"What you are describing sounds a lot like the way we handle our household budget.  This is possible, but quite difficult to do with an Excel spreadsheet.  It is much easier to do with dedicated budgeting software designed for this purpose. When choosing personal budgeting software, I've found that the available packages fall in two broad categories: Some packages take what I would call a proactive approach: You enter in your bank account balances, and assign your money into spending categories.  When you deposit your paycheck, you do the same thing: you add this money to your spending categories.  Then when you spend money, you assign it to a spending category, and the software keeps track of your category balances.  At any time, you can see both your bank balances and your spending category balances.  If you need to spend money in a category that doesn't have any more money, you'll need to move money from a different category into that one.  This approach is sometimes called the envelope system, because it resembles a digital version of putting your cash into different envelopes with different purposes.  A few examples of software in this category are You Need a Budget (YNAB), Mvelopes, and EveryDollar. Other packages take more of a reactive approach: You don't bother assigning a job to the money already in your bank account.  Instead, you just enter your monthly income and put together a spending plan.  As you spend money, you assign the transactions to a spending category, and at the end of the month, you can see what you actually spent vs. what your plan was, and try to adjust your next budget accordingly.  Software that takes this approach includes Quicken and Mint.com. I use and recommend the proactive approach, and it sounds from your question like this is the approach that you are looking for.  I've used several different budgeting software packages, and my personal recommendation is for YNAB, the software that we currently use.  I don't want this post to sound too much like a commercial, but I believe it will do everything you are looking for.   One of the great things about the proactive approach, in my opinion, is how credit card accounts are handled.  Since your spending category balances only include real money actually sitting in an account (not projected income for the month), when you spend money out of a category with your credit card, the software deducts the money from the spending category immediately, as it is already spent.  The credit card balance goes negative.  When the credit card bill comes and you pay it, this is handled in the software as an account transfer from your checking account to your credit card account.  The money in the checking account is already set aside for the purpose of paying your credit card bill. Dedicated budgeting software generally has a reconcile feature that makes verifying your bank statements very easy.  You just enter the date of your bank statement and the balance, and then the software shows you a list of the transactions that fall in those dates.  You can check each one against the transactions on the statement, editing the ones that aren't right and adding any that are missing from the software.  After everything checks out, the software marks the transactions as verified, so you can easily see what has cleared and what hasn't. Let me give you an example to clarify, in response to your comment.  This example is specific to YNAB, but other software using the same approach would work in a similar way. Let's say that you have a checking account and a credit card account.  Your checking account, named CHECKING, has $2,000 in it currently.  Your credit card currently has nothing charged on it, because you've just paid your bill and haven't used it yet this billing period.  YNAB reports the balance of your credit card account (we'll call this account CREDITCARD), as $0. Every dollar in CHECKING is assigned to a category.  For example, you've got $200 in ""groceries"", $100 in ""fast food"", $300 in ""rent"", $50 in ""phone"", $500 in ""emergency fund"", etc.  If you add up the balance of all of your categories, you'll get $2,000. Let's say that you've written a check to the grocery store for $100.  When you enter this in YNAB, you tell it the name of the store, the account that you paid with (CHECKING), and the category that the expense belongs to (groceries).  The ""groceries"" category balance will go down from $200 to $100, and the CHECKING account balance will go down from $2,000 to $1,900. Now, let's say that you've spent $10 on fast food with your credit card.  When you enter this in YNAB, you tell it the name of the restaurant, the account that you paid with (CREDITCARD), and the category that the expense belongs to (fast food).  YNAB will lower the ""fast food"" category balance from $100 to $90, and your CREDITCARD account balance will go from $0 to $-10. At this point, if you add up all the category balances, you'll get $1,890.  And if you add up your account balances, you'll also get $1,890, because CHECKING has $1,900 and CREDITCARD has $-10.  If you get your checking account bank statement at this time, the account balance of $1,900 should match the statement and you'll see the payment to the grocery store, assuming the check has cleared.  And if the credit card bill comes now, you'll see the fast food purchase and the balance of $-10. When you write a check to pay this credit card bill, you enter this in YNAB as an account transfer of $10 from CHECKING to CREDITCARD.  This transfer does not affect any of your category balances; they remain the same.  But now your CHECKING account balance is down to $1,890, and CREDITCARD is back to $0. This works just as well whether you have one checking account and one credit card, or 2 checking accounts, 2 savings accounts, and 3 credit cards.  When you want to spend some money, you look at your category balance.  If there is money in there, then the money is available to spend somewhere in one of your accounts.  Then you pick an account you want to pay with, and, looking at the account balance, if there isn't enough money in that account to pay it, you just need to move some money from another account into that one, or pick a different account.  When you pay for an expense with a credit card, the money gets deducted from the category balances immediately, and is no longer available to spend on something else."


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/6/26/15872468/tesla-gm-ford-valuation-justifying-disruption) reduced by 97%. (I'm a bot) ***** > It&#039;s a narrative that Tesla founder Elon Musk has cultivated well as he has jumped from one underdog-disruption scenario to the next, ditching various subplots as they become more and more implausible: Electric cars! Batteries! Solar! Self-driving cars! Recently he tweeted that Tesla is about to unveil a new semi and pickups.  > So is Tesla the next Honda, or the next Webvan? If one believes that Tesla is worth more than Ford or GM, one better have a decent theory of how Tesla is making current capabilities obsolete, why incumbents cannot replicate these capabilities, and whether Tesla will earn good margins in a post-Detroit world.  > Tesla may demonstrate success in their EV vertical and then license their OS with self-driving capabilities - a Windows-Intel-type strategy that implies Tesla software in every automobile on the market.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6k3efu/why_tesla_is_overhyped_and_overvalued/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~154797 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*: **Tesla**^#1 **car**^#2 **capability**^#3 **bet**^#4 **Disruption**^#5"


Actually, they'd just forego healthcare and either die when they get sick or go bankrupt.  I agree with you on the income guarantee, though.  It avoids many of the worst problems with our various government programs, particularly in regard to punishing people for starting to succeed a little.


> If you accept the thesis that White people are better nation builders than Black people you must accept the idea that White people and Black people are fundamentally different.  And if you accept the idea that black people are statistically better sprinters than white people, does that make you racist, too? Or just somebody who has looked at an Olympic sprinting lineup in the past ten years? If we're to be consistent, shouldn't we be enacting affirmative action in the NBA until the demographics match the general population? If not, why is that behaviour acceptable, desirable and lauded in other fields?  Maybe it's just a stupid word that a political special interest group have tried to turn into a weapon to use against anyone who doesn't pay sufficient homage to their agenda?


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40642152) reduced by 45%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Growth in UK house prices has continued to slow, but the cost of the average home still increased by 4.7% in the year to May 2017.  > The main contribution to the rise in house prices came from England, where prices jumped by 5%. The average price of a house in England is now &pound;238,000, the ONS said, while a property in Wales costs &pound;150,000 after a 3.8% increase in prices over the past 12 months.  > Within England, the smallest price rise in the year to May was seen in the North East, up 1.6%, while London had the second lowest price rise of 3%. The highest price rise was 7.5% in the East, just ahead of the East Midlands where property values went up by 7.2%. &quot;Richard Snook, senior economist at business services company PwC, said:&quot;The figures are in line with our expectations that growth in 2017 will be around half that of 2016.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6o284h/house_price_growth_continues_to_slow_in_uk/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~169772 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*: **price**^#1 **house**^#2 **year**^#3 **rise**^#4 **average**^#5"


Doesnt mean that equity or even debt holders wouldn't lose their investment.  Those money and banking texts are presently useless post GFC given the incredible moral hazard and how all of the traditional bankruptcy rules were ignored.


