"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-06-21/the-wrong-kind-of-entrepreneurs-flourish-in-america) reduced by 91%. (I'm a bot) ***** > In an influential 2014 paper, Thomas Philippon speculated that financial industry profits and salaries rose spectacularly since 1980 because banks, securities firms and fund-management companies found new methods for extracting rent.  > Big companies are shelling out increasingly big bucks for patents, just to shield them against competitors&#039; lawsuits.  > Some states forbid car companies from selling directly to buyers, while others protect credit-card companies by banning retailers from passing on swipe fees.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6itbxk/the_wrong_kind_of_entrepreneurs_flourish_in/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~150176 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **company**^#1 **Rent**^#2 **big**^#3 **new**^#4 **government**^#5"


One more effect that's not yet been mentioned is that companies based in Australia and listed on the Australian Securities Exchange, but which do most of their business overseas, will increase their earnings in AU$, since most of what they earn will be in foreign currencies. So their shares are likely to appreciate (in AU$).


"In this context, we're talking about terms of art in accounting, specifically double-entry book-keeping. In accounting lingo, an ""asset"" account represents an actual asset and it's value. So if you buy a car with a loan for $10,000, you apply a $10,000 debit to the asset account and a $10,000 credit to the loan. Debits and credits are confusing when you first start learning about accounting."


> Does it take money to provide for me in the same way a slave owner takes labor to pay for and feed his slaves?  No because a slave does not get to vote on his/her owner nor is he/she allowed to leave.  So, are you going to answer [my question about how multiple providers of services currently handled by the government could work](https://www.reddit.com/r/economy/comments/6leb2o/missouri_republicans_lower_st_louis_minimum_wage/djurery/) or do you plan to keep evading the question?


How will your employer treat your pay and benefits status while you're on leave?   Disability income coverage and leave policies work in tandem to solve very different problems.  Disability income coverage covers your income, leave policies guarantee your status as an employee.   Typically, STD coverage requires an actual loss of income and will offset it's stated benefit for any income you're receiving.  In general you can't begin a STD claim after the 7 day waiting period and also draw income from vacation or sick time.  Also, typically STD will cover some percentage of your covered pay (sometimes including commission/bonus income) up to some weekly maximum. FLMA requires employers to allow certain amounts of time for certain types of leave.  FMLA is not necessarily an income replacement tool like STD coverage.   Contrary to your post it's my understanding that if sick and vacation time accrue in to a single PTO bucket your employer is prohibited from requiring employees to exhaust accrued time prior to beginning FMLA leave. In general, you're not missing anything because the point of FMLA is to guarantee your job and status as an employee from a benefits perspective. Benefits language from the Department of Labor Website A covered employer is required to maintain group health insurance coverage, including family coverage, for an employee on FMLA leave on the same terms as if the employee continued to work.


cash isn't part of changes in working capital calculation - dont include it in current assets.   *edit - Also to answer a question you didn't ask, subtracting cash doesn't skew the multiples.  If cash really is that excess, the market cap will reflect a large cash position, thus adding it all back into EV.  Think of apple as a good example.  If they theoretically would dividend out all the cash, market cap would drop and so would EV.


Are you kidding me? There's only one reason. Greed. If CEOs pay their workers less they take more home for themselves. Period. There is no other reason.  It's wrong, because the front line workers are the ones who make the company work. They're the ones who earn 90% of the money. But they get 10% of the profits. It's crooked, and it's greedy, and that's all.


Haarverlängerung und -verdichtung zusätzlich im ständigen Angebot --Modefrisör Pohl in der Fürstenriederstrasse im München schneidet nicht nur Haare und färbt und fönt sie. Er bietet zusätzlich Haarverlängerung und Haarverdichtung an, und das seit fast 20 Jahren. Hierfür stehen separate Räume mit einem eignen Eingang parat. Der Friseursalon bietet auch natürliche und modische Perücken von namhaften Herstellern an. Hier sind Sie in besten Händen und dürfen sich verwöhnen lassen.


You won't hear me calling crypto a safe haven as such. The local price volatility is more than most people can handle. And it takes a level of tech savvy to be able to separate facts from nonsense.  By my personal analysis, Ethereum (ETH) would be the safest crypto investment by far. Bitcoin (BTC) is also surprisingly resilient in terms of value, but has been deprecated on multiple levels at this point, so it seems quite overvalued (or Ethereum undervalued for that matter). The rest of crypto can probably best be compared to investing in startups. High risk, high reward.


I go in, grab my motor oil (one of the few items Walmart is significantly cheaper on) , go through the self checkout, and leave. I don't really care about the store experience or need my hand held to find an item...I expect most who shop at Walmart, even on occasion like myself, would feel similar.


Let's do a real example of leverage on the SPY. Imagine you have $20K today and plan on having $100K by JAN 2018.  You could get 100 shares of SPY and ride it out.  Maybe buying another 100 shares every few months until 2018, ending up with less than 500 shares to your name ( and zero cash in the bank ). or You could lever with DEC 2017 LEAP CALLS. They'll expire in 2.5 years, so you'd have to re-up sooner than your plan.   With 20K starting cash, in my example we'll go with 5 contracts to start with.  If we choose the $230 strike they'd cost $1250 each (putting roughly $6250 at risk).   The plan in is if the stock market goes up, you've got leverage.  You are the proud owner of contracts worth 500 shares of SPY and have only spent 1/3rd of your present day dollars.  If the market goes down in the next two years, sure, you lost the entire $6250, but likely saved $93,750 powder dry and can try your luck with the 2021 LEAPS.   Probably get down votes for this, but I'll even argue that proper use of leverage can very much reduce your risk.   One truth is you'll never get a margin call from holding long options.


"> How does this reflect upon 8 years of the AHCA?  It's a good question but I suspect the answer is ""not good"".  It had a few things to improve our circus of a healthcare system but mainly focused on getting more people into the dysfunctional tent."


None whatsoever, no. Moreover, trying something like that would very likely trigger a full audit.


If I own shares of a company, am I entitled to apply as position of   CEO? Sure, but anybody else can apply too. Who decides? The corporate board of directors, who are nominally chosen by a vote of the stockholders. I say nominally, because in practice they are nominated by the current CEO and it's very rare for stockholders to veto the CEO's choice. Once in a while a group of stockholders will nominate their own candidate for the board, but they rarely win. I'd like to think there's some socio-corporate or investor-relationship advantage to working or having the option to work in certain positions in said company -- especially by privilege or total outstanding share ownership numbers. Why? Simply holding a large number of shares doesn't necessarily mean you know anything about running the business.


Well you have to understand that even when working full time at minimum wage you generally have very little money or time that can go towards going to school, having kids or having any kind of fun at all in life. Do you really understand what it's like to start from the bottom? It's always getting worse for the bottom subset so it's always getting more difficult to change their lives.  It's not impossible but it actually is incredibly unfair. This is not a meritocratic society. This is not a utilitarian society. All the rich really want is to feel like they are better people than others. They don't have the incentive to want to actually make people better around them. When almost everything is owned in society and you don't own any of it than you yourself are effectively owned as well.


">So, are you going to bring some facts I don't know about to this debate  Reddit posting space is so small, and the sum total of facts (*real* ones, not the ""official"" ones) of things you are blind to are so large that it would be impossible to fit them in here (even as links to outside data).  >or just a drive by smearing?  Your hero Krugman engages in that on a regular basis, one would have though you had become familiar with it by now."


