and start a SMSF together, then it is your combined funds that need to be over the $300K mark (a SMSF can have between 1 to 4 members). The cheapest fund I could find was First State Super. The fees are $52 + 0.64% per year (for the High Growth option). So for a balance of $1000 you would pay $58.40 or 5.84% per year. The High Growth Investment Option has returned 18.4% over the last year, 12.7% pa over the last 5 years, and 8.2% pa over the last 10 years (which includes the period covering the GFC). So even with a small balance of $1000 your super investment will still continue to grow. If you could slowly grow your super account to $2000 your fees would be $64.80 or 3.24%, and at $3000 balance your fees would be $71.20 or 2.37%. The great thing about super is the tax advantages. You may be complaining now about fees on a small balance, and yes you should try to minimise these fees, not only when you have a small balance but also when your balance is larger, but the tax advantages available through superannuation will really come into play when you are on a high income paying the tax at or near the highest marginal tax rate. Compare the top marginal tax rate (plus Medicare Levy) at 46.5% compared to the tax rate of 15% on super contributions and investment returns. And it gets better, when you retire and take a pension or lump sum from your super after age 60 you pay zero tax on the income stream or lump sum. and you also pay zero tax on any ongoing investment returns in your super. The benefits of superannuation are numerous, and the best way to reduce your fees for now is to find a fund with lowest fees, try to increase your balance so your percentage fees go down, and try to consolidate all your super funds into the one with the lowest fees, if you have more than one super fund.


You can find the details in the IRS instructions for the form 5405. Summary - you have to repay the credit if you move, even if it is because you were laid off. However, if you sell the house, the repayment is limited by your gains. If you sell at a loss - you don't need to repay. Also, if you die, you don't have to repay, don't know if it helps.


Commonly recommended books:  Intelligent Investor - Graham One Up On Wall Street - Lynch The Essays of Warren Buffett : Lessons for Corporate America - Cunningham   Graham's book should be mandatory reading for this sub. Lynch's book talks about leveraging your personal expertise to make intelligent investment choices. Cunningham's is a compilation of Warren Buffett's letters to shareholders of BH with some commentary. It covers a wider range of material, but the lessons on corporate governance are very useful when doing valuation.


"Seriously.  I can't tell you how many times I hear this scenario: Kid graduates college; kid runs out and signs lease on apartment ""because that's what you do""**; kid complains that he's in financial trouble and can't make ends meet.   Housemate sharing is most famously displayed in hit shows like Big Bang Theory or New Girl.  They get a much nicer place with better furnishings for way less money.  (However don't hook up with close neighbors or friends of other housemates, they do it for awkward laughs but it really results in awkward departure.)  It's more financially responsible.  It means the rest of your financial life will have more slack.  And when you move, obviously, it's no big deal, you just give all the notice you can, and go to the next town and find another housemate share.   ** I suspect a very significant factor is bringing home dates.  Well, there's nothing sexy about taking your date to McDonalds because you can't afford anything more.  See those shows... it works fine, you just have to be sensible about housemate choices.  Pick housemates who view things the same way, and who themselves are invested in making the shared space attractive, and aren't going to mind some ...activities... once in awhile."


Roofs will always need repairs. These jobs cant be outsourced. But we found a way to bring people here to take them from Americans.   These are the exact jobs we need to protect.   Cut off the foreign labor, raise the wages, then prices, and we will all pay because we have to. But more Americans will have good jobs.


It's the direct result of shareholders insisting their capital must return the absolute maximum possible yield, which means leaving workers incomes behind, among other nasty things.  We forget, that American citizens *allow* corporations to exist, for the benefit of society.


