If you're into math, do this thought experiment: Consider the outcome X of a random walk process (a stock doesn't behave this way, but for understanding the question you asked, this is useful): On the first day, X=some integer X1. On each subsequent day, X goes up or down by 1 with probability 1/2. Let's think of buying a call option on X. A European option with a strike price of S that expires on day N, if held until that day and then exercised if profitable, would yield a value Y = min(X[N]-S, 0). This has an expected value E[Y] that you could actually calculate. (should be related to the binomial distribution, but my probability & statistics hat isn't working too well today) The market value V[k] of that option on day #k, where 1 < k < N, should be V[k] = E[Y]|X[k], which you can also actually calculate. On day #N, V[N] = Y. (the value is known) An American option, if held until day #k and then exercised if profitable, would yield a value Y[k] = min(X[k]-S, 0).  For the moment, forget about selling the option on the market. (so, the choices are either exercise it on some day #k, or letting it expire) Let's say it's day k=N-1.  If X[N-1] >= S+1 (in the money), then you have two choices: exercise today, or exercise tomorrow if profitable. The expected value is the same. (Both are equal to X[N-1]-S). So you might as well exercise it and make use of your money elsewhere. If X[N-1] <= S-1 (out of the money), the expected value is 0, whether you exercise today, when you know it's worthless, or if you wait until tomorrow, when the best case is if X[N-1]=S-1 and X[N] goes up to S, so the option is still worthless. But if X[N-1] = S (at the money), here's where it gets interesting. If you exercise today, it's worth 0. If wait until tomorrow, there's a 1/2 chance it's worth 0 (X[N]=S-1), and a 1/2 chance it's worth 1 (X[N]=S+1). Aha! So the expected value is 1/2. Therefore you should wait until tomorrow. Now let's say it's day k=N-2.  Similar situation, but more choices: If X[N-2] >= S+2, you can either sell it today, in which case you know the value = X[N-2]-S, or you can wait until tomorrow, when the expected value is also X[N-2]-S. Again, you might as well exercise it now. If X[N-2] <= S-2, you know the option is worthless. If X[N-2] = S-1, it's worth 0 today, whereas if you wait until tomorrow, it's either worth an expected value of 1/2 if it goes up (X[N-1]=S), or 0 if it goes down, for a net expected value of 1/4, so you should wait. If X[N-2] = S, it's worth 0 today, whereas tomorrow it's either worth an expected value of 1 if it goes up, or 0 if it goes down -> net expected value of 1/2, so you should wait. If X[N-2] = S+1, it's worth 1 today, whereas tomorrow it's either worth an expected value of 2 if it goes up, or 1/2 if it goes down (X[N-1]=S) -> net expected value of 1.25, so you should wait. If it's day k=N-3, and X[N-3] >= S+3 then E[Y] = X[N-3]-S and you should exercise it now; or if X[N-3] <= S-3 then E[Y]=0.  But if X[N-3] = S+2 then there's an expected value E[Y] of (3+1.25)/2 = 2.125 if you wait until tomorrow, vs. exercising it now with a value of 2; if X[N-3] = S+1 then E[Y] = (2+0.5)/2 = 1.25, vs. exercise value of 1; if X[N-3] = S then E[Y] = (1+0.5)/2 = 0.75 vs. exercise value of 0; if X[N-3] = S-1 then E[Y] = (0.5 + 0)/2 = 0.25, vs. exercise value of 0; if X[N-3] = S-2 then E[Y] = (0.25 + 0)/2 = 0.125, vs. exercise value of 0. (In all 5 cases, wait until tomorrow.) You can keep this up; the recursion formula is E[Y]|X[k]=S+d = {(E[Y]|X[k+1]=S+d+1)/2 + (E[Y]|X[k+1]=S+d-1) for N-k > d > -(N-k), when you should wait and see} or {0 for d <= -(N-k), when it doesn't matter and the option is worthless} or {d for d >= N-k, when you should exercise the option now}. The market value of the option on day #k should be the same as the expected value to someone who can either exercise it or wait. It should be possible to show that the expected value of an American option on X is greater than the expected value of a European option on X. The intuitive reason is that if the option is in the money by a large enough amount that it is not possible to be out of the money, the option should be exercised early  (or sold), something a European option doesn't allow, whereas if it is nearly at the money, the option should be held, whereas if it is out of the money by a large enough amount that it is not possible to be in the money, the option is definitely worthless. As far as real securities go, they're not random walks (or at least, the probabilities are time-varying and more complex), but there should be analogous situations. And if there's ever a high probability a stock will go down, it's time to exercise/sell an in-the-money American option, whereas you can't do that with a European option. edit: ...what do you know: the computation I gave above for the random walk isn't too different conceptually from the Binomial options pricing model.


If you're sinking 1k/year into it, and the value is rising by $100k in 15 years, or $6k/year, you have a fine investment. Ignore the wife, she just wants something even better.


"Somebody ELI5 why I should trust a ""currency"" whose value bounces around on the whims of [tulip-craze](http://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/dutch_tulip_bulb_market_bubble.asp) fanboys? Especially one that is second only to ""the dark web"" for rumors of:     1. Money laundering.     2. ""Hoarding"" of cash.     3. Tax avoidance."


"Since you mention bounced checks in the beginning of your piece, it's worth mentioning that bounced checks can land you in prison, depending on various circumstances.   In this case, it's because you're committing a fraud, namely offering someone a piece of paper and claiming it's worth $500 or whatever when it's really worthless (because you don't have the funds).  Simply owing a debt is not considered criminal, but proffering payment that is not actually valid is considered defrauding the person you are trying to pay. This check fraud information site discusses the different penalties in each state (as this is primarily covered by laws at the state level).  It is never ""until you have repaid the check,"" of course; it is in most states a misdemeanor (<= 1 year in jail), though some states do make it a felony for larger amounts or repeat violations.  These penalties are also typically at the judge's discretion, and in many cases you are only fined. Some states have a minimum dollar amount for it to be a criminal offense; most seem to be around $500 or so, though there is quite a lot of variability. Some real world examples of this include former NBA player Antoine Walker and former NFL player Joey Porter."


In such cases, it has a EIN, like any business would. Even absent the rent you suggest, the condo should have reserve funds, similar to an individual's emergency account, only more codified as to level and flows. These funds should be earning interest.


Buying votes is illegal.  Resources require other resources to acquire. It helps if you properly incentivize people to get them for you, and pay fair market price for the resources upon reciept.  The justice department and congress allow these frivolous lawsuits to take place.  Targetted by anti-trust legistlation. Again, this has more to do with the willingness of the government to follow its own laws.  95% of these issues you've raised are directly related to government corruption and dysfunction. So why the hell do you want to give the government more power to be corrupt and dysfunctional?


Lets do the math (assuming a lot of stuff, like your interest rates and that you make the contribution at the beginning of the year, also your tax bracket at the withdrawal time frame.) 1.) Beginning of year 1 Roth Option $5k contribution Non Roth Option $5k contribution 2.) Beginning of year 2 Roth Option $5000 + $150 interest + 5K contribution = $10150 Non Roth Option $5000 + $75 interest + 5K contribution = $10075 3.) End of year 2 Buy a house! yay! Roth Option---before withdrawal account value = 10150+10150*.03=10454.5 after withdrawl (assuming 38% tax on earnings withdrawal (10%penalty + 28% income tax estimate.) = 10327.17 Non Roth Option = 10 226.125 So you are talking about a significant amount of paperwork to either 1.) Net yourself $100 toward the purchase 2.) Cost yourself $226 on the purchase but have $454.50 in your roth ira. I am not sure I would do that, but it might be worth it.


I just finished a high frequency trading project. Individuals can do it, but you need a lot of capital. You can get a managed server in Times Square for $1500/month, giving you access to 90% of the US exchanges that matter, their data farms are within 3 milliseconds of distance (latency). You can also get more servers in the same building as the exchanges, if you know where to look ;) thats all I can divulge good luck


"It's pretty easy for foreign scammers to get a US phone number or email.   A domestic bank account is a little harder.  Very likely the direct contact  is a US citizen or a legal immigrant.  The Nigerian may be completely made-up to throw you off the scent.  And that person can be found, dunned, or deported, and there's even a small chance of reversing the bank transfers. It's also hard for foreign scammers to sound American on the phone, again suggesting a domestic scam or one with domestic agents.  If you or your son is willing to do a serious amount of skill-building and legwork, you can uncover evidence by filing a lawsuit.  Once you have done so, you can use the legal processes of discovery to force banks etc. to give you information they would never give willingly.  There are countless details.  Lawyers get paid to get the details right.   Suing actual people can backfire, they can countersue.  But since you do not know their real name, you would probably be filing a ""John Doe"" lawsuit.  ""John Doe"" is a placeholder: the idea being that you will later, through discovery, uncover the defendants' real names.  For a novice exploring the legal system for the first time, there's a big advantage - John Doe never countersues or quashes, he never gets in your way or wastes your time... heck, he never even shows up in court! And when you collect evidence via discovery, you can take that to law enforcement or immigration.   It goes without sayi-- well, there's no need to go into that.  Just realize you did goof, and make sure you learn the lessons."


1 reason is  Leverage.... If you are buying out of the money options you get much more bang for your buck if the stock moves in your favor.  The flipside is it is much more likely that you would lose all of your investment.


Increasing demand, the price people are willing to pay, will also increase profits, leading to the virtuous cycle you describe. The government spending tax dollars, also leads to growth.  The 2 sides balance out.  The difference between CEO pay and employee pay is that employees spend their money, while CEOs save money. So by taxing profits, money is put back into the economy.