Worked with a few well off Chinese, they are educated and know with all the pollution it's just a matter of time cancer rates are going to grow.  Fake or contamination food products and over all when they travel to another country they enjoy the freedom and lifestyle.  Can you blame them


The Idiot in chief has actually stepped over the edge of sanity and dragging the entire country over with him.  The damage he is doing is going to be unrecoverable, he has given over the entire economy and control of the White house over to Israeli actors and is losing democratic control to the Generals.  He is fermenting civil war and racist violence.  We might soon get a taste of martial law.


"As someone who has to clean up tech press releases into something more readable for a tech audience, I would say that the Microsoft one is better as it contains actual usable content.  The recent trend in PR to send tech press releases to tech writers and omit any of the technology from it is one of the most annoying things to have happened.  The Apple press releases (Nokia Siemens Networks etc) read like the sort of thing you send to the tabloid press, not the tech press.  The sort of people who need to know ""everything"" about tech are not being served by these content light fluff pieces."


Oh what a crock of shit. The guy basically admits his bias in regards to being fired in that statement alone.  The government isn't afraid of Bitcoin. Anyone who thinks that they are is a fucking moron.  /u/SatyapriyaCC posts in fucking /r/conspiracy, so there you go.


> ...and remain profitable, they should be allowed to fail.  Agreed.  > But that isn't acceptable because we need air travel.  I agree that we need air travel.  That demand should, in theory, create a pressure on the market to create a supply.  I think we'd see new airlines, with different business models, emerging to fix the problem.  It's not a quick fix... but the correct solutions rarely are.


The effects of compounding inflation. Counter act by earning compounding interest on investments, aka the 8th wonder of the world. Maybe you have a family and have no money to save up? then u can't participate in compounding interest income, sorry I guess. My best advice to being rich is not being poor. (I'm a broke finance major at the moment, so I'm learning in depth of how I'm getting fucked)


I'm not gonna debate you or your roman numerals; people like you exist everywhere and are inconsequential.  I'm just surprised the other people in this sub are like-minded, like you can spit your bullshit and go unchecked here.  Maybe I shouldn't be surprised idk


"Yes. Of course this is the response a typical Redditor would love. The Ugandan ""foreign minister"" is clearly unfit for the position, much like a typical Redditor.  It's too bad people have entirely ignorant knee-jerk reactions and attempt to make jokes, especially in situations that are anything but funny."


Kentstruction with our many years of experience can build the Custom Home Builder Long Island of your dreams. We can help you go from the stage to the actual design, building and final moving in. Simplifying this project will ease the entire process.


The expert clearly has a trust fund. Been doing 7 days a week for 2 months and been fine with it. Right up until had to pack up and keep one eye on fucking horizon for the last week watching for fire. Little tough to keep mind on work while your friends lose their homes.


"Thanks, that's what I've been thinking.  9 years C++, but haven't used it much the past two years. 5 years solid python and matlab, and a few individual projects with others (Fortran 77/90, Mathematica), plus tutorials on ruby and perl just to be familiar.   I started using SKLearn ML stuff in recent publications, and that's been nice. The group I've been most active with is the detector characterization group in my collaboration--we have a few hundred thousand channels, and are the liaisons between pure data analysis guys and the instrumentalists. Lots of data quality investigations, and implementing changes to both the data analysis pipelines (improving final results, cleaning data, vetos, etc) as well as the detector operations (adjusting controls signals and detector automation tools, etc).  That being said, my ""program from scratch"" ability is average for my peers, involving daily stack exchange searches, and with supporting so many projects for a 1000+ person collaboration I feel like I'm going to look inexperienced in interviews (""yeah I could look that up."" ""Yeah I could sit down and figure out a good way to investigate/tackle that issue."" ""Yeah I don't have a CS degree, so I probably wouldn't pass a random upper-level undergrad CS exam...."")  But I measure twice and cut once, I am a deep critical thinker and learn quickly. I feel like it's cliche to say that, but it's valid.... so I'm pretty nervous about making this jump. Not really sure where to start!  Thanks for your reply :)"


We could always brake the state up into Northern Illinois, pretty much everything north of Peoria, Western Illinois, everything west of Decatur and north of Carbondale, Eastern Illinois, everything east of Decatur and north of Carbondale, and Southern Illinois, everything south of Carbondale. Then divide the debt by 1/4 and negotiate the pension obligations of each new state.


I wasn’t disagreeing with Trump’s plan.  I never said I did.  I don’t agree with Trump’s methods, though.  No irony here.  I want to come up with a solution everyone can agree on.  But what I’ve heard from Republicans and Democrats is a refusal to work together.  So I am trying to find solutions that bring people together.  What does Trump’s agenda have to do with it?  His agenda isn’t my goal set.  Edit:  Also, that link you posted was as one sided as everything else!  It was not what I am trying to accomplish!  You don’t work together by ignoring criticisms and proclaiming how great you’ve done.


There are two different possible taxes based on various scenarios proposed by the OP or the lawyer who drew up the OP's father's will or the OP's mother.   First, there is the estate tax which is paid by the estate of the deceased, and the heirs get what is left. Most estates in the US pay no estate tax whatsoever because most estates are smaller than $5.4M lifetime gift and estate tax exemption. But, for the record, even though IRAs pass from owner to beneficiary independent of whatever the will might say about the disposition of the IRAs, the value of the deceased's IRAs is part of the estate, and if the estate is large enough that estate tax is due and there is not enough money in the rest of the estate to pay the estate tax (e.g. most of the estate value is IRA money and there are no other investments, just a bank account with a small balance), then the executor of the will can petition the probate court to claw back some of the IRA money from the IRA beneficiaries to pay the estate tax due. Second, there is income tax that the estate must pay on income received from the estate's assets, e.g. mutual fund dividends paid between the date of death and the distribution of the assets to the beneficiaries, or income from cashing in IRAs that have the estate as the beneficiary. Now, most of OP's father's estate is in IRAs which have the OP's mother as the primary beneficiary and there are no named secondary beneficiaries. Thus, by default, the estate is the IRA beneficiary should the OP's mother disclaim the IRAs as the lawyer has suggested. As @JoeTaxpayer says in a comment, if the OP's mother disclaims the IRA, then the estate must distribute all the IRA assets to the three beneficiaries by December 31 of the year in which the fifth anniversary of the death occurs. If the estate decides to do this by itself, then the distribution from the IRA to the estate is taxable income to the estate (best avoided if possible because of the high tax rates on trusts). What is commonly done is that before December 31 of the year following the year in which the death occurred, the estate (as the beneficiary) informs the IRA Custodian that the estate's beneficiaries are the surviving spouse (50%), and the two children (25% each) and requests the IRA custodian to divide the IRA assets accordingly and let each beneficiary be responsible for meeting the requirements of the 5-year rule for his/her share. Any assets not distributed in timely fashion are subject to a 50% excise tax as penalty each year until such time as these monies are actually withdrawn explicitly from the IRA (that is, the excise tax is not deducted from the remaining IRA assets; the beneficiary has to pay the excise tax out of pocket). As far as the IRS is concerned, there are no yearly distribution requirements to be met but the IRA Custodial Agreement might have its own rules, and so Publication 590b recommends discussing the distribution requirements for the 5-year rule with the IRA Custodian. The money distributed from the IRA is taxable income to the recipients. In particular, the children cannot roll the money over into another IRA so as to avoid immediate taxation; the spouse might be able to roll over the money into another IRA, but I am not sure about this; Publication 590b is very confusing on this point.   All this is assuming that the deceased passed away before well before his 70.5th birthday so that there are no issues with RMDs (the interactions of all the rules in this case is an even bigger can of worms that I will leave to someone else to explicate). On the other hand, if the OP's mother does not disclaim the IRAs, then she, as the surviving spouse, has the option of treating the inherited IRAs as her own IRAs, and she could then name her two children as the beneficiaries of the inherited IRAs when she passes away.  Of course, by the same token, she could opt to make someone else the beneficiary (e.g, her children from a previous marriage) or change her mind at any later time and make someone else the beneficiary (e.g. if she remarries, or becomes very fond of the person taking care of her in a nursing home and decides to leave all her assets to this person instead of her children, etc).  But even if such disinheritances are unlikely and the children are perfectly happy to wait to inherit till Mom passes away, as JoeTaxpayer points out, by not disclaiming the IRAs, the OP's mother can delay taking distributions from the IRAs till age 70.5, etc. which is also a good option to have. The worst scenario is for the OP's mother to not disclaim the IRAs, cash them in right away (huge income tax whack on her) or at least 50% of them, and gift the OP and his sibling half of what she withdrew (or possibly after taking into account what she had to pay in income tax on the distribution). Gift tax need not be paid by the OP's mother if she files Form 709 and reduces her lifetime combined gift and estate tax exemption, and the OP and his sibling don't owe any tax (income or otherwise) on the gift amount.  But, all that money has changed from tax-deferred assets to ordinary assets, and any additional earnings on these assets in the future will be taxable income. So, unless the OP and his sibling need the cash right away (pay off credit card debt, make a downpayment on a house, etc), this is not a good idea at all.