"Coming from someone who has worked a in the account servicing department of an actual bank in the US, other answers are right, this is probably a scam, the phone number on the letter is probably ringing to a fraudulent call center (these are very well managed and sound professional), and you must independently locate and dial the true contact number to US Bank. NOW. Tell them what happened. Reporting is critical. Securing your money is critical. Every piece of information you provided ""the bank"" when you called needs to be changed or worked around. Account numbers, passwords, usernames, card numbers get changed. Tax ID numbers get de-prioritized as an authentication mechanism even if the government won't change them. The true bank probably won't transfer you to the branch. If the front-line call center says they will, ask the person on the phone what the branch can do that they cannot. Information is your friend. They will probably transfer you to a special department that handles these reports. Apparently Union Bank's call center transfers you to the branch then has the branch make this transfer. Maybe their front-line call center team is empowered to handle it like I was. Either way, plug your phone in; if the call takes less than 5 minutes they didn't actually do everything. 5 to 8 minutes per department is more likely, plus hold time. There's a lot of forms they're filling out. What if that office is closed because of time differences? Go online and ask for an ATM limit increase. Start doing cash advances at local banks if your card allows it. Just get that money out of that account before it's in a fraudsters account. Keep receipts, even if the machine declines the transaction. Either way, get cash on hand while you wait for a new debit card and checks for the new account you're going to open. What if this was fraud, you draw your US Bank account down to zero $800 at a time, and you don't close it or change passwords? Is it over? No. Then your account WILL get closed, and you will owe EVERYTHING that the fraudsters rack up (these charges can put your account terrifyingly far in the negative) from this point forward. This is called ""participation in a scam"" in your depository agreement, because you fell victim to it, didn't report, and the info used was voluntarily given. You will also lose any of your money that they spend. What if US Bank really is closing your account? Then they owe you every penny you had in it. (Minus any fees allowed in the depository agreement). This closure can happen several days after the date on the warning, so being able to withdraw doesn't mean you're safe. Banks usually ship an official check shipped to the last known address they had for you. Why would a bank within the United States close my account when it's not below the minimum balance? Probably because your non-resident alien registration from when you were in school has expired and federal law prohibits them from doing business with you now. These need renewed at least every three years. Renewing federally is not enough; the bank must be aware of the updated expiration date. How do I find out why my account is being closed? You ask the real US Bank. They might find that it's not being closed. Good news! Follow the scam reporting procedure, open a new account (with US Bank if you want, or elsewhere) and close the old one. If it IS being closed by the bank, they'll tell you why, and they'll tell you what your next options are. Ask what can be done. Other commenters are right that bitcoin activity may have flagged it. That activity might actually be against your depository agreement. Or it set off a detection system. Or many other reasons. The bank who services your account is the only place that knows for sure. If I offer them $500 per year will they likely keep the account opened? Otherwise I got to go to singapore open another account Legitimate financial institutions in the United States don't work this way. If there is a legal problem with your tax status in the US, money to the bank won't solve it. Let's call the folks you've talked to ""FraudBank"" and the real USBank ""RealBank,"" because until RealBank confirms, we have no reason to believe that the letter is real.  FraudBank will ask for money. Don't give it. Don't give them any further information. Gather up as much information from them as possible instead. Where to send it, for example. Then report that to RealBank. RealBank won't have a way to charge $500/year to you only. If they offer a type of account to everyone that costs $500, ask for the ""Truth in Savings Act disclosures."" Banks are legally required to provide these upon request. Then read them. Don't put or keep your money anywhere you don't understand."


It is supported by inflation and historical values. if you look at real estate as well as the stock market they have consistently increased over a long period of history even with short term drops. It is also based on inflation and the fact that the price of land and building material has increased over time.


"Okay, so you don't know what other options are available, understood. No need to be a dick. In other industries, deals and transactions are invalidated, reversed, refunded or other measures taken all the time when they're based on invalid information. Hence, why I was asking what options there are for these situations. I know that if I saw CSCO go down 40% and the info scanned on official sources that I would dump a ton of money into buying it up if I had it available. I mean, hell, it's Cisco Systems who practically owns the internet. They'll be back up from that hit and fairly quickly. To find out that was all just because some over-worked programmer put a comma where there should have been a period would have me on the warpath if trend was actually the other way. With the amount of money that flows through such a system, there has to be some kind of process for dealing with these things. If you don't know, then no worries. There's no need to jump on me for asking a question when a simple ""I don't know"" would suffice."


I disagree with the reply.   Your both impressions are correct. -   Do not close old credit cards because they keep your credit rating high (fico score) -   Also low utilization that credit cards report to credit rating companies, improves your rating.


Then tax the 1% and tell the NY government to knock it off with shitty building codes, you need more construction, right?    You getting upset with people maximizing their investments is futile.  If you own something, IT IS YOUR JOB TO MAXIMIZE ITS VALUE.