If your deductions are higher than the standard deduction, you will be able to subtract property taxes from your income. In your example, that means that taxes are computed based on $95,000. In 2011, the standard deduction varies between $5,800 (single filer) and $11,600 (married filing jointly). Tax credits are subtracted from your tax obligation. The most common tax credit for most people is student loan interest. If you pay $500 in student loan interest, that sum is subtracted from your tax bill.


An important factor you failed to mention is the costs associated with owning a home.  For example, every 10 / 15 years, you have to replace your AC unit ($5k) and what about replacing a roof (depends on size, but could be $10k)?  Not to mention, paying a couple thousand annually for property taxes.  When renting, you never have to worry about any of these three.....


AFAIK, in the USA, as long as you're beneath a staff threshold of something like 13 people (correct me if someone knows the exact number), you can willfully discriminate in hiring however you damn well please.   Makes sense to me. If you have a tiny business, one person being out for 3 months can have a massive impact. Not simply one fewer maze rat in the cube farm at GE.


"I know that's always going to be the thing that people are talking about when they claim that not enough people go to jail for financial crimes.  First, [some did](http://money.cnn.com/2016/04/28/news/companies/bankers-prison/index.html) go to jail.    It's arguable that the Feds should have tried harder to find ways to accuse specific people of crimes, but the actual housing price crisis was caused by a widespread belief that housing prices just couldn't collapse as much as they did in any circumstance.  That set off a chain reaction that had never happened before in any known modern economy.   If you really want to go after everyone involved, it would include everyone from bankers to economists to home buyers who bought more house than they could afford, generally by lying about their income on ""stated income"" mortgages."


Do a common size analysis to  compare to its competitors. Also run a rqtio analysis to the industry. Explain the commonalities and differences as it pertains to the business.   A lot of big banks publish research on public companies and where they're headed in terms of financials. They are usually published for a fee but you can sometimes find them for free online.  It would be useful to talk about the current financial landscape like yellen, rate hikes etc if you wanna go there.


"She's also emotionally manipulating you. You'll put her in a bad spot if you quit? Tough shit! She only wants you to stay because she is too lazy to find someone else. Trust me, she does NOT care about your future career goals.  Also, she said she would help you out ""if you do well"". What does that mean? Has she given you a benchmark for what ""well"" is? Two months is not very long. Keep looking for something else, and if you find something better, take it. If not, just suck it up and stay there."


I know one piece of information that can help you (in a macabe sort of way) - from what my wife has told me, if your partner dies, you are not responsible for paying for their debts, especially student loans. I expect the same thing for credit cards - if someone were to happen to charge $2,000 on their credit card and get hit by a bus, the credit card company can cajole and plead for you to pay for it, but you have no legal requirement to do so.  Unfortunately I do not have as much information about as if you spouse is living.


I don't have a reference, but I think it depends on when you entered the workforce: If you finished school at age 24, your primary goals are to pay down expensive debt and to save up enough for a down payment.  So essentially not much.  Maybe $5k to $10k at the most. On the other hand if you entered the workforce at age 20, with no debts and no significant expenses, it should have been easy to sock away 20% of your income for 6 years, so $40k to $50k would be reasonable. The difference is that the first person's income earning potential should be higher, so eventually they'd be able to make up the difference and pass them.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/india-botched-goods-and-services-tax-by-shashi-tharoor-2017-07) reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Milk products, for example, may fit into four different tax rates; generic flour will not be taxed, but branded flour will be taxed at 5%. Not surprisingly, the result has been widespread confusion about which tax rates apply to what.  > Even before the GST was rolled out, the Indian judicial system was choked by indirect tax appeals, tying down some $23 billion in tax revenue.  > The confusing tax rates, excessive documentation, and anxiety over the implementation of compliance requirements has prompted fears that the GST will damage people&#039;s livelihoods.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6nawok/indias_botched_tax_reform/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~166832 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **GST**^#1 **tax**^#2 **rate**^#3 **Modi**^#4 **India**^#5"


Well, I'm from the Netherlands, which is also kind of a 'nanny' state, usually supermarket goods are fairly cheap (bottle of 1,5L Coca Cola is $1,42, a 24-crate of beer is around $11). But gasoline ($2/L), diesel ($1.60/L) and tobacco ($6-8.50) are quite expensive.  Basically we have an extra tax on certain (unhealthy and environmentally harmful) goods so you get a basic consumer tax of 19% (soon to be 21%) + 15-250%. For example a pack of cigarettes of $6.50 is $1.71 without taxes right now.  But for some reason alcohol isn't taxed as heavily, where tobacco gets upwards of 250% extra tax alcohol only gets 5-15.5% extra taxes.


Right now, there are three major cable companies.  They are very obviously operating on a gentleman's agreement not to contest each others' territories too much, and using that position to wildly inflate prices.  Witness how much headroom the incumbent suddenly finds to cut prices and improve service when Google Fiber comes to town.  Large shareholders have outsized influence on the composition of a Board and its agenda, because small shareholders don't organize.  Giving 67% of SpinCo to Comcast shareholders means that the kingmakers for the Comcast board will be the kingmakers for the SpinCo board, except that they can't play too rough with the Charter kingmakers.  And yes, they could sell their stock, but do you think they will?  Right now, it's a three-party agreement between three independent companies.  SpinCo will be owned directly by Charter, and by the same people who also own Comcast.  It turns the three-party agreement into a two-party agreement, because both of the other two companies will have either the direct or indirect power to make sure that SpinCo doesn't contest territories too much, rather than having to rely on the third company freely agreeing to that arrangement.


Glad I could help! I really got a lot from the theory, although full disclosure I didn't read the whole book, we just studied it in class. I'm a supervisor at a paintball park while I'm at school, and the thing I always admired most was how they made everyone feel like they had self worth. You could be the seasonal employee, making minimum wage, and you still knew you were valued by everyone, as long as you did your job. Everyone played their own role, while some were more important, the whole thing falls apart if its missing a small piece. Your question about IT is just like this. Even though the IT guys might be technically small potatoes next to the big time salesman, he still needs functioning computers or else he can't do business.


My wife was once on a game show.   The income was 1099 and wholly unrelated to gambling.  I did offset the hotel cost on a schedule C against it (and filed a California return to get back the withholding) but a television appearance for a prize is not gambling.  It is pay for a performance and she didn't risk any of her own money.   Your friend's 8k loss can only offset casino or lottery winnings, sorry.


Venezualans are earning 200 times more bolivars today than they were 4 years ago. Does this mean venezualans are outperforming Americans? Obviously not. there was a lot left out of this article. Rising cost of healthcare, housing, transportation, education etc.


The total limit book is a composite of all the orders on all of the exchanges. While it's uncommon for a limit order posted beyond the NBBO to fill outside of the NBBO, it does occur. For example, the best ask may be on exchange X, but for some reason the smart order routing algorithm may select exchange Y if it judges the net trade to be less costly, malfunctions, etc, and HFTs will immediately arbitrage the order between two exchanges, or the best order on exchange X disappears causing the order to fill above the NBBO. The system isn't perfect because there are multiple exchanges, but that eventuality is extremely rare with equities since nearly every exchange will have orders posted at the NBBO because exchange equity fee and rebate schedules are extremely competitive, nearly identical.  It is however more common with options since less exchanges as a percentage of the total will have orders posted at the NBBO because of very wide exchange rebate and fee schedules. How a single exchange handles a new order that crosses an existing limit order is already addressed here: How do exchanges match limit orders?


Must be regional. McDonalds burgers are the same quality and the McChicken tastes great for 1 dollar. It is the best bang for your buck on the US east coast to my knowledge.  Also their coffee is a MUCH better value than Starbucks and DD.