The cable companies are not monopolies.  In the broadband market they compete with telcos and in the video market they compete with a telco and two satellite companies and sometimes an over builder.  The caps instituted so far are 250mg, levels that only BitTorrent users break.  This article is ridiculous hyperbole.


local by me is a market/store that is basically veggies and fruits.  they have some meat, some fish, but people are there for the vegetables and ethnic fruits  I rarely go because I can see from the main road all their parking spaces and hardly ever is there a spot available.  when I do see a parking space, I wheel in and buy like $40 worth, mostly veggies.  high quality, low prices, great variety  point is, people want to pick out there own fresh stuff


No.  Because the person deciding this was the way to do things failed to account for the counter pressures, and just forced it down peoples’ throats.  Just like your economic views fail to account for the counter pressures.  What would be counter pressures in these previous situations?  Other economic systems in proximity, social values, economic bullies who have the financial clout to push their way harder, crime that now has an easier avenue of gain, and on and on.  Edit:  Let’s make a point to not forget about entrenched management.


There are two main factors at play to consider.   Also, realize that no advice is universal. You need to evaluate your exact situation and do what is best for you.


Lol and a company spending more than they need to on labor is reality? Thanks for pointing me in the right direction. Ill be sure to run all future thoughts I have by you to ensure that fit into your 'reality'.


I think this varies considerably depending on your situation.  I've heard people say 6 month's living expenses, and I know Suze Orman recommended bumping that to 8 months in our current economy. My husband and I have no children, lots of student loan debts, but we pay off our credit cards in full each month and are working to save up for a house.  We've talked through a few different what-if scenarios.  If one of us were to lose our job, we have savings to cover the difference between our reduced income and paying the bills for 6 or 8 months while the other person regained employment.  If both of us were to lose our jobs simultaneously, our savings wouldn't hold us over for more than 3 or 4 months, but if that were to happen, we would likely take advantage of the opportunity to relocate closer to our families, and possibly even move in to my parent's house for a short time.  With no children and no mortgage, our commitments are few, so I don't feel the need to have a very large emergency cash fund, especially with student loans to pay off. Think through a few scenarios for your life and see what you would need.  Take into consideration expenses to break a rental lease, cell phone contract, or other commitments.  Then, start saving toward your goal. Also see answers to a similar question here.


"So here's the sad truth. He might actually be making a return on his investment. Not because it's right or because the system works, but in all these schemes there are a range of people that actually do make money.  In addition to that, there is that fact that he ""believes"" that he is doing a good thing, and is unwilling to discuss it.  So, if he is making, even a tiny return, and really believes that he is making a large return, or that that large return is just around the bend, your never going to convince him otherwise.  You have two real options; If he will listen, go though and look at money in v.s. money out. If money out is larger then money in, your screwed.  Make sure to point out that he should look at real money in (left a bank account) and real money out (deposited to a bank account). Again be prepared for the fact that he is actually making money. Some people in the pyramid will make money, it's just never as much, or as many people as they make it out to be.  Don't attack the system, attack other aspects. Try and argue liquidity, or FDIC insurance. Again not trying to show why the system is bad, but why a investment in foo instead may be better. If nothing else, go with diversify. Never put all your money in one spot, even if it's a really good spot. At least in that case he will have some money left over in the end. That said, your friend may not go for it. May just put on blinders, and may just stick finger in ears. Move to option two. Respect his wishes, and set boundaries. ""Ok, I hear you, you like system X, I won't bring it up again. Do me a favor, don't you bring it up again either. Let's just leave this with religion and politics."" If he continues to bring it up, then when he does, just point out you agreed not to discuss the issue, and if he continues to push it, rethink your friendship. If you both respect one another, you should be able to respect each others' decisions.  If you can't then, sadly, you may need to stop spending time with one another."


In a system where electronic payment is well developed you can consider the following 2 scenarios: Now let us zoom in. Regardless of what costs are actually charged, it should not be hard to see which system is most (real cost) efficient once electronical payments are well developed. And so, the conclusion is not hard to reach:


The all time low on the Canadian dollar was 61.79 US cents on Jan 21, 2002.  Yes, it will now cost you about US$1.01 to pay back a Canadian dollar, if when you borrowed you agreed to pay in their currency.


Well, no, they don't need email per se. But the fact that they don't understand how to use something so simple and so pervasive really might say something about their character and ability: whether they are willing and able to understand how technology effects the battle field.


The market is simply gapping at these times, some news may have come out that makes the market gap on the open from its previous close. Being FX, the market in one country might be trading and then at the start of the hour trading in a different country may commence, causing a small gap in price. Generally many things could cause the price to gap up or down, and these gaps sometime can occur at the start of a new hour or other timeframe you are using. They do tend to happen more often at the start of a new day's trading on a daily chart, especially with stocks.


"I made my statement in reference to another user saying ""there is no indication of [uber tracking you pre and post ride]"" I said that the uber app having your location when its opened pre-ride as evidence that uber tracks your location post ride and pre ride  You said it's not.  So unless you want me to open up uber to show that it knows my location upon opening without me ordering a ride I'm not sure what you are looking for.   In other words I stated that the sky is blue, you asked me to state why I think the sky is blue.   Your repeated attempts at drawing some grand pedantic argument are intriguing though"


A typical HELOC will have about $300 in fees to open it. From there, it's up to you how much or how long to use it.  I'd shop around to find the bank that offers the right product for you.


"As Mhoran answered, typical match, but some have no match at all, so not bad.  The loan provision means you can borrow up to $50k or 50% of your balance, whichever is less. 5 year payback for any loan, but a 10 year payback for a home purchase.  I am on the side of ""don't do it"" but finance is personal, and in some situations it does make sense. The elephant in this room is the expenses within the 401(k). Simply put, a high enough expense will wipe out any benefit from tax deferral. If you are in this situation, I recommend depositing to the match, but not a cent more.  Last, do they offer a Roth 401(k) option? There's a high probability you will never be in as low a tax bracket as the next few years, now's the time to focus on the Roth deposits, if not in the 401(k), then in an IRA."


"And here we find the antisemitic dickhead.  New order directly from Tel Aviv: ""Stop posting your stupidity on the internet. The article was interesting but shut the hell up""  Also gender neutral uniforms are your biggest fear right now? The Jewish world conspiracy has the masterplan to give out these uniforms? I will never understand you guys."


"This is a classic correlation does not imply causation situation.  There are (at least) three issues at play in this question: If you are swing- or day-trading then the first and second issues can definitely affect your trading.  A higher-price, higher-volume stock will have smaller (percentage) volatility fluctuations within a very small period of time. However, in general, and especially when holding any position for any period of time during which unknowns can become known (such as Netflix's customer-loss announcement) it is a mistake to feel ""safe"" based on price alone. When considering longer-term investments (even weeks or months), and if you were to compare penny stocks with blue chip stocks, you still might find more ""stability"" in the higher value stocks.  This is a correlation alone — in other words, a stable, reliable stock probably has a (relatively) high price but a high price does not mean it's reliable. As Joe said, the stock of any company that is exposed to significant risks can drop (or rise) by large amounts suddenly, and it is common for blue-chip stocks to move significantly in a period of months as changes in the market or the company itself manifest themselves. The last thing to remember when you are looking at raw dollar amounts is to remember to look at shares outstanding.  Netflix has a price of $79 to Ford's $12; yet Ford has a larger market cap because there are nearly 4 billion shares compared to Netflix's 52m."


You can save a bit by getting an interior cabin, but it can be a bit weird to be in a room with NO window and NO natural daylight.  It's strangely really easy to lose all track of time, especially if you don't set an alarm.  We spent very little time in our stateroom outside of sleeping, or changing clothes etc. So IMHO there's no reason to overspend on the stateroom. OTOH, A room along the outside of the ship will cost more, but might be worth the cost difference.  You don't need a full balcony or any of that, however a simple window even if partially occluded by something, really changes the feel of the room and makes it a lot less 'cave' like. JohnFx covered just about everything else I'd have had to say.


In Australia, any income you earn is taxable despite where it came from. Using your example your taxable income is $70,000. Keep in mind that with a business even as a sole trader any business expenses that contribute to the earning of your business income is deductible, reducing the final amount of tax you'll have to pay.  The ATO website has lots of good information and examples to look at including tax rates.  If your total income is pushing  into a higher tax bracket over 30c tax per $1 earned, it may be worth looking at shifting your business to operate under a company structure that just has a fixed tax rate around 30c per $1.  That said, for me, I don't want the paperwork overhead of a company yet so I'm running my side business as a sole trader too. I'd rather do that and keep it easy for now while my business gets profitable that waste time on admin structures for tax reasons even if in the shortterm it may mean slightly higher tax. In the end, you only pay tax on profit (income minus expenses) as opposed to raw/gross income.  For more info there are good books in the bookshops or local library (to read free) on starting a business on the side while still working. They discuss these issues too.


I'd like to make two points: To focus on your test case of Japan.  You point out that about a third of them believe they'll work until they die.  That means more than a majority of them believe they'll retire.  In a democracy where a majority of people make decisions it is completely expected that the majority will dictate the policy.  Of course there is fuzziness around that last statement because people who believe they'll retire could very well be of the mindset that they'll handle their retirement savings themselves rather than rely on government.  Similarly some people that expect to work until they die might realize that there's a risk that they won't be able to. To focus on the case of government run pensions.  The pension program that a government runs isn't like a private savings plan where its purpose is to get you a good rate of return.  At best it's an insurance policy; more accurately it's just a tax and you should think of it this way.  The reason you should think of it that way is several fold.  One, if the pension fund is ever short, the government will make up the difference from the general fund.  Two, the government can spend the money from the pension fund on other programs if the law changes which, over the course of a lifetime, is entirely possible.  Three, no one has a legal right to withdraw their contributions directly.  Four, the point of the program is to take care of old people so they aren't starving in the street.  To do this, they take the money of the young and give it to to old people.  The money you pay in doesn't go to investments of any sort, it goes directly to the elderly.  Ultimately this is why you can't opt-out and why you should think of those contributions as a tax and not as savings.