10 year US Treasury bonds are currently yielding 3.46%. If you're offered an investment that looks better than that, you should ask yourself why big investors are putting their money in US Treasuries instead of what you've been offered. And obviously at 3.46% per year, you're not going to get rich quick -- it will take you over twenty years to double your money, and that's without allowing for inflation.


> You cant teach fantasy football.  > I agree that it isn't worth much, but to speak as though its completely worthless is ignorant.    There are people who play daily fantasy football who earn a fortune.       There are people who major in English, and move onto very successful writing careers in many different areas.      Neither area is a very safe career to support a family.  Both are more small % of people making great incomes, and most making nothing.


"> The latest outbreak was first noted by iwaspoisoned.com, a website that crowdsources reports of customer illnesses following visits to restaurants. The goal, it says, is ""safer food, safer communities and a healthier economy."" Yet, as Bloomberg reported last week, hedge funds looking to profit from others' bad luck can also access a ""souped up"" version of the site for a $5,000 monthly fee. >  > Aaron Allen, principal at Aaron Allen & Associates, a restaurant industry consultancy, posited in a LinkedIn post on Monday morning that the Chipotle illness might not just be a matter of luck. ""A lot of things stacked up that made it suspicious,"" he told Bloomberg in an interview on Monday, ""and when you look at it from a statistical point of view, even more suspicious."""


You aren't getting a straight answer because nobody knows why those regulations are the way they are. Everyone has to give this information to open the brokerage account or for any access to the US financial system whether it is with a bank account, or a brokerage account. Everyone also typically gives this information to their employer to be employed at all for IRS regulations. The SEC isn't going to do anything with the data, unless you do something illegal related to the stock market, then they will know who you are. The IRS isn't going to do anything with the data, unless you are noncompliant in paying taxes, then they will know who you are.


"It certainly seems like you are focusing on the emotional factors.  That's your blind spot, and it's the surest path to a situation where your husband gets to say ""I told you so"".  I recommend you steer straight into that blind spot, and focus your studies on the business aspects of buying and owning homes.   You should be able to do spreadsheets 6 ways from Sunday, be able to recite every tax deduction you'll get as a homeowner, know the resale impacts of 1 bathroom vs 2, tell a dirty house from a broken house, etc.  Everybody's got their favorites, mine are a bit dated but I like Robert Irwin and Robert Allen's books.  For instance: a philosophy of Allen's that I really like: never sell.  This avoids several problems, like the considerable costs of money, time and nerves of actually selling a house, stress about house prices, mistaking your house's equity for an ATM machine, and byzantine rules for capital gains tax mainly if you rent out the house, which vary dramatically by nation.  In fact the whole area of taxes needs careful study.  There's another side to the business of home ownership, and that's renting to others.  There's a whole set of economics there - and that is a factor in what you buy.  Now AirBNB adds a new wrinkle because there's some real money there.  Come to understand that market well enough to gauge whether a duplex or triplex will be a money maker.  Many regular folk like you have retired early and live off the rental income from their properties.  JoeTaxpayer has an interesting way of looking at the finances of housing: if a house doesn't make sense as a a rental unit, maybe it doesn't make sense as a live-in either.   So learn how to identify those fundamentals - the numbers.  And get in the habit of evaluating houses.  Work it regularly until it's second nature.  Then, yes, you'll see houses you fall in love with, partly because the numbers work.  It also helps to be handy.  It really, really changes the economics if you can do your own quality work, because you don't need to spend any money on labor to convert a dirty house into a clean house.  And lots of people do, and there's a whole SE just for that.  There is a huge difference between going down to the local building supply and getting the water pipe you need, vs. having to call a plumber.  And please deal with local businesses, please don't go to the Big Box stores, their service is abominable, they will cheerfully sell you a gadget salad of junk that doesn't work together, and I can't imagine a colder and less inviting scene to come up as a handy person."


Furthermore, in 2003 when the Nissan plant expanded in Canton, MS (suburb of Jackson), which is a very similar job market to Montgomery, AL, three times as many people [applied](http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/837740/posts). Keep in mind that the job market was pretty good in Jackson at the time. Basically, they open these plants in the South where labor is cheap and Union strength is low. For the applicants, one of these jobs could be the key to a better future due to a pay rate that is much higher than the local average. Not only is this the case for uneducated and unskilled workers, but it is even attractive to those who are educated and likely underpaid due to the economics of the region.  TL;DR Nothing to see [here](http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/05/30/1096008/-When-good-jobs-are-available-the-queue-goes-around-the-block)...