Quite a few mores thing you do but you will discover less factor which offer you to publish your services or item in free of price is is on the internet labeled [advertising australia](http://come2ourdeals.com.au) which can be using additional and much more marketing in the world-wide-web marketing.


>In the simple equation of debt-to-GDP you want GDP to grow much quicker than debt.  This is similar to having your income growing quicker than your actual debt.  The answer of course is to adopt a growth-oriented fiscal stance. The opposite of austerity. Open season on deficit hawks.


You should never buy anything that consumes all of your savings. First you should have 6 months living expenses in a liquid account. Second you should be investing for retirement, index funds or ETFs. The longer you have money invested the better off you'll be.  Pragmatically speaking you're better off getting the cheapest car that is reliable. Cars cost money, depreciation and money, every day you own them. However I get the urge to splurge. Get a loan, pay 2x the standard payment amount.


Friend, there is a difference between following the letter of the law vs the spirit of the law.  Because something is legal doesn't make it the ethical choice.  If I'm walking behind someone and they happen to drop a $100 bill without noticing, I can certainly pick it up and put it in my pocket legally, but its hardly the moral thing to do.    Taken to the extreme, if it was legal to buy and sell slaves, I still wouldn't do it even if it provided a monetary benefit.  Or, if I drove by a person dying and bleeding on the street, it would be legal for me to drive home and do nothing (I think...not so sure as I write it).  While I agree with you that tax laws are at fault, its reprehensible to me that corporations making huge profits using the infrastructure of the region choose tax avoidance as opposed to doing what is not only right, but better in the long run for all parties.  Keep in mind that these favorable tax laws were lobbied by corporations with the intent to avoid taxes in mind.  I fully respect your perspective and you're entitled to make choices based on whether they are legal or not, but I choose to live life differently.  Best of luck.


From a federal tax point of view, withdrawals from 529 plans are treated as taxable unless they are used on qualified expenses: The part of a distribution representing the amount paid or contributed   to a QTP does not have to be included in income. This is a return of   the investment in the plan. The designated beneficiary generally does not have to include in   income any earnings distributed from a QTP if the total distribution   is less than or equal to adjusted qualified education expenses   (defined under Figuring the Taxable Portion of a Distribution ,   later). [...] To determine if total distributions for the year are more or less than   the amount of qualified education expenses, you must compare the total   of all QTP distributions for the tax year to the adjusted qualified   education expenses. You'll have to include them in your income and pay normal income tax on them, and also in most cases pay an extra 10% penalty: Generally, if you receive a taxable distribution, you also must pay a   10% additional tax on the amount included in income. You'd have to check on the situation from a state perspective but I'd imagine it's quite similar. The basic point is that non-qualified distributions are treated as earnings.


"Yes I know that. Then please tell me how this article relates to business. I doubt anyone even clicked at it, it's a link to ""stock picks"" subreddit which then links to ""crypto"" trading blog. This is definitely nto business related post even if everyone is downvoting me to hell.  Sidenote: This subreddit is full of spam and almost nothing relevant to actual business can be found so this is a good moment to unsubscribe which I have just done."


Constructing a building especially the commercial ones are very time taking task. The introduction of steel building kits has now made it possible to erect large commercial buildings without the extra cost and time loss. They have become the new revolutionary construction technology that is fast changing the face of the construction as well as commercial structures.


"I didn't say ""not at all available outside of work hours"".  I said ""not checking work email"".  If something urgent comes up at the office when I'm out where it makes more sense for someone to call me and ask for help, sure, they can call, and I'll answer if I can, or get back to them when it's reasonably convenient to do so.  I'm not going to waste my non-work hours looking for work to do, though; if it's not urgent, it waits until the next time I'm in the office."


In my personal experience, and from potentially a lot of data... anytime people repeat something a lot commonly, especially when I hear it from primarily people that havent actually worked for the company, its probably accurate and not worth further research. Of course you sir are a truthful, honest and wise individual but nay what about that guy you dont like? Is he? Of course not! We dont even need the raw data or methodology.  Further the earth is probably flat, everything in the universe revolves around that earth, and the tide moves in tide moves out you can't explain that.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


The hard and fast rule is to pay off high interest loans first, but each individual's situation is different so there are some things to consider. Student loan interest is tax deductible up to $2,500.  Will your student loan interest exceed $2,500 for the year?  If so I would try to pay down the student loan first to bring down the total interest for the year so that you get as much interest back as possible on your tax return.  Also, it may be beneficial to pay off the car first to close that account so that you are only left with the 1 loan.  Once you have the car loan payment out of the way you can dedicate that amount to paying off the student loan. I'm in almost the same situation as you.  I currently have a mortgage and car payment.  In 6 months my grace period will be over, and my student loan payments will start.  I have $100k in student loan debt.  So I will have a $1,100 mortgage payment, $1,100 student loan payment, and $700 car payment (car loan is 0%).  I don't want to have 3 loans active so I will pay off my car loan in a 2-3 months to get that out of the way.  Then I will pay down my student loan by paying $700 extra every month.