"Would my (new) landlord even be aware of the fact that I'm his   guarantor? Does that show up on a credit report or would there be   another indication of it somewhere? It may come up during background checks, and it may not come up. You're expected to disclose material information on the rental application, and withholding it may lead to voiding the rental contract and eviction. But the problem is slightly different. Can you afford paying two rents? By being the guarantor you take the responsibility of paying the rent ""in the case if..."". You need to treat it as a real liability that you will be expected to pay. With all the respect to your brother, if something unexpected happens - you will be on the hook. You have to account for that."


Why would you need to have a separate checking account just for tax payments? As long as your categorize your expense properly, you can run a report based on that category to present only your tax responsibilities. You can set up your account how you want, but IMO it seems excessive for quarterly tax payments. My other thought is that you may also be required to pay monthly bank charges to have a second business checking.


It's 5% free money, if you believe the company's stock is fairly valued and likely to grow and/or return reasonable dividends until you're ready to sell it. There's usually a minimum holding period of a few months to a year before these discounted shares can be sold; take that into account


"Smart money (Merriam-Webster, Wiktionary) is simply a term that refers to the money that successful investors invest.  It can also refer to the successful investors themselves.  When someone tells you to ""follow the smart money,"" they are generally telling you to invest in the same things that successful investors invest in.  For example, you might decide to invest in the same things that Warren Buffett invests in.   However, there are a couple of problems with blindly following someone else's investments without knowing what you are doing. First, you are not in the same situation that the expert is in.  Warren Buffett has a lot of money in a lot of places.  He can afford to take some chances that you might not be able to take.  So if you choose only one of his investments to copy, and it ends up being a loser, he is fine, but you are not. Second, when Warren Buffett makes large investments, he affects the price of stocks.  For example, Warren Buffett's company recently purchased $1 Billion worth of Apple stock.  As soon as this purchase was announced, the price of Apple stock went up 4% from people purchasing the stock trying to follow Warren Buffett.   That having been said, it is a good idea to watch successful investors and learn from what they do.  If they see a stock as something worth investing in, find out what it is that they see in that company."


"If history is any guide, Page’s idealistic impulses could result in a vaster, more sprawling company. The following is an example of one of Page’s idealistic impulses (wanting people to share spectrum) which could result in a vaster, more sprawling company (if they hadn't been outbid, Google would have expanded by buying a business asset i.e. spectrum which they didn't need). I've no experience with bidding. I don't understand what's happening at all An 'auction' is a way to sell something. Instead of offering it for sale at a fixed price, you offer it 'to the highest bidder'. Someone (e.g. Google) says, ""I'll offer you [some amount: e.g. a million dollars] for it."" If no-one else exceeds that bid, then you say 'sold' and Google has bought it. Alternatively someone else comes along with a higher bid, ""I'll offer you two million dollars for it,"" in which case they're the new high bidder, and you'll sell it to them unless the process repeats itself with anyone counter-offering an even higher bid. See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auction and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectrum_auction The ""Disadvantages"" section of this article alleges (currently without a citation) that: Despite the apparent success of spectrum auctions, an important disadvantage limiting both efficiency and revenues is demand reduction and collusive bidding. The information and flexibility in the process of auction can be used to reduce auction prices by tacit collusion. When bidder competition is weak and one bidder holds an apparent advantage to win the auction for specific licenses, other bidders will often choose not to the bid for higher prices, hence reducing the final revenue generated by the auction.[citation needed] In this case, the auction is best thought of as a negotiation among the bidders, who agree on who should win the auction for each discrete bit of spectrum. Google's bid made that impossible (or, at least, ensured that the winning bid would be at least as high as the minimum which was set by Google's bid)."


"Let's not get too hung up on job titles. People hiring you are not interested in (or hoodwinked by)job titles.  Call yourself The Grand Poohbah for all I care - what I want to see is what you were doing in that role, and how well you were doing it!  Call your self ""Do It All Man"" or something silly. Believe me, looking at Resumes is the worst job in the world.   When I was hiring people, I will give you my process.  I open a gigantic envelope, take out a huge pile of paper. Try to find the application letter. OK - found it - great. Tear off everything except the first piece of paper, and chuck in the rubbish. If you sent an application letter which is less than one side of one page, your application automatically goes into the list of ""possibles"".  Next, I find the CV, and I take the top sheet, and chuck everything else in the trash.  If you can't convince me, using ONLY two pieces of paper, and ONLY one side of each: one applying for the job, and the other showing your relevant experience, THEN YOU NEVER EVEN GET AN INTERVIEW.   If you want to spend 10 pages telling me about everything you've ever done - and you start at age 17 on page 1, then I will never get to know what you did after delivering milk at age 19, *because I threw the rest in the trash already*.  OK, I got side-tracked. Sorry. Job titles mean diddly squat."


Don't forget taxes, Web site (even if it just has your business name, address and phone number its better than not having a site at all) social media for showing off the flower arrangements and getting more business...


I would go for the upgrade and cancel the insurance. It's been 5 years since I left the post paid subsidized phone world and I'm WAY better off.  I use ATT GoPhone and I buy my phones in cash.  If I shatter my phone, I replace the screen or simply buy a new one.  Sites like swappa.com make buying and selling phones a breeze and you save a bundle of money leaving the carrier subsidies and ridiculous insurance programs on the table.


"Basically, your question boils down to this: Where and how do I squeeze the stock market so that within time period X, it will make me Y dollars. (Where I'm emotionally attached to the Y figure because I recently lost it, and X is ""as soon as possible"".) To make money on the stock market (in a quasi-guaranteed way), you have to adjust X and Y so that they are realistic. For instance, let X be twenty-five years, and Y be ""7% annual return"". Small values of X are risky, unless X is on the order of milliseconds and you have a computer program working for you. To mitigate some of the risk of short term trading, you have to treat trading seriously and study like mad: study the stock market in general, and not only that, but carefully research the companies whose stocks you are buying. Work actively to discover stocks which are under-valued relative to the performance of their corporation, and which might correct upward relative to the performance of similar stocks. Always have an exit strategy for every position and stick to it. Use instruments like ""trailing stops"": automatic tracking which follows a price in one direction, and then produces an order to close the position when the price reverses by a certain amount."


Around Oct 03 2010 the SPY closed at 113.  Today it is trading at 130.  After four months, that means that the S&P is up 15% over that particular 4 month period. You said you need something pretty low maintenance, and you are comparing your returns to the S&P 500 (which as @duffbeer703 points out is a good thing to compare against because of its diversification). To kill two birds with one stone, I would sell your fund that you have and take the proceeds and purchase the ETF SPY.  SPY trades like a stock but mirrors the S&P 500's performance. It has extremely low fees (as opposed to what I suspect your BlackRock fund has).  You can own it in an Etrade or Fidelity or other low cost broker account.  Then you will be extremely low maintenance, fully diversified (among stocks) and you don't have to compare your performance against the S&P :)


"There's no such thing as ""unlimited resources"".   Rephrase your question and explain the limits under which you want to work, to succeed.  Final note: if you have unlimited resources, why would you even start a business or work on anything? Got it?"


I don't understand the rooting for Louis CK. He's charging for what should be free - digital content. That's what I always hear on Reddit. But because he's, what, not going through Time Warner or something, this is more *pure*?


He's the Pharma company fall guy. This will diffuse a lot of the hostility toward them for a while because it is seen as a victory against them when in reality it didnt do much. Him being an unlikeable dickweasel just made him a better choice.


International means from all over the world. In the U.S. A Foreign Equity fund would be non-US stocks.  There's an odd third choice I'm aware of, a fund of US companies that derive their sales from overseas, primarily.