I'm not certain if you can get a debit card with it, but if you have a PNC in your area, they have a special kind of account designed around teaching financial literacy to children: https://www1.pnc.com/sisforsavings/tour.html . I'm not sure if you can get a debit card for the child or not, but the custodian gets one I believe, and the child gets a special online login to manage the money, so if you don't mind the name issue, it might be worth looking into. If you don't have PNC, maybe one of the banks in your area have a similar program?


As I see it, there are 2 potential solutions - Joining with another person or 2, and buying a house with multiple bedrooms. I am in the US, and I've seen immigrants living in tight accommodations that would seem unacceptable to most of us. But, with the combined incomes, they were able to buy the house and quickly pay for it, and then buy another.  $800/mo is about $5/hr. Below US minimum wage. Use your skills to take on additional work on line. A virtual assistant position can increase your income quite a bit.  Keep in mind, as someone on the other side of the world, my advice may not be practical for you, these are just my thoughts.


"One must point out: The Fed has never in their history, correctly ""expected"" any financial crises.  They have been surprised 100% of the time.  They weren't even aware of the biggest financial collapse in US history in 2007-8 before it happened -- when rhe blogosphere and so-called ""fringe economists"" were warning about it daily.  The fact that Yellen doesn't ""expect it"" should be assumed at this point. As should its inevitability."


From what I understand (I never had an RESP but would consider one for a future child), with the right type of withdrawal, you can use the RESP money for anything education related. Basically, know that the RESP is considered to have three compartments within it: (1) your contributions, (2) contributions from the government through the Canada Education Savings Grant (CESG), and (3) the return on the investment, or accumulated earnings. The government contributes an extra 20% on top of your contributions annually by way of the CESG, up to a $500 max. Tuition As you noted, official tuition fees, reported on a fee slip, is where one large chunk of the RESP will go. This will be pulled out of your original contributions and is known as a Post-Secondary Education (PSE) Withdrawal. Different RESP administrators (bank, discount brokerage, etc) determine what sort of proof of enrolment would be required, but it ought to be similar between them and different educational institutions. This withdrawal is not taxable by either you or the student, since the contributions were made with after-tax dollars. Educational Assistance Payments (EAPs) EAPs are for other expenses that the student would incur by being at university. In the first 13 weeks of studies, you can request up to $5000 in EAP withdrawals (full-time studies, $2500 for par-time), after which there is no limit. Each EAP payment is made up of the CESG and accumulated earnings portions of the RESP, whose proportions are determined based on the EAP amount. This is considered taxable income for the student, or beneficiary, in the year the EAP withdrawal is made. It gets a bit fuzzy here, from my understanding. The student would ostensibly be able to purchase anything that they could rationalize as education-related, and I'm not sure what sort of proof different banks would need. Maybe just the confirmation of enrolment is enough. This is the part of my post that should directly answer your question which, using this terminology, boils down to what sorts of expenses can I use the EAP withdrawals for? To this, from what I've read out there, I would say that you could probably purchase anything. From the student's point of view, they are enrolled in a qualifying education institution, and if they don't spend the money on education-related purchases, money required for those purchases will have to come from somewhere else anyway.  Other withdrawals Any other type of withdrawal is like walking through a minefield. You can withdraw the original contributions without paying tax on them, but you would need to pay back the corresponding CESG back to the government. Other types of withdrawals would be taxable and may incur a 20% penalty. I don't have any more details on that. As I mentioned, this is from what I've read and looked into for future RESP purposes. A new concept that has popped up is RESP vs TFSA. The TFSA provides the same tax shelter (after-tax dollar contributions, no tax on the gains), but also allows for no tax on the withdrawals. To add to that, the TFSA withdrawals are tax-free as well. The main benefit that the RESP offers that the TFSA doesn't is the CESG. My current opinion (and I could be wrong) is that you should contribute $2500 annually to the RESP in order to get the $500 max CESG, and anything else that you'd like to contribute should go in a TFSA. But I digress. Hopefully my long-winded response makes some sense. Enjoy.


Did a little bit of digging, and found this article, from Staples High School in Westport, Connecticut.  Hopefully this will be a growing trend.  They say: A personal financial management class will now be offered at the beginning of the upcoming school year (2011-2012). According to the course catalogue, the focus of this course will be using mathematics as a tool in developing financial literacy skills. Topics covered in the course will include: earnings, banking, credit cards, loans, taxes, insurance, investing, loans, budgeting, and buying personal property. “In a perfect world, everyone would be required to take a personal finance course,” Principal John Dodig said.


"It is not allowed to pay refunds to anyone other than the taxpayer. This is due to various tax return fraud schemes that were running around. Banks are required to enforce this. If the direct deposit is denied, a check will be issued. In her name, obviously. What she does with it when she gets it is her business - but I believe that tax refund checks may not be just ""endorsed"", the bank will likely want to see her when you deposit it to your account, even if it is endorsed. For the same reason."


It is absolutely feasible to move your savings into Canada. There are a few ways you can do it. However it is unlikely you will benefit or avoid risk by doing so. You could directly hold your savings in the CAD. Investing in Canadian bonds achieves a similar goal as holding your money in the CAD. By doing so you will be getting re-payed with CAD. Some Canadian companies also trade on US markets. In addition some brokerage firms allow you to trade on Canadian markets. The problem with any of the options is the assumption that Canadian banks will fare better then US banks. The entire globe is very dependent on each other, especially the more developed nations. If large US banks were to fail it would create a domino effect which would spiral into a global credit crunch. It wouldn't matter if your invested in Canadian companies or US companies they would all suffer as would the global economy. So it would probably be more valid to refer to your question - enter link description here If you are referring to weather the Canadian bonds would be a safer investment over US Treasuries it would all depend on the scenario at hand. Investors would probably flock to both treasuries.


You're hysterical and I find your mischaracterization of me insulting and intellectually lazy. I fundamentally disagree with your position that more government intervention will do anything but further harm the people you want to help so bad.    I know you're not able to comprehend this, most people with 18+ years of public school education aren't, but there are other decentralized, community driven solutions to these problems. Outsourcing every fucking to the state has demonstrably failed and will continue to fail in spectacular fashion. The problem with people like you is that you believe that, through coercion of the state, you can equalize every outcome. Attempting that you justify ever increasing tyranny until liberty is all but dead.    The long of the short if it is, you can not legislate equality of outcome, even at the margins. The road to hell is paved with socialist good intentions, which history demonstrates if you care to look.


"I think ""Rich Dad Poor Dad"" is a good read for understanding the basics of personal finance in a non-technical format before actually starting investing."


I would go even farther than Victor's answer.  There is little evidence that candlestick patterns and technical analysis in general have any predictive power.   Even if they did in the past, of which there is some evidence, in modern times they are so easy to do on computers that if they worked algorithmic traders would have scanned almost all traded stocks and bought/sold the stock before you even had a chance to look at the graph. While the best technical traders who are very good at quickly using pattern recognition across many indicators as Victor mentioned might be able to add some advantage.  The odds that a pattern so simple to code such as Bullish Engulfing would have predictive power is tiny.


What you're describing is called timing the market.  That is, if you correctly predict when the market will drop, you can sell before the drop, wait for the drop, then buy after the drop has occurred.  Sell high, buy low. The fundamental problem with that, though, is: What ends up happening, on average, is you end up slightly behind.  There's quite a lot of literature on this; see Betterment's explanation for example.  Forbes (click through ad first) also has a detailed piece on the matter. Now, we're not really talking HFT issues here; and there are some structural things that some argue you can take advantage of (restrictions on some organizational investors, for example, similar to a blackjack dealer who has to hit on 16).  However, everyone else knows about these too - so it's hard to gain much of an edge. Plenty of people say they can time the market right, and even yourself perhaps you timed a particular drop accurately.  This tends to lead to false confidence though; how many drops that you timed badly do you remember? Ultimately, most investors end up slightly down when they attempt to time the market, because of the transaction costs (if you guess two drops, one 'right' and one 'wrong', and they have exactly opposite gains/losses before commissions, you will lose a bit on each due to commission), and because of the overall upward trend in the market (ie, if you picked at random one month a year to be out of the market, you'd lose around 10% annualized gains from doing that; same applies here). All of that aside, there is one major caveat: risk tolerance.  If you are highly risk tolerant, say a 30 year old investing your 401(k), then you should stay in no matter what.  If you're not - say you're 58 and retiring in a few years - then knowledge that there's a higher risk time period coming up might suggest moving to a less risky portfolio, even at the known cost of some gains.


Well, it's the same fundamental principals as all investing.  Buy low, sell high.  Buy things that will be scarce in the future while they're abundant.   Buy up everything and create artificial scarcity.  It's the same thing that's done with diamonds and was done with oil for quite some time.   Small markets like tickets to a show are just much more vulnerable to being cornered.  How do you legislate against ticket scalpers without turning yourself into a hypocrite?   Obviously you're not going to pull the plug on Wall Street or angel investing or any other investing strategy, and you'd have a hell of a time shutting down DeBeers.  Capitalism isn't perfect if your desire is fairness.


I have read this at least a dozen times, and watched several documentaries on it, but this is the clearest explanation yet. Thank you.  I had not really considered the possibility that the fed is not the evil monster it's usually frame as before. Now I'm not sure how bad it is due to these conflicting viewpoints. The worst case I have heard against it (repeatedly) is that it's a privately owned corporation. And that it's for-profit. What is that about?