"If a country had a genuine completely flat income tax system, then it wouldn't matter who paid the tax since it doesn't depend on the employee's other income. Since not many countries run this, it doesn't really make sense for the employee to ""take the burden"" of the tax, as opposed to merely doing the administration and paying the (probable) amount of tax at payroll, leaving the employee to use their personal tax calculation to correct the payment if necessary. Your prospective employer is probably saying that your tax calculation in Singapore is so simple they can do it for you. They may or may not need to know a lot of information about you in order to do this calculation, depending what the Singapore tax authorities say. If you're not a Singapore national, they may or may not be relying on bilateral tax agreements with your country to assert that you won't have to pay any further tax on the income in your own country. It's possible they're merely asserting that you won't owe anything else in Singapore, and in fact you will have taxes to report (even if it's just reporting to your home tax authority that you've already paid the tax). Still, for a foreign worker a guarantee you won't have to deal with the local tax authority is a good thing to have even if that's all it is. Since there doesn't appear to be any specific allowance for ""tax free money"" in the Singapore tax system, it looks like what you have here is ""just"" the employer agreeing to do something that will normally result in the correct tax being paid in your behalf. This isn't uncommon, but it's also not exactly what you asked for. And in particular if you have two jobs in Singapore then they can't both be doing this, since tax is not flat. The example calculation includes varying tax rates for the first X amount of income that (I assume without checking) are per person, not per employment. Joe's answer has the link. In practice in the UK (for example), there are plenty of UK nationals working in the UK who don't need to do a full tax return and whose tax is collected entirely at source (between PAYE and deductions on bank interest and suchlike). In this sense the employer is required by law to take the responsibility for doing the admin and making the tax payments to HMRC. Note that a UK employer doesn't need to know your circumstances in detail to make the correct payroll deductions: all they need is a so-called ""tax code"", which is calculated by HMRC and communicated to the employer, and which basically encodes how much they can pay you at zero rate before the various tax rate tiers kick in. That's all the employer needs to know here for the typical employee: they don't need to know precisely what credits and liabilities resulted in the figure. However, these employers still don't offer empoyees a net salary (that is, they don't take on the tax burden), because different employees will have different tax codes, which the employer would in effect be cancelling out by offering to pay two people the same net salary regardless of their individual circumstances. The indications seem to be that the same applies in Singapore: this offer is really a net salary subject to certain assumptions (the main one being that you have no other tax liabilities in Singapore). If you're a Singapore millionaire taking that job for fun, you might find that the employer doesn't/can't take on your non-standard tax liability on this marginal income."


"Curious, why are you interested in building/improving your credit score? Is it better to use your card and pay off the bill completely every month? Yes. How is credit utiltization calculated?    Is it average utilization over the month, or total amount owed/credit_limit per month? It depends on how often your bank reports your balances to the reporting agencies. It can be daily, when your statement cycle closes, or some other interval. How does credit utilization affect your score?  Closest to zero without actually being zero is best. This translates to making some charges, even $1 so your statement shows a balance each statement that you pay off. This shows as active use. If you pay off your balance before the statement closes, then it can sometimes be reported as inactive/unused. Is too much a bad thing?  Yes. Is too little a bad thing? Depends. Being debt free has its advantages... but if your goal is to raise your credit score, then having a low utilization rate is a good metric. Less than 7% utilization seems to be the optimal level.  ""Last year we started using a number, not as a recommendation, but as a fact that most of the people with really high FICO scores have credit utilization rates that are 7 percent or lower,"" Watts said. Read more: http://www.bankrate.com/finance/credit-cards/how-to-bump-up-your-credit-score.aspx Remember that on-time payment is the most important factor. Second is how much you owe. Third is length of credit history. Maintain these factors in good standing and you will improve your score: http://www.myfico.com/CreditEducation/WhatsInYourScore.aspx"


Something is missing from your scenario. If you don't know what it is, start by going to http://annualcreditreport.com and get your free credit report. Review it, and figure out if you have outstanding balances or judgements that you're unaware of. You should be using your card every month and pay it on time.


Completely wrong again. The starving man is starving because has no money. The man who does not fear lack of food has more money to buy better quality eggs. The well fed man thus has a higher willingness to pay for eggs.  Mothers affection has no quantifiable economic value or bearing. What you're describing is a category change, a concept completely different from the matter at hand.  http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/07/13/156737801/the-cost-of-free-doughnuts-70-years-of-regret


I'm a bot, *bleep*, *bloop*. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:  - [/r/talkbusiness] [I just made a public DropBox w\/ DMR reports for the following social media channels: Reddit, YouTube, LinkedIn, Twitter, & facebook. (Enjoy!)](https://np.reddit.com/r/talkbusiness/comments/795ezw/i_just_made_a_public_dropbox_w_dmr_reports_for/)  [](#footer)*^(If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads.) ^\([Info](/r/TotesMessenger) ^/ ^[Contact](/message/compose?to=/r/TotesMessenger))*  [](#bot)


No. You owe taxes in the state you made the money. So unless you can convince the lottery company to retroactively move to Puerto Rico or such, you can't. As others said, if you win, that should not be your worries..


Ipswich land is the regions leading developer of residential land packages for new home buyers. All our estates are located centrally in the Ipswich region to ensure great access to all the facilities that you need. Call us today to inspect the lots available, or swing past our showroom to find out more.


humid air also has a higher heat capacity which is why when its 35F and humid it feels a hell of a lot colder than 20F and humid. The actual amont of moisture in the air goes way down once you get below freezing.


> Xerox. (Those are considered tech right?)  Not anymore.  Burns is probably better chair and ceo than Mulcahy but I wouldn't hold my breath on Xerox regaining its old glory and title as common household name again with its heavy reliance on global outsourcing and business processing strategy Burns has been betting on since 2009. Matter of fact, HP leading the way, Xerox is right up there to be the next in line to be another Kodac.


It can be cheaper to have the store order it though. I had to order two large metal cabinets from Home Depot at one point and it would have been about $120 to ship it to me directly. Or ship it to the store 15 minutes away for free.


I believe the reasons:


You have to check your contract to be sure what is it you're paying for. Typically, you get some of the following features which can be unavailable to you in banks which don't charge a monthly fee: Arguably, these expenses could be paid by the interest rates your money earn to the bank. Notice how banks which don't charge a fee usually require you to have a minimum amount of cash in your account or a minimum monthly cash flow. When you pay for your bank's services in cash, there's no such restrictions. I'm not sure if typical banks in the UK would take away your credit card if you lose your job and don't qualify for that kind of card any more, but I do know banks who would. The choice is yours, and while it's indeed sad that you don't have this kind of choice in Canada, it's also not like you're paying solely for the privilege of letting them invest your money behind your back.


There are a lot of good answers above, all of them will probably work for you in some way or another. One point to note (from the procrastination theme) is that you could invest your free money that you have currently in some investment instrument which would require you to do some paperwork etc. to get out, this way the immediate cash flow is decreased and also invested. Now from each montly budget save a small amount for the things that you would like to buy. Give this small savings some months to accumulate so that you can afford only one of the items that you want to buy or target an item that you want to buy. After the money is accumulated, if you still want to buy the item, then you probably should. One point of note is that budgeting is also important on a monthly basis, Pete has provided excellent suggestion in this regard.