How dare you talk about Israel like that and suggest that they be removed from the face of the earth by force . .how utterly anti-Semitic of you . .  I think that the Administrator of this site should ban an unintelligent creature like you for suggesting mass genocide of the Israeli people . .shame on you


**NAT Port Mapping Protocol**  The NAT Port Mapping Protocol (NAT-PMP) is a network protocol for establishing network address translation (NAT) settings and port forwarding configurations automatically without user effort. The protocol automatically determines the external IPv4 address of a NAT gateway, and provides means for an application to communicate the parameters for communication to peers. NAT-PMP was introduced in 2005 by Apple as an alternative to the more common ISO Standard Internet Gateway Device Protocol implemented in many NAT routers. The protocol was published as an informational Request for Comments (RFC) by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) in RFC 6886.  ***  ^[ [^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


Yes absurd. But those fat cat business owners need to pay their share! I mean my 70 year old Korean dry cleaner and his wife have been screwing the state out of their fair share of the till for a long time.  But seriously, the tax is really horrible for the small business with small margins and large volume. Dry cleaners, restaurants and convenience stores are just a few examples.


There is plenty of research that shows that companies that have a portfolio of brands within the same category have superior financial returns.  The reason is that even for dish soap there are different types of people who want different products.  One of the more successful brands for P&G over the past decade has been Gain detergent.  It is a mega-brand that competes with tide for people who love scent.  The brand has been so successful that there are now dish soaps and other products with the Gain name.  There are typically performance differences between the brands.  For example trade off performance against a certain type of stain for more scent.


Generally for tax questions you should talk to a tax adviser. Don't consider anything I write here as a tax advice, and the answer was not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used by any taxpayer, for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer. Does IRS like one payment method over other or they simply don't care   as long as she can show the receipts? They don't care as long as she withholds the taxes (30%, unless specific arrangements are made for otherwise). She should withhold 30% of the payment and send it to the IRS. The recipient should claim refund, if the actual tax liability is lower. It's only consulting work at the moment, so most of the communication   is done over phone. Should they start engaging in written   communication to keep records of the work done? Yes, if she wants it to be a business expense. Is it okay to pay in one go to save money-transferring fees? Can she   pay in advance? Again, she can do whatever she wants, but if she wants to account for it on her tax returns she should do it the same way she would pay any other vendor in her business. She cannot use different accounting methods for different vendors. Basically, she has not outsourced work in previous years, and she   wants to avoid any red flags. Then she should start by calling on her tax adviser, and not an anonymous Internet forum.


Your crystal ball of presumption is clearly cracked.  Apple admitted to paying a 6% overseas tax rate in 2015.  It has been suggested they pay about 8% in the US, but nobody really knows but them.  What an utterly ridiclous statement to suggest they are anywhere close to losing money.  Any fool can see Apple is highly profitable and competetive everywhere.  Multinational corporations have amasses over two trillion dollars overseas.  The competition is over when you get to profit.  Cash is useless until transformed into something material.  They should want to improve the country of their origin.


"I am forgetful and a parent of 2 young boys.  It's way easier to order something walking through the house while it's fresh in my mind than trying to remember to go online and order stuff once they're in bed.  * I clean litter boxes, realize were low, on my way out the door with old litter in garbage bag I yell ""Alexa, order more of our cat litter"".  * Doing dishes and grab the one of the last pods for the dishwasher ""alexa order more dish washer detergent"".  In the world of being a parent, I go from one task to the next when not playing with my kids, and i get distracted very easily. My wife and I make it a point to not be on our phones when with our kids, so I can't just open my amazon app and order from there since it's usually on the charger when I'm home."


Hundreds of millions of stock options isn't hundreds of millions of income yet though. And once they cash out they do get taxed as income so it's effectively the same. If we taxed the stock options it would be double taxation.  I know it's ridiculous how much money they make still though something has to be done but just pointing that out.


but what about non-identifying information like emails or even telephone numbers? Are you allowed to do this? Most countries have privacy laws that would explicitly forbid companies from selling data not just to other companies, but even to other divisions within the company without explicit approval from customer.  There are adequate regulatory controls that would stop companies from indulging in such practises. However tons of smaller / un-registered companies or companies operating from certain countries are definitely a source for such practises.


The first thing you should do, and should have been doing all this time if you weren't, is to take the money you would've paid in the payment plan and set it aside in a separate savings account.  If your plan was 2 years, $65 a month, then set that aside, now. That will allow you to be in a better negotiating position when this is finally resolved.  It's also possible this takes two years to be resolved - in which case you'll be in position to pay the debt off in full at that point!  It's also possible at some point in the future you'll be offered to settle for half or something like that, at which point if you've saved several months of payments that might be more practical to do. As far as what to do about the charges being removed, unless you have a specific reason for believing they're invalid, that's probably impossible.  You could go to the Public Service Commission (outlined in this article about making complaints about overcharges from ConEd); it seems like it's probably too late for that, honestly, but who knows.  If you'd made more of an effort at the time, it's possible you could've disputed them back then with PSC.   And, as far as what to do with requiring written payment plans: absolutely, 100%.  I would try to find out why you're not getting the plans.  Do they have the wrong address, perhaps?  Or is your mail sometimes poorly delivered?  Ask them to send it via certified mail (you may be charged a few dollars for this), or ask them to e-mail you a copy while you're on the phone with them (my preferred option). Bill collectors like getting their money, so they ought to help you out with this.


>Ummm I bet we didn't 'work less'  You'd lose your bet. Hunter-gatherers worked only a few hours per day.  Consider it: housing costs, near zero; energy and transport costs, near zero; insurance, medical care, zero; education, students loans, etc, zero; and on...


Dividends and interest are counted under operations for the purpose of this tweet. This is pretty much entirely a non-story. I'm not sure exactly how they're dividing it up, but it looks like they're only counting stock appreciation as capital gains and counting things revenue from sales (from their subsidiaries as well) under operating income.   This is just from a quick glance over their statement of earning, but that's what it looks like to me.


Assuming there are no other liabilities...  The enterprise value is $5mm. $1mm loan + $4mm equity. The proforma enterprise value will be the same, but the equity will now represent all of it at $5mm. Your 4% will now be 3.2%, but equal the same value; $160,000.


Shareholders are the equity holders. They mean the same thing.  A simplified formula for the total value of a company is the value of its equity, plus the value of its debt, less its cash (for reasons I won't get into). There are usually other things to add or subtract, but that's the basic formula.


A stopped clock is right two times a day.   We may get a market crash similar to the financial crisis or the dot com crash or we may not. What if over the next 10 years rates rise very sluggishly, low inflation, and  low growth more or less continues with maybe one brief and shallow recession. In that case I bet US stocks produce 4-5% returns per year and US bonds produce maybe 1-2% per year.  European and emerging market stocks should have higher returns because they are in an earlier part of the cycle.  I think your baseline has to look something like that.  The last two crashes were caused by the tech bubble and the housing bubble - where is the bubble today? US stocks are expensive, but probably not in bubble territory. Bonds worldwide are unattractive with low or negative yields - negative yields maybe a bubble, but central banks will be the most hurt by negative rates and they are in a strong position to take the pain.   There could be a crash I just don't see how we get there yet - maybe china?


Very true, however, gambling is still a huge part (~50% huge) and we have gotten smarter on how to attract gamblers, which include incentivising them with nongaming stuff like concerts, fights, etc...  AC doesnt have all that so its much harder for them to attract gamblers    Source: im a slot marketing manager at a luxury vegas casino.