">> So, for every trading partner, you need a unique EDI process.  > You don't have EDI operators in US?   Trust me: those ""EDI operators"" (called ""EDI Service Bureaus"" in the US) have a unique EDI map for each trading partner, because, as I said, each trading partner sends the EDI data in a completely different way.  And EDI service Bureaus charge $$$ per message... so a lot of businesses who are heavy into EDI (like my company) find it more cost effective to have in-house EDI operation.  Also, once the custom EDI map is done, it will probably be used with no changes for the next 10 years... at least...  > In our process we ideally have PO number...  Even if you have a PO number, each supplier sends the EDI invoice in a totally different format.  In any case, freight invoices have to be matched to warehouse freight records, goods-receipt invoices have to be verified against receiving in the warehouse, office supplies invoices have to be reviewed to make sure allowed items were ordered, charges for temporary labor have to be approved by hiring managers, invoices for legal work have to be matched Matter cases, etc.  Shortly, invoices from suppliers are for many different types of services handled by many different departments."


"Boston here. Cabs here are incredibly overpriced and hard to find outside out a few areas which always have cabs in them. Dispatchers are slow, rude and cabs dont always turn up. Uber has been a breath of fresh air in this neighborhood from a consumer POV.  That being said - this stuff with Lyft is some underhanded bullshit. Uber has positive PR already from consumers, which is why they're able to be a business as well as an advocacy group for breaking down taxi monopolies. This kind of shit would put them on the wrong side of consumers, who atleast in the Boston area more or less view them as the ""good guys""."


It depends on what your goals are, your age, how much debt you have, etc. Assuming -- and we all know what happens when you assume -- that your financial life is otherwise in order, the 5% to 10% range you're talking about isn't overinvesting.  You won't have a lot of company; most people don't own any. One comment on this part: I have some gold (GLD), but not much ... Gold and GLD are not the same thing at all.  Owning shares of the SPDR Gold Trust is not the same thing as owning gold coins or bars.  You're achieving different ends by owning GLD shares as opposed to the physical yellow metal.  GLD will follow the spot price of gold pretty closely, but it isn't the same thing as physical ownership.


sure, thats the whole purpose of getting yourself to a point where you can run a business    to take that away because it causes an 'imbalance' is like taking away someones savings because its not fair that they have money to bargain with against someone who has no savings


I'd contact paypal to request clarification.  In the meantime, most banks will credit outgoing transfers immediately but process later, and only debit incoming after it passes through a processing team. So while the money will go out right away it may take a few days for your bank to actually process the withdrawal and the subsequent reversal from Paypal. In reality Paypal doesn't usually recieve the money immediately either, but they extend you credit to speed up things. Either way, it doesn't hurt to contact Paypal to make sure they have reverted the amount to your bank, and if they confirm such you can also reach out to your bank and ask where the money is stuck. Usually delays like this will happen in the interface between two unrelated financial institutions.


It depends.  If you’re a lowly peon, bankrupting is bad because you deprive the hard-working bourgeois who have worked very hard to give you some debt, and by not repaying your debt to them, you are punishing their business success and depriving them of their rightfully owned interest (and principal). And this is not moral at all, as this is highly frowned upon by the lord Jesus Christ himself.  However, if you’re a big croporation, bankrupcy is good because it enables you to restructure your financial environment to insure a better efficiency in maximizing the debt-to-equity ratio of your stakeholders without tying them up with excessive liability that would be detrimental to their cash flow positivity.


In the world, are large market segments where many motorcycle investor and motorcycle showroom, where are available all types motorcycle. If you are looking for Antique Indian motorcycle to improve a vintage motorcycle you have obtained, then “Geloman’s Indian Spares” is the best platform for you! Our workshop is great locations for all Indian motorcycle spare parts collectible products to show up. We have many years of working experience in selling quality spare parts and classy motorcycle at an affordable price.