"Concise answers to your questions: Depends on the loan and the bank; when you ""accelerate"" repayment of a loan by applying a pre-payment balance to the principal, your monthly payment may be reduced. However, standard practice for most loan types is that the repayment schedule will be accelerated; you'll pay no less each month, but you'll pay it off sooner. I can neither confirm nor deny that an internship counts as job experience in the field for the purpose of mortgage lending. It sounds logical, especially if it were a paid internship (in which case you'd just call it a ""job""), but I can't be sure as I don't know of anyone who got a mortgage without accruing the necessary job experience post-graduation. A loan officer will be happy to talk to you and answer specific questions, but if you go in today, with no credit history (the student loan probably hasn't even entered repayment) and a lot of unknowns (an offer can be rescinded, for instance), you are virtually certain to be denied a mortgage. The bank is going to want evidence that you will make good on the debt you have over time. One $10,000 payment on the loan, though significant, is just one payment as far as your credit history (and credit score) is concerned. Now, a few more reality checks: $70k/yr is not what you'll be bringing home. As a single person without dependents, you'll be taxed at the highest possible withholdings rate. Your effective tax rate on $70k, depending on the state in which you live, can be as high as 30% (including all payroll/SS taxes, for a 1099 earner and/or an employee in a state with an income tax), so you're actually only bringing home 42k/yr, or about $1,600/paycheck if you're paid biweekly. To that, add a decent chunk for your group healthcare plan (which, as of 2014, you will be required to buy, or else pay another $2500 - effectively another 3% of gross earnings - in taxes). And even now with your first job, you should be at least trying to save up a decent chunk o' change in a 401k or IRA as a retirement nest egg. That student loan, beginning about 6 months after you leave school, will cost you about $555/mo in monthly payments for the next 10 years (if it's all Stafford loans with a 50/50 split between sub/unsub; that could be as much as $600/mo for all-unsub Stafford, or $700 or more for private loans). If you were going to pay all that back in two years, you're looking at paying a ballpark of $2500/mo leaving just $700 to pay all your bills and expenses each month. With a 3-year payoff plan, you're turning around one of your two paychecks every month to the student loan servicer, which for a bachelor is doable but still rather tight. Your mortgage payment isn't the only payment you will make on your house. If you get an FHA loan with 3.5% down, the lender will demand PMI. The city/county will likely levy a property tax on the assessed value of land and building. The lender may require that you purchase home insurance with minimum acceptable coverage limits and deductibles. All of these will be paid into escrow accounts, managed by your lending bank, from a single check you send them monthly. I pay all of these, in a state (Texas) that gets its primary income from sales and property tax instead of income, and my monthly payment isn't quite double the simple P&I. Once you have the house, you'll want to fill the house. Nice bed: probably $1500 between mattress and frame for a nice big queen you can stretch out on (and have lady friends over). Nice couch: $1000. TV: call it $500. That's probably the bare minimum you'll want to buy to replace what you lived through college with (you'll have somewhere to eat and sleep other than the floor of your new home), and we're already talking almost a month's salary, or payments of up to 10% of your monthly take-home pay over a year on a couple of store credit cards. Plates, cookware, etc just keeps bumping this up. Yes, they're (theoretically) all one-time costs, but they're things you need, and things you may not have if you've been living in dorms and eating in dining halls all through college. The house you buy now is likely to be a ""starter"", maybe 3bed/2bath and 1600 sqft at the upper end (they sell em as small as 2bd/1bt 1100sqft). It will support a spouse and 2 kids, but by that point you'll be bursting at the seams. What happens if your future spouse had the same idea of buying a house early while rates were low? The cost of buying a house may be as little as 3.5% down and a few hundred more in advance escrow and a couple other fees the seller can't pay for you. The cost of selling the same house is likely to include all the costs you made the seller pay when you bought it, because you'll be selling to someone in the same position you're in now. I didn't know it at the time I bought my house, but I paid about $5,000 to get into it (3.5% down and 6 months' escrow up front), while the sellers paid over $10,000 to get out (the owner got married to another homeowner, and they ended up selling both houses to move out of town; I don't even know what kind of bath they took on the house we weren't involved with). I graduated in 2005. I didn't buy my first house until I was married and pretty much well-settled, in 2011 (and yes, we were looking because mortgage rates were at rock bottom). We really lucked out in terms of a home that, if we want to or have to, we can live in for the rest of our lives (only 1700sqft, but it's officially a 4/2 with a spare room, and a downstairs master suite and nursery/office, so when we're old and decrepit we can pretty much live downstairs). I would seriously recommend that you do the same, even if by doing so you miss out on the absolute best interest rates. Last example: let's say, hypothetically, that you bite at current interest rates, and lock in a rate just above prime at 4%, 3.5% down, seller pays closing, but then in two years you get married, change jobs and have to move. Let's further suppose an alternate reality in which, after two years of living in an apartment, all the same life changes happen and you are now shopping for your first house having been pre-approved at 5%. That one percentage point savings by buying now, on a house in the $200k range, is worth about $120/mo or about $1440/yr off of your P&I payment ($921.42 on a $200,000 home with a 30-year term). Not chump change (over 30 years if you had been that lucky, it's $43000), but it's less than 5% of your take-home pay (month-to-month or annually). However, when you move in two years, the buyer's probably going to want the same deal you got - seller pays closing - because that's the market level you bought in to (low-priced starters for first-time homebuyers). That's a 3% commission for both agents, 1% origination, 0.5%-1% guarantor, and various fixed fees (title etc). Assuming the value of the house hasn't changed, let's call total selling costs 8% of the house value of $200k (which is probably low); that's $16,000 in seller's costs. Again, assuming home value didn't change and that you got an FHA loan requiring only 3.5% down, your down payment ($7k) plus principal paid (about another $7k; 6936.27 to be exact) only covers $14k of those costs. You're now in the hole $2,000, and you still have to come up with your next home's down payment.  With all other things being equal, in order to get back to where you were in net worth terms before you bought the house (meaning $7,000 cash in the bank after selling it), you would need to stay in the house for 4 and a half years to accumulate the $16,000 in equity through principal payments. That leaves you with your original $7,000 down payment returned to you in cash, and you're even in accounting terms (which means in finance terms you're behind; that $7,000 invested at 3% historical average rate of inflation would have earned you about $800 in those four years, meaning you need to stick around about 5.5 years before you ""break even"" in TVM terms). For this reason, I would say that you should be very cautious when buying your first home; it may very well be the last one you'll ever buy. Whether that's because you made good choices or bad is up to you."


I like the answers others gave, if it's some substantial debt you definitely could go the bankruptcy route but it damages your future, also it's morally unethical to borrow all that money and not intend to pay. Second, if you can pay off the entire balance and clear out the 23% interest than I'd do that first. One less bill to concern yourself with. Now let's say you've been making $100 payments monthly on each card (my assumption for this examples sale) now instead of paying $100 to the remaining cards balance each month and saving the other $100, pay $200 against the remaining credit cards balance. By not taking home any money this way you are tackling the liability that is costing you money every month. Unless you have a great investment opportunity on that remaining $1000 or haven't created much of an emergency fund yet, I'd consider putting more of that money towards the debt. Gaining 0.01% on savings interest still means you're eating 25.99% in debt monthly. If you're able to I'd venture out to open a zero interest card and do a balance transfer over to that new card, there will be a minimal transfer fee but you may get some cash back out of it and also that zero interest for a year would help hold off more interest accruing while you're tackling the balance.


I don't mean to be rude, but if you have to ask if you can earn a living from home, the answer is 'probably not.'  Most people are more financially productive at a traditional workplace, otherwise more people would quit the jobs they hate and work at home or develop their hobbies into businesses.   Making a living from home requires being a self-starter and finding clients/customers who accept such arrangements. First, be assured no one earns a living stuffing envelopes, being a mystery online shopper, or selling low to moderate quantities of stuff to their circle of friends.  A few earn a living flipping houses, cars, or shares, or stuff on eBay, but with considerable risk, capital, effort, luck, contacts, and experience/skill.   A few more find success by inventing something or developing a business. Once again, not as easy as it sounds.   You can look for professional work freelancing, or find grunt work on something like vWorker. But these are easily as competitive as the job market, perhaps moreso.  In the case of vWorker you are competing against people in southern asia who almost surely can beat you on price.


"NN doesn't have to do with what your describing.  But let's follow your thought scenario: Why should ISPs be allowed to charge twice for the same service? The ""free delivery"" you listed isn't free. I as a consumer already pay for it. And I choose who gets my traffic. Why should ISPs be allowed to then also charge companies? Why should they be allowed to choose whose content I want to have use the service I pay for? If you don't like Amazon don't pay Amazon with your traffic. Or Google. They ""rely"" on your desire to use them via the service you pay for."


I type the whole fucking thing out myself. All financial statements. I've been trying to figure out a way to make it so I can just have it set up for me so I just have to type numbers in but every company uses different wording and has different accounts for each statement so you're going to have to add and subtract accounts. It'll still be time consuming.


This could a sign of things to come. Wireless carriers have been gobbling up spectrum that can bring affordable wireless broadband to customers, and now Ford adds Pandora.   I think it's a good time to take profits from SIRI.