"1. Interest rates What you should know is that the longer the ""term"" of a bond fund, the more it will be affected by interest rates. So a short-term bond fund will not be subject to large gains or losses due to rate changes, an intermediate-term bond fund will be subject to moderate gains or losses, and a long-term bond fund will be subject to the largest gains or losses. When a book or financial planner says to buy ""bonds"" with no other qualification, they almost always mean investment-grade intermediate-term bond funds (or for individual bonds, the equivalent would be a bond ladder averaging an intermediate term). If you want technical details, look at the ""average duration"" or ""average maturity"" of the bond fund; as a rough guide, if the duration is 10, then a 1% change in interest rates would be a 10% gain or loss on the fund. Another thing you can do is look at long-term (10 years or ideally longer) performance history on some short, intermediate, and long term bond index funds, and you can see how the long term funds bounced around more. Non-investment-grade bonds (aka junk bonds or high yield bonds) are more affected by factors other than interest rates, including some of the same factors (economic booms or recessions) that affect stocks. As a result, they aren't as good for diversifying a portfolio that otherwise consists of stocks. (Having stocks, investment grade bonds, and also a little bit in high-yield bonds can add diversification, though. Just don't replace your bond allocation with high-yield bonds.) A variety of ""complicated"" bonds exist (convertible bonds are an example) and these are tough to analyze. There are also ""floating rate"" bonds (bank loan funds), these have minimal interest rate sensitivity because the rate goes up to offset rate rises. These funds still have credit risks, in the credit crisis some of them lost a lot of money. 2. Diversification The purpose of diversification is risk control. Your non-bond funds will outperform in many years, but in other years (say the -37% S&P 500 drop in 2008) they may not. You will not know in advance which year you'll get. You get risk control in at least a few ways. There's also an academic Modern Portfolio Theory explanation for why you should diversify among risky assets (aka stocks), something like: for a given desired risk/return ratio, it's better to leverage up a diverse portfolio than to use a non-diverse portfolio, because risk that can be eliminated through diversification is not compensated by increased returns. The theory also goes that you should choose your diversification between risk assets and the risk-free asset according to your risk tolerance (i.e. select the highest return with tolerable risk). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_portfolio_theory for excruciating detail. The translation of the MPT stuff to practical steps is typically, put as much in stock index funds as you can tolerate over your time horizon, and put the rest in (intermediate-term investment-grade) bond index funds. That's probably what your planner is asking you to do. My personal view, which is not the standard view, is that you should take as much risk as you need to take, not as much as you think you can tolerate: http://blog.ometer.com/2010/11/10/take-risks-in-life-for-savings-choose-a-balanced-fund/ But almost everyone else will say to do the 80/20 if you have decades to retirement and feel you can tolerate the risk, so my view that 60/40 is the max desirable allocation to stocks is not mainstream. Your planner's 80/20 advice is the standard advice. Before doing 100% stocks I'd give you at least a couple cautions: See also:"


"This does not seem, to me, to be a very good indication regarding the   risk of the person not paying their balances off. If you do not have a source of income then how are you going to repay your debt.  Not to mention there is recource for creditors to garnish wages.  That is not possible if you have no income.  The risk assessment is about the ability of the creditor to recover any moneys loaned and costs and still make a profit. For example, students have their parents pay them some pocket money to   cover for expenses, or a person might be working sporadically on   consulting gigs that do not have a fixed monthly or yearly component. Most credit card companies that are willing to issue to college students will allow you to include money from your parents in your income.  Credit card companies are looking for customers that will carry a balance and incur fees but be able to pay them.  These companies do not make money off of fees and interest that they do not collect.  As such, sporatic work increases risk. Is it possible for people to get approved for unsecured credit cards   if they don't hold (or have not held for some time) a job at the time   of application? I was able to while I was in college.  Though I did have a part time job.  If you can show that you have the ability to pay you can usually get a credit card if you do not have bad credit.  It will probably be high interest and have alot of fees some of them you will have to pay upfront.  But what you probably mean to ask is ""Is it possible to get a no cost unsecured credit card with out a reliable source of income?""  The answer to that is: probably not.  Even the ones that look like they are free probably have hidden fees."


"There are two types of insurance, which causes some confusion. Social Security Disability Insurance (which you indicate you have) is insurance you can receive benefit from if you earn enough ""work credits"" (payroll taxes) prior to your disability onset. It is not a needs-based program. Supplemental Security Income is a need-based program which does not consider your work history. To qualify for this, your total assets need to be lower than some threshold and your family income also below some threshold. If you inherit a home, or money, I doubt this would jeopardize your SSDI qualification, since your qualification was based on a disabling condition and work history. If you inherit an income property, which you manage (i.e. you become a landlord), this may jeopardize your claim that you are unable to work. Even if you are not making an ""income"" as the landlord, but the work your are performing is deemed to have some ""value"" this too could jeopardize your claim. All of this can be very complicated, and there are some excellent references on the web including SSA website, and some other related websites. Finally, if you become able to work while on SSDI, your benefit may/will end depending on the level of work you are able to perform. But just because you are able to work again does not mean you need to repay past benefits received (assuming your condition has not been falsified). Your local social security office, or the social security main office both offer telephone support and can also answer questions regarding your concern. Here are a couple relevant links:"


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-shoots-down-pro-assad-190100769.html) reduced by 69%. (I'm a bot) ***** > More.The United States has shot down a pro-Syrian government drone that opened fire on US-led coalition forces in Syria, a military spokesman said, in a major escalation of tensions between Washington and troops supporting Damascus.  > At-Tanaf, on the key highway connecting Damascus with Baghdad, has been menaced by a surge of Iran-backed troops loyal to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad.The area, also just north-east of the Jordanian border, is used by coalition forces as a training and staging area for attacks against Isis.The coalition has established a &quot;De-confliction&quot; zone, extending 34 miles from the garrison, in which pro-regime and Russian forces are not supposed to operate.  > Dillon said the drone had fired on coalition forces patrolling outside the zone.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6g9wg4/united_states_has_shot_down_a_prosyrian/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~140308 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **forces**^#1 **coalition**^#2 **drone**^#3 **Dillon**^#4 **State**^#5"


Why would the IRS be coming after you if you reported the income? If you reported everything, then the IRS will use the 1099 to cross-check, see that everything is in order, be happy and done with it. The lady was supposed to give you the 1099 by the end of January, and she may be penalized by the IRS for being late, but as long as you/wifey reported all the income - you're fine. It was supposed to be reported on Schedule C or as miscellaneous income on line 21 (schedule C sounds more suitable as it seems that your wifey is in a cleaning business). But there's no difference in how you report whether you got 1099 or not, so if you reported - you should be fine.


This is more of an interesting question then it looks on first sight. In the USA there are some tax reliefs for mortgage payments, which we don’t have in the UK unless you are renting out the property with the mortgage.  So firstly work out the interest rate on each loan taking into account any tax reliefs, etc. Then you need to consider the charges for paying off a loan, for example often there is a charge if you pay off a mortgage.   These days in the UK, most mortgagees allow you to pay off at least 10% a year without hitting such a charge – but check your mortgage offer document. How interest is calculated when you make an early payment may be different between your loans – so check. Then you need to consider what will happen if you need another loan.   Some mortgages allow you to take back any overpayments, most don’t.  Re-mortgaging to increase the size of your mortgage often has high charges. Then there is the effect on your credit rating: paying more of a loan each month then you need to, often improves your credit rating. You also need to consider how interest rates may change, for example if you mortgage is a fixed rate but your car loan is not and you expect interest rates to rise, do the calculations based on what you expect interest rates to be over the length of the loans. However, normally it is best to pay off the loan with the highest interest rate first.  Reasons for penalties for paying of some loans in the UK. In the UK some short term loans (normally under 3 years) add on all the interest at the start of the loan, so you don’t save any interest if you pay of the loan quicker.    This is due to the banks having to cover their admin costs, and there being no admin charge to take out the loan. Fixed rate loans/mortgagees have penalties for overpayment, as otherwise when interest rates go down, people will change to other lenders, so making it a “one way bet” that the banks will always loose.   (I believe in the USA, the central bank will under right such loans, so the banks don’t take the risk.)