I would love a citation. I explicitly stated the one I used, which is the most common. I noticed you dodged the second portion though, and went from 50 chemicals to 30. I suspect a few more replies and it will be down to like 5, counting preservatives also in frozen burgers.


One of my first assignments in my new job was to prepare a presentation on the growing domestic oil and natural gas industry and I couldn't agree more with some of the assertions listed in FT's article. US production has slowed in the past few years, but seems to be poised for a very healthy comeback.   Maugeri isn't alone in his predictions.  In 2013 and beyond, opportunities in U.S. energy markets look plentiful; Citi and Goldman Sach’s research units are incredibly bullish for U.S. energy output, with Citi projecting the United States to pass Saudi Arabia and Russia in oil and natural gas production by the end of 2013, and Goldman anticipating the same transfer of dominance to occur in 2017. Beyond the United States, Canadian and Mexican output is also booming, leading Citi to call North America “The New Middle East”.


I funded about a half dozen loans. All were AA or A rated. All but one paid me. The one who stiffed me wiped out all my profit on the others. I ended up with a tiny negative return.


"Jesus Christ, these clowns really are the last to know. The Phillips curve was devoid of logic from the start given that ""employment"" is not, and has never been a measure of earnings.  Maybe next they'll look at their ridiculous employment metrics, and ""discover"" what the rest of us unannointed ones have considered obvious for years."


"When presenting negative P/E values, most brokers and equity analysts show them as ""n.m."", which stands for not meaningful. I have never seen a P/E ratio of 0."


Republicans are of the idea that corporate profitability improves the lives of their constituency: If a company can spend less, they will produce a less expensive product, thereby improving consumers lives.  They also believe that if a company improves profitability, this will result in higher workers incomes.  *Don't laugh, now*.  They actually believe this stuff.  That it has been proven wrong over the last 5 decades is beside the point.  Somehow the people who vote for Republican politicians have swallowed enough flavor-aid that they come back to the trough every two years and elect the same klepto's over and over.


Similar to @SoulsOpenSource's answer, I would suggest Venmo, which works like PayPal but is free for debit-card-to-debit-card transactions. More information here.


"First of all, insurance never covers the cost of the item, it is almost always a partial payout at best. For example, a typical house in the Northeast US where I live that costs $300,000 will have the actual house valued at maybe $100,00 and rest of the value will be in the land. Therefore, the insured value will typically be $100,000. The only problem is that to actually rebuild the house might easily cost $250,000. So, your idea that some kinds of insurance allows the beneficiary to recoup their loss is usually never true. As you say, from an actuarial point of view insurance is a sheer waste of money. For example, a typical house has maybe a 0.5% chance of burning down every year. In other words out of 2000 houses, maybe 1 will burn down every year. So, lets say you got $100,000 of insurance on your house. Then the value of that policy would be $100,000 / 2000 = $50 per year. An insurance company will charge around $700 per year for the policy. That means you are basically flushing $650 down the toilet every year to maintain that policy. The reason why they do this is what blankip says above, they are buying ""peace of mind"", a psychological product. In other they imagine they are somehow safe. So, even though they are losing money, paying it makes them feel as though they are not losing money. It's delusional, but then again most people have a lot of delusions of which insurance is just one of many."


> When that guy says you can go to 30A on a fuse, how do you feel about his opinion as an electrician?  > Still say that non-electrician decisions have zero bearing on how you feel about his abilities as an electrician?  Do you have a friend who's really good at math, but sucks in social situations?  What about a cousin who's really good at interior design but is an awful driver?  If your electrician friend has a long history of giving good electrical advice, both to me and others, then they have a long history of giving good electrical advice.  I wouldn't expect that to change because they gave me bad dinner advice.  Tiel has started multiple multi-billion dollar industries.  He's served on countless boards, and taught business classes at Stanford.  His skills in _business_ have been verified by other entrepreneurs, professors and personal history.  I know people who'd give their left leg to get _business_ advice from him.  He's also known to be a raging asshole.    Not just in voting for Trump, but pretty much everything else.  There's his personal vendetta against Gawker, and how he throws his money around to keep surfers from walking on his beach.  I wouldn't want to grab a beer with the guy, but that doesn't affect his area of expertise.


The reason is governments print extra money to cause inflation (hopefully reasonable) so that people don't just sit comfortably but do something to make money work. Thus inflation is an artificial measure which leads to money value gradually decreasing and causing people invest money in one way or another to beat inflation or maybe even gain some more money. Printing money is super cheap unlike producing any kind of commodity and that makes money different from commodities - commodities have their inherent value, but money has only nominal value, it's an artificial government-controlled product.


"En Cornwall butikken har lagt en t franchise til sitt detaljhandel tilbud.  Butikk Helston, drevet av Chris og Sue Sharrinton, har innført t for å utfylle sin eksisterende vellykkede mat på farten drift og tiltrekke seg en bredere kundebase.  ""Vi har vært på utkikk etter en tid til noe nytt og annerledes å tilby våre mat på farten, og vi valgte t som partner fordi det er så sterkt merkenavn,"" sa Chris.  ""T har en trendy appell og vil tiltrekke seg yngre kunder til butikken, i tillegg til å forbedre vår totale tilbudet. Vi har opprettet 300 sq ft plass til t-drift, og fortsatt skal selge vår egen populært utvalg av varm mat, pasties, pølse ruller og bacon baps, sammen med kassett smørbrød, sikrer at våre eksisterende ikke er drastisk redusert.  Chris og Sue jobbet sammen **[Appleby vestover](http://www.swspar.com/) for installasjon av t tilbudet. Appleby vestover også jobbet med en annen av sine forhandlere, Julian Holliss når han installert franchise i hans bensin forecourt butikken i Dartmouth."


Oil itself is actually quite nice because you can store it in large quantities cheaply, but it costs a lot to move it and get it out of the ground. Another factor which you pointed out is how you can only get an engine 50% energy efficient, whereas electric motors are far more efficient. The main problem with renewables is that it is hard to store in large quantities, since our batteries aren't that efficient at storing a lot of energy for nighttime/calm days. Nuclear power and a really efficient battery would solve all of our problems, but people are deathly afraid of nuclear.  The main point is that people have been predicting the end of oil for decades, just a matter of time until it's economically viable to stop using it.


Much of this is incorrect. Aetna owns Payflex for starters, and it's your EMPLOYER who decides which banks and brokers to offer, not Payflex. An HSA is a checking account with an investment account option after a minimum balance is met. A majority of U.S. employers only OFFER an HSA option but don't contribute a penny, so you're lucky you get anything.  The easy solution is just keep the money that is sent to your HSA checking account in your checking account, and once a year roll it over into a different bank's HSA. The vast majority of banks offer HSAs that have no ties to a particular broker (i.e. Citibank, PNC, Chase). I have all my HSA funds in HSA Bank which is online but services lots of employers. Not true that most payroll deductions or employer contributions go to a single HSA custodian (bank).  They might offer a single bank that either contracts with an investment provider or lets you invest anywhere. But most employers making contributions are large or mid-market employers offering multiple banks, and that trend is growing fast because of defined contribution, private exchanges and vendor product redesigns. Basically, nobody likes having a second bank account for their HSA when their home bank offers one.


Is it just -34*4.58= -$155.72 for CCC and -11*0.41= -$4.51 for DDD? Yes it needs to be recorded as negative because at some point in time, the investor will have to spend money to buy these shares [cover the short sell and return the borrowed shares]. Whether the investor made profit or loss will not be reflected as you are only reflecting the current share inventory.


.INX (the S&P 500 index itself) does not include reinvested dividens.  You can figure total return by going to Yahoo finance, historical data. Choose the start year, and end year. You should find that data for SPY (going back to 1993) will show an adjusted close, and takes dividends into account. This isn't perfect as SPY has a .09% expense ratio, but it's better than just the S&P index. One of the more popular Dow ETF is DIA, this will let you similarly track the Dow while accounting for dividends.


"When using Time Value of Money equations, you need to know when the flow starts. A mortgage for example, has a first payment at the end of the first time period, usually 1 month.  For savings, one can start the account with a deposit of course, or start by saying ""I will deposit $XXX at the end of each month.  The answer really depends on the exact details of the situation. In your example, I'm inclined to suggest first flow is 1 year out."


MoneyDance Is the way to go.  I've been using it for years and it works well.  It keeps getting better, and best of all, it's completely cross platform!  Mac, Windows and linux!


Personally, I'd like an comparison about the difference between the different 'houses' of Economic theory. Rothbardian Liberterianism, as argued by the Mises Inst, has some fantastic video-lectures, so I've been getting acquainted with them, but I'd like a good overview of the other side of that fence.


"> Any additional questions, objections, or ""misunderstanding"" on your side in regards to this subject?  No, I totally understand.  Everything that President Trump promised you is going to happen.  > I even asks for specifics and you did not (and cannot) name any!  Oh, you got me.  It can't be real if I don't have specifics.  > Hunger will not occur because warmer weather and more rain is just even more food.  We're going to have farming in Phoenix!  > You actually also believe that ""Russians!"" are responsible for Trump in addition to all the terrible things you believe about Trump.  Yes, it is the Russians who are hacking his teleprompters and Twitter feed."


Sale of a stock creates a capital gain. It can be offset with losses, up to $3000 more than the gains. It can be deferred when held within a retirement account.  When you gift appreciated stock, the basis follows. So when I gifted my daughter's trust shares, there was still tax due upon sale. The kiddy tax helped reduce but not eliminate it. And there was no quotes around ownership. The money is gone, her account is for college.  No 1031 exchange exists for stock.