Russia was the sole country to mention in Inartificial words that terrorists came from Pakistan. Kadakin aforementioned, asking national capital to place a halt to cross-border terror. Russia is the 1st major great power to use the term of “Surgical Tears”. It was more horrible than the killings in James Wan’s SAW, yet everyone stood to watch, some in excitement and others in tears but all with cameras capturing the images from several angles to upload on social media.


>[While Argentina has the money to pay the interest it owes, a U.S. judge’s ruling bars it from passing the funds to holders before settling with the so-called holdout creditors that won an order for full repayment on defaulted debt from 2001. Argentine officials say the plaintiffs have rebuffed all offers for a deal.](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-08-04/argentine-default-sours-outlook-for-peso-as-talks-ordered.html)


you don't need to turn your head. almost all the controls you would want to use while driving, including navigation, volume, phone dialing, are accessible from the wheel and visible in the central instrument dashboard.   have you actually driven one? its really not any more distracting that any other car.


When I bought the house I had my lawyer educate me about everything on the forms that seemed at all unclear, since this was my first time thru the process. On of the pieces of advice that he gave was that title insurance had almost no value in this state unless you had reason to believe the title might be defective but wanted to buy the property anyway. In fact I did get it anyway, as an impulse purchase -- but I'm fully aware that it was a bad bet. Especially since I had the savings to be able to self-insure, which is always the better answer if you can afford to risk the worst case scenario. Also: Ask the seller whether they bought title insurance. Often, it is transferrable at least once.


"Institutional ownership has nearly lost all meaning. It used to mean mutual funds, investment banks, etc. Now, it means pension funds, who hold the rest of the equity assets directly, and insiders. Since the vast majority of investors in equity do not hold it directly, ""institutions"" are approaching 100% ownership on all major equities. Other sites still segment the data."


I'm a bot, *bleep*, *bloop*. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:  - [/r/talkbusiness] [The GPS\/GNSS system behind finance, telecommunications and transportation networks is vulnerable to terrorist jamming and criminal spoofing](https://np.reddit.com/r/talkbusiness/comments/7828xq/the_gpsgnss_system_behind_finance/)  [](#footer)*^(If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads.) ^\([Info](/r/TotesMessenger) ^/ ^[Contact](/message/compose?to=/r/TotesMessenger))*  [](#bot)


My bank will let me download credit card transactions directly into a personal finance program, and by assigning categories to stores I can get at least a rough overview of that sidd of things, and then adjust categories/splits when needed. Ditto checks. Most of my spending is covered by those. Doesn't help with cash transactions, though; if I want to capture those accurately I need to save receipts. There are ocr products which claim to help capture those; haven't tried them. Currently, since my spending is fairly stable, I'm mostly leaving those as unknown; that wouldn't work for you.


>Gosh this certainly won't drive piracy underground in some modern day version of an alcohol prohibition where bars were shut down.      Speakeasies required discretion in order to be successful. I don't think that the most recent generation possesses the abilities to both keep a secret or exercise discretion.  There have been places to get free movies and music for years, but everyone thinks access to those products are a human and civil right and can't keep their mouths shut about it.


There is no such thing as intrinsic value. Gold has value because it is rare and has a market. If any of those things decline, the value plunges. The question of whether gold is overvalued or not is complicated and depends on a lot of factors.  The key question in my mind is: Is gold more valuable in terms of US dollars because it is becoming more valuable, or because the value of US dollars, the prevailing medium of exchange, is declining?


Mutual funds buy (and sell) shares in companies in accordance with  the policies set forth in their prospectus, not according to the  individual needs of an investor, that is, when you invest money in (or withdraw money from) a mutual fund,  the manager buys or sells whatever shares that, in the manager's judgement,  will be the most appropriate ones (consistent with the investment policies). Thus, a large-cap mutual fund manager will not buy the latest hot small-cap stock that will likely be hugely profitable; he/she must choose only between various large capitalization companies. Some exchange-traded funds are fixed baskets of stocks. Suppose you will not invest in a company X as a matter of principle. Unless a mutual fund prospectus says that it will not invest in X, you may well end up having an investment in X at some time because the fund manager bought shares in X. With such an ETF,  you know what is in the basket, and if the basket does not include stock in X  now, it will not own stock in X at a later date. Some exchange-traded funds are constructed based on some index and track the index as a matter of policy. Thus, you will not be investing in X unless X becomes part of the index because Standard or Poor or Russell or somebody changed their minds, and the ETF buys X in order to track the index. Finally, some ETFs are exactly like general mutual funds except that you can buy or sell ETF shares at any time at the price at the instant that your order is executed whereas with mutual funds, the price of the mutual fund shares that you have bought or sold is the NAV of the mutual fund shares for that day, which is established based on the closing prices at the end of the trading day of the stocks, bonds etc that the fund owns.  So, you might end up owning stock in X at any time based on what the fund manager thinks about X.


BillShrink.com lets you compare credit cards based on all your specifics (miles vs. cash, where you shop the most, etc) and tells you what the best card is for your specific habits. MOD EDIT  Looks like billshrink.com is shut down.  From their site: Dear BillShrink customer, As you may have heard, BillShrink.com was shut down on July 31, 2013.   While we’re sad to say goodbye, we hope we’ve been able to help you be   better informed and save some money along the way! The good news is   that much of the innovative award-winning BillShrink technology will   still be available via our StatementRewards platform (made available   to customers by our partnering financial institutions). Moreover, we   expect to re-launch a new money-saving service in the future. To see   more of what we’re up to, visit Truaxis.com. We have deleted your personal information as of July 31. We will   retain your email address only to announce a preview of the new tool.   If you do not want us to retain your email address, you can opt out in   the form below. This opt out feature will be available until September   31, 2013. If you have already opted out previously, you do not need to   opt out again. If you have any further questions, contact us at   info@billshrink.com. Thanks, The BillShrink/Truaxis Team


"I have mixed feelings, this seems to only be possible because the margins on AWS subsidize the entire rest of the business.  Amazon is going to continue crushing competition, but in what seems like an ""unfair"" way.  I'm very worried that in another 10 years we're going to be living in a world with very reduced competition up the entire supply chain."


The issue here is that the transaction (your funds to her account) looks very similar to the rent payments which you plan to make in the future. Those rental payments (if deemed to be commercial) would normally be subject to tax. Consider the scenario where rather than an up front $5000, and $5000 over 2 years, you paid her $10000, and paid no rent. That might be an attempt to avoid paying tax. A commercial transaction can't be re-labeled as a gift just based on your election - the transaction needs to be considered as a whole. However, an interest free, unsecured loan connected with you paying rent at market rate would be (depending on local laws) simply foolish (to some extent). I don't think you are able to structure the transaction as a joint purchase (since the mortgage will prevent her from allocating a part of the property to you). Its also likely that you can live in her house and contribute an adequate amount to the household costs without creating a taxable income for her. For example in the UK, up to ~£4000 pa rental income generated from the property in which you reside does not need to be declared. You need to identify the scenarios where your particular arrangement could be imagined as resulting in a taxable or potentially taxable event - then make sure you are not avoiding those events just by choosing how you label the events.


This has happened to me several times while trying to travel. See a flight listed for one price, go through the process and it ends up being 50-100 more. Not sure which airlines just in general. I dont see how 2 seperate sites can have the same price problem. and what changes in the 5-10 minutes it takes someone to enter their info? do gas and costs go up that much in 10 minutes? Just like extra ticket fees and everything....i just wish companies would start putting the FULL price up front. extra fees and all.