"You cannot determine this solely by the ticker length. However, there are some conventions that may help steer you there. Nasdaq has 2-4 base letters BATS has 4 base letters NYSE equity securities have 1-4 base letters. NYSE Mkt (formerly Amex) have 1-4 base letters. NYSE Arca has 4 base letters OTC has 4 base letters. Security types other than equities may have additional letters added, and each exchange (and data vendors) have different conventions for how this is handled. So if you see ""T"" for a US-listed security it would be only be either NASDAQ, NYSE or NYSE Mkt. If you see ""ANET"" then you cannot tell which exchange it is listed on.  (In this case, ANET Arista Networks is actually a NYSE stock). For some non-equity security types, such as hybrids, and debt instruments, some exchanges add ""P"" to the end for ""preferreds"" (Nasdaq and OTC) and NYSE/NYSE Mkt have a variety of methods (including not adding anything) to the ticker.  Examples include NYSE:TFG, NYSEMkt:IPB, Nasdaaq: AGNCP, Nasdaq:OXLCN.  It all becomes rather confusing given the changes in conventions over the years. Essentially, you require data that provides you with ticker, listing location and security type. The exchanges allocate security tickers in conjunction with the SEC so there are no overlaps.  eg. The same ticker cannot represent two different securities. However, tickers can be re-used.  For example, the ticker AB has been used by the following companies:"


If you lived in a gang banger / drug dealer's house, ate his food, watched his TV, wore the clothes he provides, *while* being a legal adult fully able to move out and be independent if one chooses... wouldn't that *imply* acceptance and approval of the person's drug dealing lifestyle?


A quick search shows that https://www.westernunion.com/de/en/send-money/start.html says they will transfer €5,000 for a cost of €2.90. Assuming you can do a transfer every week, that would be six weeks at a cost of €17.40. €17.40 is slightly less than €1,500.00. I'm sure there are more ways.


It's interesting how the sentiment of a thread or phrasing of content affects voting. I basically said:  > If a company wants to take advantage of the infrastructure (e.g. police, fire department, legal system, roads, street cleaning, clean water, etc.) then they should pay their fair share. What's so hard to understand about that?  Yet that gets way up and mine goes way down. Just interesting.


The interest on a loan secured by a rental property is not deductible at all. The interest on a loan used to buy (or improve) the rental property is deductible, regardless of where you got it from (you can take money from your credit card to buy a rental - it will be deductible). The deductability is per the use of the money, not the source, with the cash-out up to 100K from your primary residence being the notable exception.


"There are a few questions that need qualification, and a bit on the understanding of what is being 'purchased'. There are two axioms that require re-iteraton, Death, and Taxes. Now, The First is eventually inevitable, as most people will eventually die. It depends what is happening now, that determines what will happen tomorrow, and the concept of certainty. The Second Is a pay as you go plan. If you are contemplating what will heppen tomorrow, you have to look at what types of ""Insurance"" are available, and why they were invented in the first place. The High seas can be a rough travelling ground, and Not every shipment of goods and passengers arrived on time, and one piece. This was the origin of ""insurance"", when speculators would gamble on the safe arrival of a ship laden with goods, at the destination, and for this they received a 'cut' on the value of the goods shipped. Thus the concept of 'Underwriting', and the VALUE associated with the cargo, and the method of transport. Based on an example gallion of good repair and a well seasoned Captain and crew, a lower rate of 'insurance' was deemed needed, prior to shipment, than some other 'rating agency - or underwriter'. Now, I bring this up, because, it depends on the Underwriter that you choose as to the payout, and the associated Guarantee of Funds, that you will receive if you happen to need to 'collect' on the 'Insurance Contract'. In the case of 'Death Benefit' insurance, You will never see the benefit, at the end, however, while the policy is in force (The Term), it IS an Asset, that would be considered in any 'Estate Planning' exercise. First, you have to consider, your Occupation, and the incidence of death due to occupational hazards. Generally this is considered in your employment negotiations, and is either reflected in the salary, or if it is a state sponsored Employer funded, it is determined by your occupational risk, and assessed to the employer, and forms part of the 'Cost-of-doing-business', in that this component or 'Occupational Insurance' is covered by that program. The problem, is 'disability' and what is deemed the same by the experience of the particular 'Underwriter', in your location. For Death Benefits, Where there is an Accident, for Motor Vehicle Accidents (and 50,000 People in the US die annually) these are covered by Motor Vehicle Policy contracts, and vary from State to State. Check the Registrar of State Insurance Co's for your state to see who are the market leaders and the claim /payout ratios, compared to insurance in force.  Depending on the particular, 'Underwiriter' there may be significant differences, and different results in premium, depending on your employer. (Warren Buffet did not Invest in GEICO, because of his benevolence to those who purchase Insurance Policies with GEICO). The original Poster mentions some paramaters such as Age, Smoking, and other 'Risk factors'.... , but does not mention the 'Soft Factors' that are not mentioned.  They are, 'Risk Factors' such, as Incidence of Murder, in the region you live, the Zip Code, you live at, and the endeavours that you enjoy when you are not in your occupation. From the Time you get up in the morning, till the time you fall asleep (And then some), you are 'AT Risk' , not from a event standpoint, but from a 'Fianancial risk' standpoint. This is the reason that all of the insurance contracts, stipulate exclusions, and limits on when they will pay out. This is what is meant by the 'Soft Risk Factors', and need to be ascertained. IF you are in an occupation that has a limited exposure to getting killed 'on the job', then you will be paying a lower premium, than someone who has a high risk occupation.  IT used to be that 'SkySkraper Iron Workers', had a high incidence of injury and death , but over the last 50 years, this has changed. The US Bureau of Labor Statistics lists these 10 jobs as the highest for death (per 100,000 workers). The scales tilt the other way for these occupations: (In Canada, the Cheapest Rate for Occupational Insurance is Lawyer, and Politician) So, for the rest in Sales, management etc, the national average is 3 to 3.5 depending on the region, of deaths per 100,000 employed in that occupation. So, for a 30 year old bank worker, the premium is more like a 'forced savings plan', in the sense that you are paying towards something in the future. The 'Risk of Payout' in Less than 6 months is slim. For a Logging Worker or Fisher(Men&Women) , the risk is very high that they might not return from that voyage for fish and seafood. If you partake in 'Extreme Sports' or similar risk factors, then consider getting 'Whole Term- Life' , where the premium is spread out over your working lifetime, and once you hit retirement (55 or 65) then the occupational risk is less, and the plan will payout at the age of 65, if you make it that far, and you get a partial benefit. IF you have a 'Pension Plan', then that also needs to be factored in, and be part of a compreshensive thinking on where you want to be 5 years from today."