"I'm not sure the term actually has a clear meaning. We can think of ""what does this mean"" in two ways: its broad semantic/metaphorical meaning, and its mechanical ""what actual variables in the market represent this quantity"". Net buying/selling have a clear meaning in the former sense by analogy to the basic concept of supply and demand in equilibrium markets. It's not as clear what their meaning should be in the latter sense. Roughly, as the top comment notes, you could say that a price decrease is because of net selling at the previous price level, while a price rise is driven by net buying at the previous price level. But in terms of actual market mechanics, the only way prices move is by matching of a buyer and a seller, so every market transaction inherently represents an instantaneous balance across the bid/ask spread. So then we could think about the notion of orders. Actual transactions only occur in balance, but there is a whole book of standing orders at various prices. So maybe we could use some measure of the volume at various price levels in each of the bid/ask books to decide some notion of net buying/selling. But again, actual transactions occur only when matched across the spread. If a significant order volume is added on one side or the other, but at a price far away from the bid/offer - far enough that an actual trade at that price is unlikely to occur - should that be included in the notion of net buying/selling? Presumably there is some price distance from the bid/offer where the orders don't matter for net buying/selling. I'm sure you'd find a lot of buyers for BRK.A at $1, but that's completely irrelevant to the notion of net buying/selling in BRK.A. Maybe the closest thing I can think of in terms of actual market mechanics is the comparative total volumes during the period that would still have been executed if forced to execute at the end of period price. Assuming that traders' valuations are fixed through the period in question, and trading occurs on the basis of fundamentals (which I know isn't a good assumption in practice, but the impact of price history upon future price is too complex for this analysis), we have two cases. If price falls, we can assume all buyers who executed above the last price in the period would have happily bought at the last price (saving money), while all sellers who executed below the last price in the period would also be happy to sell for more. The former will be larger than the latter. If the price rises, the reverse is true."


SecondMarket attempts to add liquidity to privately held companies. You may be able to find a buyer there, but this is still incredibly illiquid due to accredited investor regulations constricting businesses from catering to the 99%. As around 1% of the United States population qualifies as an accredited investor.


You should probably consult an attorney. However, if the owner was a corporation/LLC and it has been officially dissolved, you can provide an evidence of that from your State's department of State/Corporations to show that their request is unfeasible. If the owner was a sole-proprietor, then that may be harder as you'll need to track the person down and have him close the plan.


I'm not saying your not a hard worker but you sound like a whiner that thinks they have all the answers. It sounds like your parents want you to just do your job. I disagree with your parents 'selling' you the business. I think you should start your own business before trying to run someone else's. Your workplace is a business not a training camp, i entirely agree that you should not be training customers or employees how to use excel or google sheets. maybe a friendly YouTube link, but that's it.


Inhibited Ethylene Glycol is used as an industrial coolant, antifreeze heat transfer fluid. The inhibitor package is designed to protect brass, copper, solder, steel, cast iron, aluminum and other metals commonly found in the industrial cooling and heating systems. The effectiveness of Inhibited Mono Ethylene Glycol Brine (Inhibited MEG Brine) in preventing corrosion has been proven in extensive laboratory and in actual service tests. Using Inhibited Mono Ethylene Glycol Brine (Inhibited MEG Brine) for heat transfer applications instead of brine solutions or un-inhibited ethylene glycol reduces maintenance costs and improves heat transfer efficiency. Outperforms Dowtherm, Dowcal and Norkool range of inhibited ethylene glycol based heat transfer fluids.


I don't get it. Are most redditors in this thread the children of rich people? Did you all grow up with central air?  You're first place to live outside of your parents' place is probably gonna suck. That's life.


The FDIC has been pretty good at recovery lost money from failed banks. The problem is the temporary loss from immediate needs. The best thing for anyone to do is diversify in investments and banks with adequate covered insurance for all accounts. Immediate access to available cash is always a priority that should be governed by the money manager in this case yourself.


Who the fuck cares what most voters think? Most Americans also were unable to do the simple math to tell you whether you would have more or less purchasing power in a scenario where annual interest on your savings account was 1% but inflation was 2%.  There's a reason we don't allow the average citizen to have a voice in regards to the economy and that is it. The profound level of ignorance from the average person regarding even the most simplistic elements of finance is appalling and disgusting.


Im in texas so as far as i know we are allowed to work pretty much as much as we wantm its probably different in different states and i could be wrong about texas. Ive only worked in fast food so they could have smuged the rules a bit. I cant really work that little since if i do I'll only be able to spend or save 80 a month after bills and gas. So i qish i could work that little lol


>Of course there will be a net loss in jobs.  If you draw your box around the fast food industry only, then yes.  However, if you draw your box around the entire US economy, it's not so clear cut.  We have absolutely no idea what jobs will come in the future.  Every single time an industry has been wiped out, from polar ice delivery to horse carriage manufacturing, new industries have risen to take their place.


"It depends on when, where and how the account was setup.  If the state has an UGMA (Uniform Gift to Minors) law, the account was probably opened under that -- in which case, your wife became the custodian by statute at age 18 or 21. She has always been the account owner. The ""catch"" is that if your wife's father died before she assumed custodianship of the account, it may be subject to taxation. You may be in some sort of oddball situation where due to your wife moving, the broker merging or lost records, the phone reps cannot figure out what is going on. I'd suggest working the phone tree a little harder and searching for old records."


Points are index based.  Simple take the total value of the stocks that compose the index, and set it equal to an arbitrary number. (Say 100 or 1000)  This becomes your base.  Each day, you recalculate the value of the index basket, and relate it to the base.  So if our index on day 0 was 100, and the value of the basket went up 1%, the new index would be 101 points. For the example given, the percentage change would be (133.32 -133.68  ) / 133.68 * 100% = -0.27%  Keep in mind that an index basket will change in composition over time.  Assets are added and removed as the composition of the market changes.  For example, the TSX index no longer includes Nortel, a stock that at one time made up a significant portion of the index.  I'm not sure if a percentage drop in an index is really a meaningful statistic because of that.   It is however, a good way of looking at an individual instrument.


It looks like you are very well read. So here is some advice that you might have heard but dont take seriously and let me warn you since you are signaling a high intellect that you should take this very seriously.   Do not do drugs. Even alcohol or cigs. You most likely have a high possibility of addiction since from what i have noticed the smart ones get easily addicted. This is not a joke. You will be much better living a sober life and i want you to do good for the world.


"What they are doing is wrong. The IRS and the state might not be happy with what they are doing.  One thing you can ask for them to do is to give you a credit card for business and travel expenses. You will still have to submit receipts for expenses, but it will also make it clear to the IRS that these checks are not income. Keep the pay stubs for the year, or the pdf files if they don't give you a physical stub. Pay attention to the YTD numbers on each stub to make sure they aren't sneaking in the expenses as income. If they continue to do this, ask about ownership of the items purchased, since you will be paying the tax shouldn't you own it?  You can in the future tell them ""I was going to buy X like the customer wanted, but I just bought a new washer at home and their wasn't enough room on the credit card. Maybe next month"""


I think most people will have a similar idea to you, but I believe manufactured meat will approach a stage where it is far more efficient to make compared to natural meat, simply because you're avoiding all the extra effort associated with animal husbandry like vaccinations, marking, grazing, slaughtering etc. Once that happens, manufactured meat will be a much cheaper and more environmentally friendly option and people will make the switch organically.