"I am sorry, did you have a better example of a country that does not tax or taxes less but provides better services and protections?   > But we think the rich aren't paying their ""fair share"". Let me tell you, no share is fair. The government didn't work for that paycheck, you did.  Let me tell you, because I am one of those rich guys. I own a business that did millions in revenue last year. I am by far not one of those ""super rich"" that we read about, nor is my company one of those that paid nothing in taxes last year. My company is organized as an S-Corp, which means it is a pass-through when it comes to taxes. (I.e. I pay the taxes, not the company). I had an effective tax rate of over 33% last year, and paid into the six figures just in federal taxes.   That being said, I am also one of those people that feels that our taxes are too low as a country. I would be happy to talk about why, and do it one topic at a time. If water is the topic you want to start with, I would be happy to."


If you're not insolvent, doing something like this is both a moral and legal hazard: When you are insolvent, the tax and moral hazard issues can be a non-issue. Setting up a scenario that makes you appear to be insolvent is where the fraud comes in. If you decide to go down this road, spend a few thousand dollars on competent legal advice.


"The S&P 500 is an index. This refers to a specific collection of securities which is held in perfect proportion. The dollar value of an index is scaled arbitrarily and is based off of an arbitrary starting price. (Side note: this is why an index never has a ""split""). Lets look at what assumptions are included in the pricing of an index: All securities are held in perfect proportion. This means that if you invest $100 in the index you will receive 0.2746 shares of IBM, 0.000478 shares of General Motors, etc. Also, if a security is added/dropped from the list, you are immediately rebalancing the remaining money. Zero commissions are charged. When the index is calculated, they are using the current price (last trade) of the underlying securities, they are not actually purchasing them. Therefore it assumes that securities may be purchased without commission or other liquidity costs. Also closely related is the following. The current price has full liquidity. If the last quoted price is $20 for a security, the index assumes that you can purchase an arbitrary amount of the security at that price with a counterparty that is willing to trade. Dividends are distributed immediately. If you own 500 equities, and most distributed dividends quarterly, this means you will receive on average 4 dividends per day. Management is free. All equities can be purchased with zero research and administrative costs. There is no gains tax. Trading required by the assumptions above would change your holdings constantly and you are exempt from short-term or long-term capital gains taxes. Each one of these assumptions is, of course, invalid. And the fund which endeavors to track the index must make several decisions in how to closely track the index while avoiding the problems (costs) caused by the assumptions. These are shortcuts or ""approximations"". Each shortcut leads to performance which does not exactly match the index. Management fees. Fees are charged to the investor as load, annual fees and/or redemptions. Securities are purchased at real prices. If Facebook were removed from the S&P 500 overnight tonight, the fund would sell its shares at the price buyers are bidding the next market day at 09:30. This could be significantly different than the price today, which the index records. Securities are purchased in blocks. Rather than buying 0.000478 shares of General Motors each time someone invests a dollar, they wait for a few people and then buy a full share or a round lot. Securities are substituted. With lots of analysis, it may be determined that two stocks move in tandem. The fund may purchase two shares of General Motors rather than one of General Motors and Ford. This halves transaction costs. Debt is used. As part of substitution, equities may be replaced by options. Option pricing shows that ownership of options is equivalent to holding an amount of debt. Other forms of leverage may also be employed to achieve desired market exposure. See also: beta.  Dividends are bundled. VFINX, the largest S&P 500 tracking fund, pays dividends quarterly rather than immediately as earned. The dividend money which is not paid to you is either deployed to buy other securities or put into a sinking fund for payment. There are many reasons why you can't get the actual performance quoted in an index. And for other more exotic indices, like VIX the volatility index, even more so. The best you can do is work with someone that has a good reputation and measure their performance."


This is such an ignorant comment I do not even know where to start with it.   Democracy, even with all its flaws, has unquestionably provided the greatest opportunity to the greatest number. While equally, demonstrating the best system of self-governance ever known, conceived, or attempted. Conversely, Socialism in every form and iteration across history has only ever produced tyranny, homogeny, oppression, suffering, wanting, regression, and death.   Socialism has never worked. Socialism will never work. Socialism is a lie perpetrated on the ignorant and most ill-informed among us. Socialism is simply a critique of democracy that comes nowhere close to offering tangible or realistic solutions.


"Bezos made very little ""money."" But he is very wealthy because of stock grants and options, from his previous years. Banks or brokerage firms will lend him (or anyone else) up to half the value of his stock. In Bezos' case, we're talking about billions. So he could, if he wanted to, cash out half of those billions. If the stock continues to go up (as it has), he will be able to cash out more each year. Imagine a person earning $1 a year in cash with $1 billion of stock, on which he can borrow up to $500 million. That, in a nutshell, is Bezos (with larger numbers)."


I agree. But I'm wondering why Japan is in such a unique position compared to most (all?) other counties. They print money yet suffer from deflation for three decades. And the quality of life is amazing even in the simplest towns. They have their Japanese made air-condition, playing their Japanese made console, eating a cheap and amazingly good nutritious meal at home or at a cheap isakaya/diner. And every year their money buys them more than last year.


> Have you considered going outside and experiencing the world around you  Technically I was in a Vegas airport once. As for how judging things you know nothing about, way to demonstrate your point by making some totally idiotic assumptions about me.


There are some out there making the argument that negative yields on the German Schatz (2-year note) are the result of speculators betting on a break-up of the euro area and its common currency. Specifically that assets held in euros, i.e. German bonds, would be re-denominated into a new Deutschmark that would appreciate in value against other European currencies.


"Sovereigns cannot go bankrupt. Basically, when a sovereign government (this includes nations and US States, probably political subdivisions in other countries as well) becomes insolvent, they default.  Sovereigns with the ability to issue new currency have the option to do so because it is politically expedient. Sovereigns in default will negotiate with creditor committees to reduce payments. Creditors with debt backed by the ""full faith and credit"" of the sovereign are generally first in line. Creditors with debt secured by revenue may be entitled to the underlying assets that provide the revenue. The value of your money in the bank in a deposit account may be at risk due to currency devaluation or bank failure. A default by a major country would likely lock up the credit markets, and you may see yourself in a situation where money market accounts actually fall in value."


Big solar fan here. I like your argument for nuclear. With the way that electricity power generation works, we need ideally 3 sources of power. Nuclear is one of them. Base load, if you will.  Solar and nat gas can sort of fluctuate against each other as the sunlight changes. And once battery tech updates we can do away with nat gas.   I don't know enough about price/economics on nuclear and if you have a few concise things to share I'd appreciate it. Not asking for you to type a tome. I can always research later but appreciate your input!


A per diem payment is a cost of doing business for the company, not for you. They can claim it (probably); you can't (definitely).


"In your mother's position, I would do two things: Get a copy of her credit report. Money Advice Service has a useful page on how to do this - it is cheap (£2) or free to do and will immediately tell you if someone else is using her address for anything untoward. Check with the Post Office whether anyone has set up a redirect on mail to your Mum's address. You can redirect by individual names, so if Joe Bloggs buys a bunch of stuff and has it sent to him at your Mum's address, he could set up a redirect at the Post Office so any post for Joe Bloggs at that address gets redirected to Joe Blogg's real address. There is a page about this on the Post Office website, I don't know exactly how to check if someone else has set this up but I'm sure the Post Office would help you find out. Additionally, I would consider visiting the address (the same house number in the ""Road"" where hers is in the ""Avenue"") and see whether the occupants have anything useful to say about this. I would just say you'd had some mis-delivered post, and want to check what their names are so that you can pass on anything that is intended for them that comes to your address (and ask them to do likewise for you). Depending on how that goes you could also ask about the ebay store and see whether it really is them that set it up."