Lenders pay attention to where your down payment money comes from. If they see a large transfer of money into your bank account within about a year before your purchase, this WILL cause an issue for you. Down payments are not just there to make the principal smaller; they are primarily used as an underwriting data-point to assess your quality as a borrower. If you take the money as loan, it will count against your credit worthiness. If you take the money as a gift, it will raise some other red flags. All of this is done for a reason: if you can't get a down payment, you are a higher credit risk (poor discipline, lack of consistent income), even if you can (currently) pay the monthly cost of a mortgage.  (PS - The cost of home ownership is much higher than the monthly mortgage payment.) Will all this mean you WON'T get a loan? Of course not. You can almost always get SOME loan. But it will likely be at a higher rate than you otherwise would qualify for if you just waited a little bit and saved money for a down payment.  (Another option: cheaper house.) EDIT: The below comments provide examples where gifts were/are NOT a problem. My experience from buying a house just a few years ago (and my several friends who bought house in the same period, some with family gifts and some without) is that it IS an issue. Your best bet is to TALK, IN PERSON with an actual mortgage broker in your area who can go through the options with you, and the downsides to various approaches.


"You have a few options: Option #1 - Leave the money where it is If your balance is over $5k - you should be able to leave the money in your former-employer's 401(k). The money will stay there and continue to be invested in the funds that you elect to invest in. You should at the very least be receiving quarterly statements for the account. Even better - you should have access to some type of an online account where you can transfer your investments, rebalance your account, conform to target, etc. If you do not have online account access than I'm sure you can still transfer investments and make trades via a paper form. Just reach out to the 401(k) TPA or Recordkeeper that administers your plan. Their contact info is on the quarterly statements you should be receiving. Option #2 - Rollover the money into your current employer's 401(k) plan. This is the option that I tend to recommend the most. Roll the money over into your current employer's 401(k) plan - this way all the money is in the same place and is invested in the funds that you elect. Let's say you wanted to transfer your investments to a new fund lineup. Right now - you have to fill out the paperwork or go through the online process twice (for both accounts). Moving the money to your current-employer's plan and having all the money in the same place eliminates this redundancy, and allows you to make one simple transfer of all your assets. Option #3 - Roll the money from your former-employer's plan into an IRA. This is a cool option, because now you have a new IRA with a new set of dollar limits. You can roll the money into a separate IRA - and contribute an additional $5,500 (or $6,500 if you are 50+ years of age). So this is cool because it gives you a chance to save even more for retirement. Many IRA companies give you a ""sign on bonus"" where if you rollover your former-employers 401(k)...they will give you a bonus (typically a few hundred bucks - but hey its free money!). Other things to note: Take a look at your plan document from your former-employer's 401(k) plan. Take a look at the fees. Compare the fees to your current-employer's plan. There could be a chance that the fees from your former-employer's plan are much higher than your current-employer. So this would just be yet another reason to move the money to your current-employer's plan. Don't forget you most likely have a financial advisor that oversees your current-employer's 401(k) plan. This financial advisor also probably takes fees from your account. So use his services! You are probably already paying for it! Talk to your HR at your employer and ask who the investment advisor is. Call the advisor and set up an appointment to talk about your retirement and financial goals. Ask him for his advice - its always nice talking to someone with experience face to face. Good luck with everything!"


Maybe he is dying and his kids have said they don't want to take control. So he negotiates the deal now so he can live out his days and feel comfortable the company who has it will take it in directions he'd prefer it to go. It's Disney so they will stay family friendly vs another company that may have gone R .


Hungarian Games provide the best party halls service in the UAE. We provide world class, comprehensive services and perfect for any sort of occasions like large wedding receptions, birthday party, and cheap party halls uae and any other social gathering.  Our best offer exquisite food and beverages as well. You will have to consider some hall that has a party venue plus takes care of the food and all top details.


Multiple instances of the same item probably aren't counted, so you're thinking too specifically while I am referring to general trends. I would quite comfortably bet that the average person has not purchased more than 1500 unique brands or visited more than 1500 unique domains.


There are lots of provisos, but in general you are correct. The provisos, off the top of my head: The only fees will be any brokerage fees when you purchase the stock. I haven't seen any handling fees when you get the dividend, but it may depend on how you hold the stock.


actually I don't mind at all. I am still playing the last word game really. You are the one attempting to make salient points. I made it clear long ago my intention was to make light of this from here on.  How LOW can we go!?


I would make a change to the answer from olchauvin: If you buy a call, that's because you expect that the value of call options will go up. So if you still think that options prices will go up, then a sell-off in the stock may be a good point to buy more calls for cheaper. It would be your call at that point (no pun intended). Here is some theory which may help. An options trader in a bank would say that the value of a call option can go up for two reasons: The VIX index is a measure of the levels of implied volatility, so you could intuitively say that when you trade options you are taking a view on two components: the underlying stock, and the level of the VIX index. Importantly, as you get closer to the expiry date this second effect diminishes: big jumps up in the VIX will produce smaller increases in the value of the call option. Taking this point to its limit, at maturity the value of the call option is only dependent on the price of the underlying stock. An options trader would say that the vega of a call option decreases as it gets closer to expiry. A consequence of this is that if pure options traders are naturally less inclined to buy and hold to expiry (because otherwise they would really just be taking a view on the stock price rather than the stock price & the implied volatility surface). Trading options without thinking too much about implied volatities is of course a valid strategy -- maybe you just use them because you will automatically have a mechanism which limits losses on your positions. But I am just trying to give you an impression of the bigger picture.


No, and using a 37 year old formula in finance that is as simple as: should make it obvious technical analysis is more of a game for retail traders than investment advice. When it comes to currencies, there are a myriad of macroeconomic occurrences that do not follow a predictable timescale. Using indicators like RSI on any time frame will not magically illuminate broad human psychology and give you an edge. It is theoretically possible for a single public stock's price to be driven by a range of technical traders who all buy at RSI 30 and sell at RSI 70, after becoming a favorite stock on social media, but it is infinitely more likely for all market participants to have completely different goals.


"Well, the real problem here is that when the government (or really any entity) controls education (especially on a widespread but centralized basis) it means that everyone is trained to think alike.  And as the saying goes: when everyone is thinking the same thing... no one is really thinking at all.  Education is inherently a system of indoctrination (doctrine = ""teaching"") -- that's really NOT a radical statement, nor is it some ""conspiracy theory"" -- it's really just tautological, saying the same thing in two different forms (though obviously one seems more ominous than the other).  For example when people talk about the need for kids to be ""properly socialized"" via attending public schools -- what they are really saying (whether they realize it or not) -- is that they believe ALL children should be ""molded"" into accepting & regurgitating the *currently dominant* socio-political dogma.  Far from creating critical thinkers, or from promoting ""diversity"", it really achieves the opposite, facilitating a mindless conformity (which ironically *might* even include a ""rebellious"" conformity, though it remains a conformity nonetheless) -- what is lost is truly innovative independent minds. *(And the proof of this will be demonstrated by the ""herd/hivemind"" that will downvote this post.)*"


I believe you are missing knowledge of how to conduct a ratio analysis. Understanding liquidity ratios, specifically the quick or acid-test ratio will be of interest and help your understanding. http://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/acidtest.asp Help with conducting a ratio analysis. http://www.demonstratingvalue.org/resources/financial-ratio-analysis Finally, after working through the definitions, this website will be of use. https://www.stock-analysis-on.net/NYSE/Company/Exxon-Mobil-Corp/Ratios/Liquidity


I wouldn't think so.  If you read the list of features listed on the page you referred to, notice: Track Stocks It looks like it is restricted to the major U.S. stock markets.  No mention of India's NSE.


I am sure the foot soldiers are hardworking honest people the problem is as you go up the ranks, it gets dirtier.  Check into how Greece got into the position it is in today. Also look into CDOs and the sub prime collapse and who profited from it. Check out how incestuous the relationship is between top staff at Goldman and financial regulation bodies.


Q4 earning should be priced in by now, I would be more betting on Amazon making more acquisitions come 2018, which have generally been value adding for them so far. 20% return over the next year is not outlandish.


The store of our childhood... where you were bored out of your mind because the toy aisle sucked ass and your dad would spend 3 hours looking at grills while your mom looked at washing machines.   At least Blockbuster was fun.


>apologies if it seemed that way  It didn't, I was only clarifying my intentions. And congratulations on your achievements... it always amazes me that two people can share an idea but one can be so much more passionate about it. I guess I need to focus more on what's important to me!


"are you implying that employees with families, a desire for personal time, any degree of physical/mental ailment, are ""bad employees"". good AND bad employees are a risk when they are treated poorly with complete disregard.  by enslaving the standard worker to a non-livable wage in which they cannot even afford to take time off you are virtually ensuring that no corresponding value can be added to the system except by those who are well off.   I responded to another post in this thread asking what the minimum wage should cover. and i ask the same to you. what do you believe that index should be. by your logic, even slavery can be considered the index."


"> AMERICA is growing, Western Europe is stagnant, China and most of East Asia is expanding relatively quickly  So staring into the face of evidence from his own intro context that generally the more active fiscal intervention since the GFC, the better economies have fared, the author proceeds to prognosticate about impending doom for the Chinese if they don't conclusively switch & stick to austerity and ignore growth to focus on hidden inflation monsters. For the US somehow everything comes down to fed monetary policy, despite the fact that 4 years of the fed's alphabet soup programs without any fiscal assistance from congress hasn't kicked the US back into preferred growth and GDP is seeming to slow back down toward recession/stagnation. And finally the eurozone is apparently most plagued by ""overblown public debt"" and government spending somehow ""crowding out"" investment that just wishes it had the chance to invest if those pesky profligate politicians would get out of the way, and maybe the countries should fork over their economic sovereignty to the ECB so they can be structurally reformed (bloodletting/grave robbing).  Just my opinion, this whole article seems like shitty oldschool/backward economic views coming out of academic economics, likely angling to be a ['very serious person' in ECB bureaucratic/advisory politics](http://www.geopolitical-info.com/en/expert/professor-enrico-colombatto). The lack of being able to comprehend & adjust to real world results is just sad."