No I get that.  But if you don’t want risk, then buy bonds.  Long term an S&P Index has very low risk.  On the other hand, actively managed funds have fees that take out a ton of the gain that could be had.  I don’t have time to look for the study but I read recently that 97% of actively managed funds were outperformed by S&P Indexes after fees.  Now I don’t know about you but I think the risk of not picking a top 3% fund is probably higher than the safe return of index’s.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2017/09/real-reason-wages-stagnated-economy-optimized-financialization.html) reduced by 84%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Each of these dynamics may well exacerbate the trend, but they all dodge the dominant driver of wage stagnation and rise income-wealth inequality: our economy is optimized for financialization, not labor/earned income.  > What does our economy is optimized for financialization mean? It means that capital and profits flow to the scarcities created by asymmetric access to information, leverage and cheap credit-the engines of financialization.  > As for selling one&#039;s labor in an economy optimized for capital and the asymmetries of finance-there&#039;s no premium for labor in such an economy, other than technical/managerial skills required by finance to exploit markets.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6z41av/the_real_reason_wages_have_stagnated_our_economy/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~207199 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **economy**^#1 **labor**^#2 **financialization**^#3 **flow**^#4 **credit**^#5"


How about a third approach: Figure the buyout as above. Figure what percentage of the value of the house the buyout constitutes. When the house sells the other party gets that percentage of the sales price.


I'm not sure if I am exactly what you are looking for, but I am currently studying finance at a university with a top ten finance program.  I would be happy to help you out with your search for a college or program.  The stuff about how to dress and act will come later.


"I would say yes: it's worth building additional retirement savings on top of a defined benefit pension plan (plans that pay set annual income).  Here are a couple of reasons: Don't put all your eggs in one basket.  While OTPP is probably in good shape, things can and do happen to pension plans.  While there is a provincial system in place to guarantee some of your pension income ($1000/mo) if your plan goes bust, your benefits are not 100% guaranteed. Defined benefit pension plans are designed to provide recurring annual income, like your paycheck when you are employed.  You can't ""take more out"" from your defined benefit pension plan when an emergency comes up.  Whereas, your RRSP (and eventually RRIF, in retirement) are accounts from which you can take out extra in any given year, if necessary. That being said, Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) won't let you save as much in your RRSP as other people who don't have pension plans: Normally, individuals in Canada are entitled to save 18% of their earned income, up to a limit ($21000 in 2009) in an RRSP each year.  However, to level the playing field, individuals who are in a pension plan get a ""Pension Adjustment"" (PA) number on their T4 which reduces their available RRSP contribution room.  Otherwise, they'd be able to tax-shelter more income for retirement than others. So, I would suggest if you have the RRSP room, consider using it.  I'd also suggest you look at a Tax Free Savings Account (TFSA), especially if you don't have much RRSP room due to the pension adjustment.  If you're not sure whether to use an RRSP or a TFSA, consider both."


It may not be available in all areas though. So the person you're replying to might not have access to it yet. But I'm pretty sure if the NYC can system failed they'd bring it to NYC really quick (if it's not there already).


What is the goal of the money?  If it is to use in the short term, like savings for a car or college, then stick it in the bank and use it for that purpose. If you really want this money to mean something, then in my opinion you have only one choice:  Open a ROTH IRA with something like Vanguard or Fidelity and invest in an index fund.  Then do something that will be very difficult:  Don't touch it. By the time you are 65, it will grow to about 60,000.  However, assuming a 20% tax bracket, the value of that money is really more like 75,000.   Clearly this will not make or break you either way.  The way you live the rest of your life will have far more of an impact.  It will get you started on the right path. BTW this is advice I gave my son who is about your age, and does not earn a ton of money as a state trooper.  Half of his overtime pay goes into a ROTH.  If he lives the rest of his life like he does now, he will be a wealthy man despite making an average income.  No debt, and investing a decent portion of his pay.


>Case in point with Uber: Let's say you decide you want to drive for UberX. You lease a Prius, and thus are on the hook financially for $350/month + $100/month insurance + $300/month gas and other car expenses, and you'll have that for three years. That's a $750 nut.  I'm not that familiar with the workings of Uber, but I assume people wouldn't lease a car specifically to become an Uber driver.  I figured Uber drivers were people who already had cars.  If you'd be paying a car lease anyway, driving for Uber doesn't really add that much to your costs.


Yeah, I suppose that's true - and not just in finance but smaller companies in general. I think I might have a good gig right now where I can try my hand on both things. It's a bit tied to one IT system though (Misys Summit) but I guess a lot the skills are transferable.


I doubt that there is an arrangement with any country that would allow you to transfer money out of a 401(k) and roll it over to another country that isn't governed by US Tax Laws without taking a distribution.  The US government won't let you pull out like that without taking its cut. There may be, but I'd be surprised.  Check around in the appropriate venues. If you're making a distribution that incurs penalties, then that's what you're doing.  If you can do so without incurring penalties, then great for you, just deposit into the vehicle of your choice in your country.


Honestly, if you're going to restrict the online payment on your card over this, you may as well just restrict it permanently. Because this is definitely not the only time anyone has had an opportunity to retrieve the information on your card. There isn't really that much information on there - anyone taking more than a cursory look could in theory remember it and use it. We're talking waiters and checkout chicks, anytime you've given your card to anyone really. Banks know this. Credit card numbers are not really secure. They factor this in. And they  have software for fraud detection - looking at large or unusual transactions and transactions in foreign countries etc. Of course it's not fool proof, but the best thing you can do isn't to cripple your card, but just be a little bit more diligent about checking your statements, making sure the transactions make sense. Some banks also allow you to set up an alert system so anytime any transactions occur you are notified immediately.


Funny how quickly that happened, huh? It's when you see shit like that, that you look at them and think wow, you really WERE just fucking us, and now you're scurrying around fixing shit because you know your business model can't compete with theirs. Fuckers.


Well if you paid cash for an MRI in America it could be up to 5,000.   In Indo it's only 250 dollars.   So the average teacher can buy 24 MRIs a year in indo.   How many MRIs can an average American teacher buy per year? Like 8 or 10 tops


For 2014/15 it looks something like this:  To make it a bit clearer, let's also plot the difference in net income for self-employment and a single person company compared to employment:  Self-employment is slightly worse between £5885 and about £10,500 because Class 2 NI kicks in before the employed person starts paying any tax. After that, self-employment is better because you pay 9% Class 4 NI rather than 12% Class 1 NI. Once higher rate tax kicks in, the saving stops growing. The single-person company is most tax-efficient at all points, ignoring any accountancy costs it incurs. Strange things happen between £100k and about £135k because the withdrawal of the personal allowance kicks in at a different point when receiving dividends. We can also plot the percentage of income paid as tax for each case:  The strange kink for self-employment below £10k is caused by Class 2 NI again. Employment and self-employment both gradually tend towards paying 47%, reaching 46.5% for £2m gross income. The company tends towards 44.44%, reaching 43.6% for £2m gross income.


Fill out the form manually, using last year's return as an example of how to report these gains.  Or experiment with one of the low-priced tax programs; I've been told that they are available for as little as $17, and if your alternative is doing it manually, spending a bit of time checking their results isn't a huge problem. Or run the basic TTax, and tell it to add the appropriate forms manually. It supports them, it just doesn't have the interview sections to handle them. (@DanielCarson's answer has more details about that.) Or...