Would you mind adding where that additional value comes from, if not from the losses of other investors?  You asked this in a comment, but it seems to be the key to the confusion.   Corporations generate money (profits, paid as dividends) from sales.  Sales trade products for money.  The creation of the product creates value.  A car is worth more than General Motors pays for its components and inputs, even including labor and overhead as inputs.  That's what profit is:  added value.  The dividend is the return that the stock owner gets for owning the stock.   This can be a bit confusing in the sense that some stocks don't pay dividends.  The theory is that the stock price is still based on the future dividends (or the liquidation price, which you could also consider a type of dividend).  But the current price is mostly based on the likelihood that the stock price will increase rather than any expected dividends during ownership of the stock.   A comment calls out the example of Berkshire Hathaway.  Berkshire Hathaway is a weird case.  It operates more like a mutual fund than a company.  As such, investors prefer that it reinvest its money rather than pay a dividend.  If investors want money from it, they sell shares to other investors.  But that still isn't really a zero sum game, as the stock increases in value over time.   There are other stocks that don't pay dividends.  For example, Digital Equipment Corporation went through its entire existence without ever paying a dividend.  It merged with Compaq, paying investors for owning the stock.   Overall, you can see this in that the stock market goes up on average.  It might have a few losing years, but pick a long enough time frame, and the market will increase during it.  If you sell a stock today, it's because you value the money more than the stock.  If it goes up tomorrow, that's the buyer's good luck.  If it goes down, the buyer's bad luck.  But it shouldn't matter to you.  You wanted money for something.  You received the money.   The increase in the stock market overall is an increase in value.  It is completely unrelated to trading losses.  Over time, trading gains outweigh trading losses for investors as a group.  Individual investors may depart from that, but the overall gain is added value.   If the only way to make gains in the stock market was for someone else to take a loss, then the stock market wouldn't be able to go up.  To view it as a zero sum game, we have to ignore the stocks themselves.  Then each transaction is a payment (loss) for one party and a receipt (gain) for the other.  But the stocks themselves do have value other than what we pay for them.  The net present value of of future payments (dividends, buyouts, etc.) has an intrinsic worth.  It's a risky worth.  Some stocks will turn out to be worthless, but on average the gains outweigh the losses.