Short Answer: Length of Time invested and risk should be correlated. From what I am hearing this is pretty good game plan for your age.   Minutia: Once you get closer to retirement lets say in 20 years.  You might want to treat two lumps of money with different risk.  For me at 49 I have a lump of money for 55-70 that carries a lot less risk then another lump of money for when I hit 80. This way I can wait and take Social Security at 70 when it pays the most per month.  Then I'll have another pile of money for when my care costs start being very expensive.    Or I think most people would benefit from making sure you have the funds you need for the next 5 years in items with extremely low risk and funds you need 6 years out or more you can have some risk tolerance there. Best laid plans though.


One reason is wealthy families use this to avoid taxes and gift money without hitting the million dollar life time giving limit. In some states one can even hold an LLC without anyone but the owners attorney knowing who owns the LLC. This is also used by people who want their wealth kept private not just for hiding illicit funds.


These issues have probably been part of IBM's computing security standards for some time. I'd imagine it just makes news when specific situations such as Dropbox or Siri get called out. Most major companies have similar policies regarding their data. Encrypt your disks. Don't store stuff on non-company servers. Etc.


Meh, that's good for pain if that works, but that's a relatively small market compared to pharmaceuticals from a business perspective, much lower profit margins because anyone can grow it. It's a highly competitive field, and as soon as it becomes legal federally you know that Altria and other huge corporations are going to be able to sell it and put the small producers out of business.  Many great minds also never did drugs. Again, I'm just going by my experiences, and none of the smart/successful people at my company or in my group of friends smoke pot.


"The catch with any exchange service is that you're going to involve some sort of business and they're going to want to get paid for their service. These services all come with their own exchange rates, fees, waiting periods, or requirements to even use said service. Commonly, pros towards one of those comes at the cost of another— e.g. fast transfers have higher fees or worse exchange rates. Over the past few months I needed a service and ended up using USForex. Since you're going from CAD to USD, you'd likely need to use CanadianForex. Pros:  Cons:  Overall, this option was far better than the $97.00 I was quoted from WesternUnion; or the $25.00-45.00 I was quoted from BMO Harris, which would have required I open a saving account with them. I wasn't provided a clean exchange rate between these two to know how all three compared. The only bit of advice I can say with any service is compare exchange rates. If you're transferring more than a few hundred dollars, the exchange rate can be seen as a ""hidden"" fee when it's unreasonably low. I'm not affiliated with or accommodated by any of the exchange services mentioned."


I was just wondering if the managers of big index funds use automation to balance the stocks and so on. To me it seems like a ton of work for a human but pretty easy to automate.  sry for my bad english


It's up to him to provide for himself. Hiring a hitman(Govt)  to steal for him is not moral. Just because you have modest skills and work full time doesn't mean you are increasing productivity and filling a customer need. That is why it's up to a free and mutual agreement between two people to determine your income. This will grow the pie and increase standard of living for all. Otherwise if we steal from an engineer (who increases productivity) and give it to a modestly skilled full time dog walker (doesn't increase productivity) then people will just walk dogs instead of innovating new things that will increase all of our standard of livings.


Looks like a hard call if they waived their immunity. However it seems a bad precedent to allow something like that to have effect. Won't a subsequent change of leadership occur with them renouncing the recklessness of the previous leadership?   Then you have a US judge in the middle of this with pictures of kids starving and old people going without medical care. We work hard for the average Joe in other countries to have a good opinion of the US. American servicemen have been in harm's way for this. Why let Wall Street have its way here?


Yeah true that. Counseling people to avoid the negatives has been more beneficial in my life than great recommendations. Even one mistake and you're up shit's creek. And I will say I have the knowledge to help people to avoid mistakes, but sometimes it devolves into mud slinging (unfortunately). If this wasn't a new account then it might give you an indication of how I've done this in the past. Most of the time it takes too much explaining to get people up to speed though.  A word to the wise: I'd recommend being open to switching industries. Everyone in finance is pretty toxic and all ended up there because of money. End up chasing the CFA (cancer distilled into three exams), grad school, nonsense corporate jobs, or the dream in high finance/small shops where the founders don't think they need another smart hard-working person. Even if if it's obvious they do.  I remember reaching out and counseling a firm on selling a position that I felt was really stupid. It was not at all in line with their investing objectives and also was one I would never touch. The guy actually agreed with me, didn't hire me (I was after a job), didn't sell the position, and lost them approx. $12 million within 12 months with my math on their 13-F's.  I only reach out to firms I respect, which works out to about 1 firm per 100k people in population from what I've seen (in a city like Pittsburgh this was only 4 shops). That means there are maybe 200 people in the US who would make a hiring decision on me for what I like to do. But I've stopped playing that game.  I now run a healthcare business I started. It was hard as hell to open but I now run circles around people because nobody actually is in the business of the industry. The doctors, nurses, etc. are all extremely bright - just not in my area. Makes for a much more fun workday.


> It's obvious when a company does this they don't even care how the food tastes, it's just a cynical attempt to save money with the hope that customers are too dumb to taste the difference.   The old [Schlitz beer scenario](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schlitz_beer#Decline_in_status_and_sale_to_Stroh).  They quickly destroyed a valuable and successful 100+ year-old brand with penny-pinching.


The LLC is paying you.  It would only be fraudulent if you were trying to move the money out of the LLC to avoid a liability.  I'm pretty sure the transaction will be taxable income for you personally.  Consider consulting with a CPA to ensure that you're doing the proper record keeping and to get advice on the best way to minimize tax burden while achieving your goals.


This is no big deal, IMO. The only real advantage is that I can think of is that if oil is priced in your currency then you're not subject to foreign currency fluctuations dictating your energy costs.   In the short term USD has been falling. If this trend continues and oil switches to yuan, then our energy will become more expensive.


I've had a business for 22 years. I've never been approached by the BBB nor do I have a listing with them, which actually means no one has sent in a complaint about us.  I think I'd rather be a business no one complains about.


"For the USA part of the equation the ""fair market value"" is the value at the time you inherited it (time of death), and thus there is no capital gain."


If they're not matching, and their profit-sharing has nothing to do with how much you invest, then I'd say don't bother with the company 401k at all.  If you need to at least have an account open to get the profit sharing, then contribute the bare minimum. Having your retirement account through your company forces you to follow their standards, choose from their funds, use their broker, etc.  It also means that when you leave the company, you either have to move your money anyway, or else have an account through a company you don't work for, which I wouldn't feel all that comfortable doing anyway. If you open a retirement account through your bank or a private financial planner, then it's yours, and you can contribute what you want, when you want, and buy the securities that you want.  Your account executive is there to service you, not your company.


"Your employer should send you a statement with this information. If they didn't, you should still be able to find it through E*Trade. Navigate to: Trading & Portfolios>Portfolios. Select the stock plan account. Under ""Restricted Stock"", you should see a list of your grants. If you click on the grant in question, you should see a breakdown of how many shares were vested and released by date. It will also tell you the cost basis per share and the amount of taxes withheld. You calculate your cost basis by multiplying the number of released shares by the cost basis per share. You can ignore the ordinary income tax and taxes withheld since they will already have been included on your W2 earnings and withholdings. Really all you need to do is report the capital gain or loss from the cost basis (which if you sold right away will be rather small)."


Neither. Keep in mind that while you're on a payment plan with the IRS, you pay much lower interest than what you'd pay for a credit card debt. I suggest sticking to your payment plan and paying it off without incurring additional debt or rolling it over to credit cards.


I thank you for that.  But I respectfully disagree.  If his realm of operations were limited to universities I could possibly agree, which Krugman could surely have done.  But now he is in a much more public position and uses his credibility to try to work changes in attitudes and social structures.  His public credibility is his livelihood.


Haha the work conditions in NYC sound kind of fun actually, I like all nighters. I work better under stress. ADD is a contributing factor to that, but that's a story for another day folks! But I'm wondering... Does it matter if I get my diploma from Canada and not the US if I go to WS? Will WS HR people look down on a UofT degree? Not everyone has 100k in their bank account!  I'm wondering also what's the HEC Montreal's reputation when it comes to their MFE? Any opinions on that? We here very good things about them in Montreal, but does the reputation transfer elsewhere?


Real question: Besides just doing what pharma companies do normally, which is raising prices astronomically for drugs which have no generics available, was he really the bad guy in other terms or did he just come off as a massive dickhead?


">""One of the biggest lies in capitalism,"" says Eliot Spitzer, ""is that companies like competition. They don't. Nobody likes competition.""  I am suspicious that Mr. Spitzer produced both the original statement *and* argued against it, because that sounds ridiculous.  ""One of the biggest lies in physics,"" says wadcann, ""is that water flows uphill.  It doesn't.  Water flows downhill."""


"No functional difference. Only impression/convenience. ""Business checks"" are checks in larger format (8"" instead of the regular 5"" checks), they can be from your personal account just as well. I didn't have any problem using the small ""individual""-standard checks for my company (I actually did get them for free from Wells Fargo, but that was a gesture, not by policy)."