The Shiller data is inflation adjusted. In effect, a flat line means that long term, housing rises with inflation, no more no less. There's no argument, just the underlying data to support his charts. This, among them.   As much as I respect Nobel Prize winning Robert Shiller, his approach and analysis of the boom ignored interest rates. Say we look at a $50K earning couple. This is just below median income. At 9%, they qualify to borrow $145K. As rates fell to 4%, they qualify for $244K. Same fixed 30 term. Ignoring all other factors, the swing in rates will generate an oscillation around the long term trend. And my own data crunching suggests the equilibrium median home price will tend toward the price supported by the median income.  A similar, but not identical question - Why can't house prices be out of tune with salaries? In response to Chan-Ho's comment - I'd imagine Shiller understood the interest impact. To clarify, the chart, as presented, ignores it.


Looks like it's $500 to start (certificate of organization) and $500 per year after that (for an annual report). Start here: http://1.usa.gov/haxLUB And that's just for the state to recognize you as an LLC.


You are in business for yourself. You file Schedule C with your income tax return, and can deduct the business expenses and the cost of goods sold from the gross receipts of your business. If you have inventory (things bought but not yet sold by the end of the year of purchase), then there are other calculations that need to be done.  You will have to pay income tax as well as Social Security and Medicare taxes (both the employee's share and the employer's share) on the net profits from this business activity.


"Well, I'm not an expert and you sound pretty credible however I still don't see anything to back up what your saying in the sources that I've found:  > Active business income can still be earned by [foreign] subsidiaries (if you can prove to Revenue Canada that it is a ""real"" corporation) and taxed at better offshore rates if 90% or more of its income comes from third party transactions.   This seems to be consistent with my definition.  >Active business profits earned by a foreign sub are taxed when profits are repatriated. Certain tax credits are available for foreign taxes paid and certain dividends out of surplus are tax free to the corporation (not individuals).   http://www.can-offshore.com/tax-planning/reporting-rule1-ccra.htm  So when foreign sub pays dividends to the parent corp they are still charged repatriation - just like in the US.  Again, this sounds consistent with my previous comment. Canada has a corporate tax rate that is over 10% lower than the US so this is still a very good deal in its own right.   Maybe you can explain in more detail or provide a source that has some additional detail? I also can't find any pieces on this or the Valeant deal that suggests beneficial repatriation rules."


Investopedia has a good explanation of the term shorting which is what this is. In the simplest of terms, someone is borrowing the bond and selling it with the intent to replace the security and any dividends or coupons in the end. The idea is that if a bond is overvalued, one may be able to buy it back later for a cheaper price and pocket the difference. There are various rules about this including margin requirements to maintain since there is the risk of the security going up in price enough that someone may be forced into a buy to cover in the form of a margin call. If one can sell the bond at $960 now and then buy it back later for $952.38 then one could pocket the difference. Part of what you aren't seeing is what are other bonds doing in terms of their prices over time here. The key point here is that brokers may lend out securities and accrue interest on loaned securities for another point here.


">Yeah, that's what I meant when I said 'fellowships'... freemasons, oddfellows, that sort of thing...   Yup. I just wanted to elaborate on your comment, and make certain it didn't get dismissed as some ""religion only"" thing by some anti-religion ranters.  The plain truth is that when it came to *urban* areas there were at least as many secular ""fraternal order of _____"" (be it ""elks"" or ""buffaloes"" or whatever) societies.  >the sort of orders that inevitably get labelled as part of a conspiracy to take over the world by christians whenever they realize church attendance is down.  But at the same time, whenever anyone nowadays suggests that ""private charity"" can take care of anything, those organizations get lumped in with and lost in the ""anti-religion"" (and more specifically the anti-church, anti-christian) aspect by people who seem to think the only possible ways for ""charity"" to exist are either via work/unions, or via business/rich folks (""philanthropy"") or via religion (and thus religious tyranny) or via government & taxes (and thus bureaucratic/political tyranny).  Few people REALLY understand that the vast majority of ""charity"" was (back before ""welfare"") largely independent of all of those things -- just people who organized for common well-being."


>Well, first off, the roads are more than just hobbies. They really do go places. A lot of the roads in my area would be unprofitable, and people live down those roads. What happens when a company decides that road is too expensive to maintain but decides to keep ownership? The people have to move?  Yes, if people want to live out somewhere that is inefficient, other people who do not choose to live there shouldn't have to subsidize them. I say this having grown up 17 miles from the nearest town in a completely rural environment.  >It doesn't have to, but it's unrealistic to expect that they won't take a profit from it. but do you really think that if a company has a monopoly, they're going to charge you the bare minimum they can? If you have no choice but to pay tolls or for driving passes for certain cities, and you can only get them from a single company, what motivation does that company have to keep them affordable and readily available? They're going to do like any company would and find that point of maximum profitability between cost of permit and number of permits.  Is this not a similar situation we currently have with electricity, trash, and various other pieces of our infrastructure? People are not being gouged because there is some level of regulation, which is necessary for a functional society. I'm not necessarily advocating a completely free market as monopolies are dangerous, I just think the government's role is to big.  >Then there's the whole reality that you will STILL pay for roads you don't use. If one company owns multiple roads, they're going to charge you enough money to expand roads, to fix up other dilapidated roads, etc. More profitable roads will be used to offset less profitable roads, etc. Basically, if there's a new neighborhood, and they build a road to it... if you've been paying that company, they're using your money to build that road.  Not really. I'm paying to use a certain stretch of road right now. What the company chooses to do with that money is their issue.


Yes they do. There are billions and billions spent on subsidies for pharmaceutical companies. It's the lion's share of the annual expenditures in the health sector and up there. If you're not happy with cbo.gov, there are countless other sources just a google search away. If I can find them in under a minute you can, too.  If you don't have a problem with it then contribute the share of your income you see fit voluntarily. But who entitled you to decide for others that they have to do the same? And I say it again: mandatory public healthcare is not a service we all would use, that's why it has to be mandatory in the first place.  And what's wrong with libertarian notions?  Well, you never have to raise any taxes if you find and cut expenses of equal value before introducing a costly system. You don't need a source for that, that's maths 101. But I'd prefer the US to cut subsidies to 0, replace them with nothing and finally lower taxes. Which will eventually leave a lot more people with enough money to easily get private insurance. Just without the administrative effort and without forcing people to partake.  It all comes down to ideological positions. We can talk numbers once we've come to the conclusion that mandatory public healthcare is the right and just thing to do. And for that you would have to convince me that exploiting a minority against their will is the right thing to do. Good luck with that. You can try to seek refuge behind sources, but you can't refute the moral argument with those.


>It's biggly sad you don't understand human nature.  This has nothing to do with human nature, it's about economics. If you are an employer, you do not hire and retain an employee that provides you value that is less than the wage you pay that employee. If you do, it *costs* you money to keep them on payroll. So if you force employers to pay a certain wage, all potential employees that are unskilled/uneducated/lacking experience that do not merit that wage have now been banned from the workforce because the base wage is higher than the work they provide. And the higher you set that base wage, the more people you ban from the work force.


"Did your CTO let a major group use ""admin/admin"" as the administrator password?    And did the job posting for your CTO have a note  saying the primary responsibility could be learned or did they look for someone who already knew their shit? Read TFA, they explicitly said ""security can be learned"".  This was a case of pre-choosing the person for the position."


Giving the government more control over the distribution of goods and services, even more than it has now, is the recipe for imbalance that has doomed communism and socialism.  Even the most tax friendly of the euros are having problems with their systems. They simply aren't competitive.  https://www.thelocal.dk/20170829/denmarks-government-announces-new-tax-plan