You can purchase stock immediately in the open market on the day of the IPO when market opens. Below link gives you more information. http://finance.zacks.com/buy-ipo-stock-3903.html


Is it possible her husband obtained a card from a bank overseas? Unlikely. A Bank overseas generally will not issue such cards. Is that why she can't find it on the credit report? The data sent to Credit Bureau is periodic and not immediate. At times it may take a month or more for a Bank to start reporting the new card to Credit Agencies. If he got the card recently, she has a freeze in effect and no bank can issue a card in her name without her approval. Possibly timing issue. i.e. the freeze was put after card company pulled the report and approved. It may take sometime to dispatch a new card. So it could be that her husband applied for this card previously before the freeze was put in place.


"I recommend you take a look at this lecture (really, the whole series is enlightening), from Swenson. He identifies 3 sources of returns: diversification, timing and selection. He appears to discard timing and selection as impossible. A student kinda calls him out on this. Diversification reduces risk, not increase returns. It turns out they did time the market, by shorting .com's before the bubble, and real estate just before the downturn. In 1990, Yale started a ""Absolute Return"" unit and allocated like 15 percent to it, mostly by selling US equities, that specializes in these sorts of hedging moves. As for why you might employ managers for specific areas, consider that the expense ratio Wall Street charges you or me still represent a very nice salary when applied to the billions in Yale's portfolio. So they hire internally to reduce expenses, and I'm sure they're kept busy. They also need people to sell off assets to maintain ratios, and figuring out which ones to sell might take specialized knowledge. Finally, in some areas, you functionally cannot invest without management. For example, Yale has a substantial allocation in private equity, and by definition that doesn't trade on the open market. The other thing you should consider is that for all its diversification, Yale lost 25 percent of their portfolio in 2009. For a technique that's supposed to reduce volatility, they seem to have a large range of returns over the past five years."


"Your 401K (and IRA) is a legally distinct entity from yourself. In fact, it is a ""trust,"" and your Administrator is a ""trustee,"" while you are both creator and benefactor. This fact, and the 10% early withdrawal penalty, makes it immune from most judgments. The IRS can ""levy"" your 401K or IRA for back taxes, but must waive the 10% penalty (under the 1997 Tax Reform law). That gives them the power to do what most others can't. A ""tricky"" banker may persuade you to take money out of your 401K to pay the bank. If you do, s/he has won. But s/he can't go after your 401k."


I think your getting at the fact that 50% of marriages end in divorce, but I don't think that means it's 50/50 for every relationship. I haven't seen the numbers but I'd bet there's trends related to wealth, prior home life, etc.


I just want to point out a couple of things, and I do not have enough reputation to comment. Saving 50% is totally possible. I know people saving 65%. For more see here EDIT: Let me repeat that 4% it the maximum you can assume if you want to be sure to have at least that return in the long term. It's not the average, it's the minimum, the value you can expect and plan with. Just to reinforce the claim, I can cite Irrational Exuberance of Robert Schiller, who explicitly says, on page 135 of the 2015 edition, that from January 1966 to January 1992 the real annual return was just 4.1%. Sure, this does not matter so much if you are investing all the way through, but it's still a 26 year period.


"http://www.darkreading.com/attacks-breaches/the-7-most-significant-government-data-breaches/d/d-id/1327468  ""What makes the government breaches more significant though is the kind of information involved. In a majority of cases, government breaches involved personally identifying data, such as names, Social Security numbers, and birthdates, the loss of which have substantially greater consequences for victims than breaches involving loss of credit card data or email account information. In a few cases, the breaches involved loss of top secret and highly confidential data of national security value."""


"From your description, the taxes may have been withheld incorrectly. You were most likely a nonresident alien during your entire stay. ""Teachers and trainees"", which include anyone on J status who is not a student, are ""exempt individuals"" (exempt from the Substantial Presence Test) unless they have already been an exempt individual during any part of 2 of the prior 6 calendar years. So if you haven't been in the U.S. as an F-1, J-1, etc. for at least 6-7 years before you came on J-1 this time, the first two calendar years of your time on J-1 this time does not count towards the Substantial Presence Test. You said you were there for 18 months. That stretches over either 2 or 3 calendar years. The first two calendar years of it would be exempt from the SPT; even if it stretched into a third calendar year, an 18-month period could not stretch for more than 6 months into a 3rd calendar year; so even in that case you would still not meet the Substantial Presence Test for the 3rd year. Since you do not meet the Subtantial Presence Test during any of those years, you were a nonresident alien for all of those years (unless you decided to file jointly with a resident spouse or something). Nonresident aliens on J-1 are exempt from FICA taxes (Social Security tax and Medicare tax) for employment as a researcher that you were authorized to do on your J-1. They should not have withheld FICA taxes from you. You should have informed them at the beginning when you initially noticed that they did, because it is a huge pain to get it back afterwards. For FICA taxes withheld in error, you can first ask the employer to refund them; and, if that fails, get a written statement of their refusal and then file Form 843 and Form 8316 with the IRS. However, given that IRS is very underfunded these days, expect it to take a long time to hear back if you ever hear back."


"In a way yes but I doubt you'd want that. A ""Stop-Limit"" order has both stop and limit components to it but I doubt this gives you what you want. In your example, if the stock falls to $1/share then the limit order of $3/share would be triggered but this isn't quite what I'd think you'd want to see. I'd suggest considering having 2 orders: A stop order to limit losses and a limit order to sell that are separate rather than fusing them together that likely isn't going to work."


"The goal is to understand the movements of the market as a whole and understand the fortunes of every investor in the S&P.  As for why it isn't price-weighted, it is because price is a complely arbitrary notion, whereas market cap is at least ""real"" in some sense.  Imagine Berkshire Hathaway vs Apple. In the S&P, Apple takes up about 75% more of the index because it's market cap is 796B, compared to 452B for Berkshire. This makes intuitive sense. Apple is ""worth"" 75% more, so it takes up that much more of the index.  Now lets look at price. In a price weighted index of only those two stocks, Apple, with a stock price of 154.12 would take up .06% compared to Berkshire Hathaway at 99.94% due to its 274,740 stock price. The only difference is Apple has WAY more shares outstanding. Nothing of economic value (other than a bit of liquidity) is captured in a price-weighted index."


Generally, the answer to the availability of holdings of a given mutual fund on a daily basis is no. Thus, an API is non-existent. The reasons for the lack of transparency on a daily basis is that it could/would impact the portfolio managers ability to trade. While this information would not necessarily permit individuals from front running the fund manager's trades, it does give insight in to the market outlook and strategy the fund is employing. The closest you'll be able to get to obtaining a list of holdings is by reading the most recent annual report and the quarterly filings each fund is required to file with the SEC.


"Could the individual [directly] use the credit cards for the down-payment? No, not directly. Indirectly, either via Cash Advance or ""Balance Transfer"" to a bank account with a promotional rate could work, however you may have to show the money sitting in a bank account and ready to go before the loan will be approved, which means the money you took out on the credit cards will show up when they pull your credit (unless you somehow timed it perfectly, and even if you did that you'd be breaking the law by lying on the disclosure statement about your current debts.) If he could, are there any negative consequences from doing so (other than probable high monthly payments on the cards)? Definitely. Let's assume we're talking about the indirect method of cash advance or balance transfer, since that is actually possible. There are 3 things to compare: Final thought: Most of the time the rate you pay on a non-mortgage loan will be higher than that of the mortgage, and furthermore mortgage interest is oftentimes tax deductible, so it would rarely ever make sense to shift would-be mortgage debt into another type of loan, down payment or otherwise."


"Thats easy:  My direct manager, the Director of IT,  1. Does not micromanage. Meaning he treats me like an adult who knows how to get things done. I never ever feel bad about watching cat videos, browsing reddit, or facebook while at work. He lets me do my thing and in return i actually get things done because i dont feel his hot breath on my neck 2. He totally promotes an atmosphere of open door. I know i can walk up to him and tell him i have a problem with him or another It person just as much as anyone else. If i think he made a bad call on something or something doesnt feel right about policy, equipment, etc he is really understanding and objective 3. He buys everyone beer all the time.  the CEO (who is flipping awesome let me tell you)  1. She has made it her literal (and i mean literal) #1 goal to make our workplace and our employees happy. not just satisfied, but really really truely happy to come to work. I have heard myself more than once mentally saying ""yes, i get to go to work today"". 2. our core values are foster happiness, Practive wowism, create community, innovate, and growth. She takes every one of them seriously and will bend over backwards to make sure all of them happen. 3. we have a prepaid amazon account that anyone can access with no restrictions specifically for sending clients gift whenever we feel like it. I dont get to do this often as i only work internally, but our receptionists regularly send gifts to people for no reason other than it would make the client happy.  4. our bonuses and incentives kind of kick ass. If we make a certain number of cennections (meaning the receptionists do certain things that earn them points...kinda like the monopoly game at mcdonalds) if we reach certain goals we usually get certain things like a schmorgas board of breakfast cereal and cartoons in the breakroom, or an in house sushi go round, or an ice cream party or a trip to hawaii (we have gotten all of those by the way). 5. when we hire employees we like to hire people who represent the culture that we have. We hire based more on attitude than actual skill (although that factors in too, obviously) so ALL the people I work with are happy, and love to make other people happy."


"It doesn't matter if you give the check to the dealer or your friend. But under NO circumstances should you co-sign your friend's car loan. Since the money you are giving is a loan, I highly, highly recommend you do the following: Requiring a signed promissory note shows you are serious about getting paid back, and gives you some legal protections if you are not paid back. If you go to a random small claims court on any given day, you will witness at least a few cases where one person says, ""it was a gift!"" and the other says, ""it was a loan!"". With a promissory note, it's a loan, period. Prepare not to get paid back, even with the note. It happens all the time. Think about what you will do if your friend misses a payment to you or never repays the loan. Will you forgive or get legal and try to collect? Again, do NOT co-sign the loan.If you do, and your friend does not make car payments, you will be 100% responsible and the lender will take legal action against you to collect."


"Give the type of books I usually read (science fiction) I don't care about the loss of ""independent"" book stores or the big box book stores.  Some of the best books I read are by small time authors that probably don't have time to shop their books around or tried and can't get their works published by a big name.  Instead they can sell their books on Amazon for a few bucks.  They get some money, I get something to read, and Amazon gets a cut for bringing us together.  It is fucking fantastic.  If Amazon starts to screw either the reader or the author too much we simply move our business elsewhere.  As a bonus I don't end up with piles of novels that nobody wants."


"The (U.S) ""accredited investor"" laws apply to investments in the U.S. Foreign countries may or may not have their own laws regarding investment in startups, and if so, the foreign laws apply. One way around the net worth minimum is to be a member of the management team. ""Active"" (management) investors don't need to be accredited because they can see what's going on on a day to day basis. The accredited investor laws apply to the target companies, not to the investors. Basically, a start-up company can't take ""other people's money"" from a non-accredited investor. But you can invest ""your own"" money in it if you are a manager."


Yes. There are a number of reasons for this, most notably some form of tax credits transfer over from year to year IF you file your taxes, and the CRA will only pay you deductions if all your taxes have been filed. If you don't owe them anything you won't necessarily get in trouble, but don't expect to get any money back from them until you file! Also, while it's probably much too late for this, if you have a partner, you can transfer a certain amount of tax deductions to them, and save them some money. The site is here: http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/formspubs/t1gnrl/llyrs-eng.html


"**Crippleware**  Crippleware has been defined in realms of both software and hardware. In software, crippleware means that ""vital features of the program such as printing or the ability to save files are disabled until the user purchases a registration key"". While crippleware allows consumers to see the software before they buy, they are unable to test its complete functionality because of the disabled functions. Hardware crippleware is ""a hardware device that has not been designed to its full capability"".  ***  ^[ [^PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=kittens_from_space) ^| [^Exclude ^me](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiTextBot&message=Excludeme&subject=Excludeme) ^| [^Exclude ^from ^subreddit](https://np.reddit.com/r/business/about/banned) ^| [^FAQ ^/ ^Information](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiTextBot/wiki/index) ^| [^Source](https://github.com/kittenswolf/WikiTextBot)   ^] ^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.27"


I love Toronto too... and I think finance people are mostly the same everywhere, just that there's more room some places than others.  I mean siphoning funds assuming that you're going to be running a HFT shop or prop trading or using models to predict when something is most profitable, which is beneficial to your wallet but not really to society.  What do you hope to be doing as a quant that won't be taking money from people who don't trade as well as you? Like, I replied to belgianroffles, I don't think there's anything ethically wrong with it.


"The correct answer to this question is:  the person who the short sells the stock to. Here's why this is the case.  Say we have A, who owns the stock and lends it to B, who then sells it short to C. After this the price drops and B buys the stock back from D and returns it to A. The outcome for A is neutral.  Typically stock that is sold short must be held in a margin account; the broker can borrow the shares from A, collect interest from B, and A has no idea this is going on, because the shares are held in a street name (the brokerage's name) and not A. If A decides during this period to sell, the transaction will occur immediately, and the brokerage must shuffle things around so the shares can be delivered.  If this is going to be difficult then the cost for borrowing shares becomes very high. The outcome for B is obviously a profit: they sold high first and bought (back) low afterwards. This leaves either C or D as having lost this money.  Why isn't it D? One way of looking at this is that the profit to B comes from the difference in the price from selling to C and buying from D.  D is sitting on the low end, and thus is not paying out the profit.  D bought low, compared to C and this did not lose any money, so C is the only remaining choice. Another way of looking at it is that C actually ""lost"" all the money when purchasing the stock.  After all, all the money went directly from C to B.  In return, C got some stock with the hope that in the future C could sell it for more than was paid for it.  But C literally gave the money to B, so how could anybody else ""pay"" the loss? Another way of looking at it is that C buys a stock which then decreases in value.  C is thus now sitting on a loss.  The fact that it is currently only a paper loss makes this less obvious; if the stock were to recover to the price C bought at, one might conclude that C did not lose the money to B.  However, in this same scenario, D also makes money that C could have made had C bought at D's price, proving that C really did lose the money to B. The final way of seeing that the answer is C is to consider what happens when somebody sells a stock which they already hold but the price goes up; who did they lose out on the gain to?  The person again is; who bought their stock.  The person would buys the stock is always the person who the gain goes to when the price appreciates, or the loss comes out of if the price falls."


"simplicity and roi are often at odds. the simplest plan that also supports a reasonable investment return would have 3 accounts: if you want to get better returns on your investments, things can get much more complicated. here are some optional accounts to consider: besides the mechanics of money flowing between accounts, a budget helps you understand and control your spending.  while there are many methods for this (e.g. envelopes of cash, separate accounts for various types of expenses), the simplest might be using mint.com.  just be sure to put all your spending on a credit or debit card, and you can see your spending by category when you log into mint. it can take a bit to get it set up, and your bank needs to be compatible, but it can give you a really good picture of where your money is going.  once you know that, you can start making decisions like ""i should spend less on coffee"", or ""i should go to the zoo more"", based on how much things cost vs how much you enjoy them. if you feel like your spending is out of control, then you can set yourself hard limits on certain kinds of spending, but usually just watching and influencing your own choices is enough. notes:  if you have a spouse or partner, you should each maintain your own separate accounts. there are many reasons for this including simplicity and roi, besides the obvious. if you feel you must have a joint account, be sure to clearly define how it should be used (e.g. only for paying the utilities) and funded (x$ per month each). particularly with your house, do not do joint ownership. one of you should be a renter and the other a landlord. some of these statements assume you are in the usa. on a personal note, i have about 20 credit cards, 2 checking accounts, 2 ira's, 2 brokerage accounts, and 3 401k's. but i consider myself a personal finance hobbyist, and spend an absurd amount of time chasing financial deals and tax breaks."


I would focus first on maxing out your RRSPs (or 401k) each year, and once you've done that, try to put another 10% of your income away into unregistered long term growth savings. Let's say you're 30 and you've been doing that since you graduated 7 years ago, and maybe you averaged 8% p.a. return and an average of $50k per year salary (as a round number).  I would say you should have 60k to 120k in straight up investments around age 30.  If that's the case, you're probably well on your way to a very comfortable retirement.


Many business owners fail to see the relevance of insuring their inventory, supplies, computers, equipment, focusing instead on obtaining health insurance for their employees. Yes, the latter is important, but that doesn’t mean you should neglect property insurance altogether.


>  low seven hundreds wont even garner a look from any school in the top 20   From my understanding, without a math background already (math major for a double in undergrad) you're expected to have a perfect quant score on the GRE to be competitive in the PhD realm.


The two factors that will hurt you the most is the age of the credit account, and your available credit to debt ratio.  Removing an older account takes that account out of the equation of calculating your overall credit score, which can hurt significantly, especially if that is the only, or one of just a couple, of open credit lines you have available. Reducing your available credit will make your current debt look bigger than what it was before you closed your account. Going over a certain percentage for your debt to available credit can make you look less favorable to lenders. [As stated above, closing a credit card does remove it from the credit utilization calculation which can raise your debt/credit ratio. It does not, however; affect the average age of credit cards. Even closed accounts stay on your credit report for ten years and are credited toward average age of cards. When the closed credit card falls off your report, only then, will the average age of credit cards be recalculated.] And may I suggest getting your free credit report from https://www.annualcreditreport.com . It's the only place considered 'official' to receive your free annual credit report as told by the FTC. Going to other 3rd party sites to pull your credit report can risk your information being traded or sold. EDIT: To answer your second point, there are numerous factors that banks and creditors will consider depending on the type of card you're applying for. The heavier the personal rewards (cash back, flyer miles, discounts, etc.) the bigger the stipulation. Some factors to consider are your income to debt ratio, income to available credit ratio, number of revolving lines of credit, debt to available credit ratio, available credit to debt ratio, and whether or not you have sufficient equity and/or assets to cover both your debt and available credit. They want to make sure that if you go crazy and max out all of your lines of credit, that you are capable of paying it all back in a sufficient amount of time. In other words, your volatility as a debt-consumer.


Microsoft is already paying Firefox for distributions (which may explain why Google is cutting them off).  I wonder when Google will pull the plug on Ask.com? Ask is the largest subsidized advertiser on Google by an extremely wide margin. They pay nothing for it... all they do is run AdSense ads and Google takes a cut. Crooked as shit, if you ask me.


Nope. Not claiming any expertise just common sense. After 2008 when everything crashed I got interested in economic depressions and asset bubbles from a historical perspective. How long they lasted in the past and what I should expect.   Figuring that past experience is a good indicator for the present and the future. Now I keep reading that the recovery is just around the corner! Just be patient, everything will be fine people. No worries. It's different this time.   Oh wait, you took a $500k HELOC because your wages have stagnated for the last 20 years and now you can't afford to pay it. Multiply that story millions of times.   I can't for the life of me understand how banks routinely approved mortgages to people 5 or 10 times their annual income. A neighbor of mine got two mortgages for $1.3 million in 2006 working part time at Home Depot.


DFW [reports](http://wdfw.wa.gov/ais/salmo_salar/) show 94% of the fish caught have empty stomachs.  While there have been juvenile sightings in rivers, no 'wild' adult Atlantic Salmon have been detected from previous escapes (one was double this escape).  As late as 1981, there were efforts to establish Atlantic Salmon colonies in the Pacific.  Those efforts failed.  So, most likely, it's a temporary thing.