If it is a separate unit from the rest of the property,  you can use that portion as an investment property.  the part, or unit, you are living in is your primary residence. The remainder is your investment. You are eligible to not pay capital gains on the portion you live in After two years. As always consult a tax accountant For advice...  Also, if this is less then 4 unit, you may he able to finance the sale of the home with an FHA loan.


All great answers. The only thing I didn't see mentioned was that student loans are not dischargable in a bankruptcy. So for example if you took money that could have gone to student loans and poured it into other debt, then for some reason declared bankruptcy later, your student load debt would remain while other debt would be discharged; essentially that money would have been better spent on the student loan. This isn't to advocate that you should pay down student loans with the intent of declaring bankruptcy, or that this makes it a better decision necessarily, just a factor that is sometimes forgotten.


I don't know if Canada's immigration policy would be a huge draw. Not because Amazon wouldn't want it, but because if the US actually gets so dumb it truly restricts quality immigration, who's to say it won't get dumb about border crossing? Even just making it unpleasant could be enough to ward off the best and brightest.  Meanwhile there are actual Canadian cities in the running which would allow Amazon to avoid the risk entirely. I know the Toronto bid actually had a letter from the Prime Minister vouching that Canada would be accommodating.


I can see that building credit is a valid reason. I would also suggest another scenario, when you have locked up money in long-term savings, with a substantial penalty for early withdrawal. If you suddenly needed money then you might save money by borrowing against the long-term deposit rather than pay the penalties. This is especially true if you needed the money only for a short time.


To get a credit history you need to use credit from someone that reports to the major credit agencies.  I don't suppose you have to BUY anything. You could just get a cash loan and hold it for a long time, but it seems silly to pay interest only for the purpose of building credit. The student loan should help you build credit. Also, I'm assuming you buy things all the time like gas, groceries, etc. Why not put those on a credit card and pay the balance off every month? That way you aren't buying anything specifically to get credit. Also there are numerous other benefits: Another suggestion: Set up your cards so the full balance is drafted from your bank automatically on the due date. That will ensure that you always pay on time (helping your credit) and also make you think twice about putting things on the card that you can't afford with the cash you have in the bank.


Article 1 Section 9 doesn't have a clause 8. Article 1 covers the legislative branch.  Article 2 section 1 clause 7 is actually tied with a few others as being the most consistently enforced. Because it's the one that establishes how the president gets paid. Every president has been paid in that way.


Taxi regulations exist to protect the public. It's not some racket to keep people out of the market.  Insurance: Uber/Lyft only insure their drivers while they are loaded. Meaning any other time they are driving around, even if they are driving to a call, they aren't insured. If they get in a wreck, their own car insurance won't cover it because they don't have taxi insurance which is a shit load more expensive than regular car insurance.  Red-lining: Red-lining is where taxi companies will not server certain neighborhoods, meaning they will neither pick up nor drop off in the area.  Discrimination: All classes are protected under taxi regulations with serious repercussions for discrimination. This also includes people with disabilities, like the blind and those in wheel chairs.  Rates: Taxi rates are typically approved by the city so that companies can't constantly change them. This is a big one as far as Uber/Lyft goes.  Really what it comes down to is Uber/Lyft need to operate on a level playing field. They are a taxi service. There is absolutely no question about this and it isn't up for dispute. They need to obey the same laws that taxi companies are still held to or be fined into oblivion. If you actually bother to read the taxi regs for your city, you will see they are there to protect you as a customer and have little benefit to taxi companies. About the only rule I can think of are the regulations regarding paying your fare. For all the rest, the taxi companies would be better off without because they wouldn't be forced to serve people they don't want to.  In my experience, the cab companies don't care about additional competition because it's the nature of the business. The fact that Uber/Lyft completely disregard all the regulations is what they have a problem with.  //Source: 8 years in the taxi industry.


This question is a bit off-topic, might be better moved to another SE site. But I'll answer anyway: Sounds like the problem is that your wife is potentially being taken advantage of by people who may not really be prospects. Keep in mind no one can take advantage of you without your permission. There are also some things you and she can do to reduce the amount of wasted time while minimizing the risk of giving up on a potential sale. Qualify your leads: make sure these potential clients are really, truly potential customers. Ask whatever questions you have to ask in order to qualify them as real house hunters. It doesn't have to be binary: you can have hot leads ready to buy now, and lukewarm leads who may not buy for 12 months or more. Treat each one accordingly. Set limits: a lukewarm lead is not allowed to call you 20 times a day. Answer their calls just once per day. By answering the phone every time they call you are training them to call as often as they like! If you only return calls once per day they'll quickly learn to save their questions up and ask them all at once. Showing 10 houses sounds a bit silly. How can you remember any details after seeing 10 houses? By asking more questions and learning more about what your clients want in a house, you can reduce the footwork. Me, I'd flat out limit it to three houses per outing, and I wouldn't even hesitate to tell the client why. I think all these things will come in time. Like any new venture, she needs some experience to learn how to maximize her efficiency and effectiveness. Keep in mind it's better to have the phone ringing too much than not at all!


QuickBooks online is one of the best accounting solution choice for small business owners. So here you find how to convert QB Desktop to QB Online. IF you need more detail and help related to this visit our page- https://www.wizxpert.com/convert-your-quickbooks-desktop-file-to-quickbooks-online/


">So you're telling me you can't commute upwards of one hour away from your work to find affordable housing? That is what Californians do.   Because everyone can and should spend 2 hours commuting every day.  Or three or four, ""if that's what it takes.""  Hell, why don't we just cancel nights and work through until it's time for sleep; that will save on commuting while allowing the same (near-zero) amount of seeing friends and family.  Fallacy of the Argument to Sufficient Extremes: ""You can fly unaided if you're determined enough.  You just have to put up with hitting the ground from a great height shortly after beginning your flight."""


">  I bootstrapped a business with my husband, from part-time while consulting to over $600k/yr in its 3rd year. I don't know nothin' bout no business!  *yawn*  I could go into a long rant about people who brag about their accomplishments on the internets and describe themselves as a ""bootstrapper"" but I won't. The whole blog reads like an Amway pitch with no indication as to what you actually do:   ""Do you want to break out of working by the hour? Do you want to create your own products and really be your own boss?""  Seriously?  This is a troll, right?"


"To begin with, bear in mind that over the time horizon you are talking about, the practical impact of inflation will be quite limited. Inflation for 2017 is forecast at 2.7%, and since you are talking about a bit less than all of 2017, and on average you'll be withdrawing your money halfway through, the overall impact will be <1.3% of your savings. You should consider whether the effort and risk involved in an alternative is worth a few hundred pounds. If you still want to beat inflation, the best suggestion I have is to look at peer-to-peer lending. That comes with some risk, but I think over the course of 1 year, it's quite limited. For example, Zopa is currently offering 3.1% on their ""Access"" product, and RateSetter are offering 2.9% on the ""Everyday"" product. Both of these are advertised as instant access, albeit with some caveats. These aren't FSCS-guaranteed bank deposits, and they do come with some risk. Firstly, although both RateSetter and Zopa have a significant level of provision against bad debt, it's always possible that this won't be enough and you'll lose some of your money. I think this is quite unlikely over a one-year time horizon, as there's no sign of trouble yet. Secondly, there's ""liquidity"" risk. Although the products are advertised as instant access, they are actually backed by longer-duration loans made to people who want to borrow money. For you to be able to cash out, someone else has to be there ready to take your place. Again, this is very likely to be possible in practice, but there's no absolute guarantee."


"I have three savings accounts that are currently open in India in different banks. Is it legal to have savings accounts open while I am in the US? If you are NRI [from what you have stated you are], you cannot hold a ""Savings"" account in India. Please have the accounts converted as NRO at the earliest. It is a simple matter of contacting Bank and completing formalities with some paperwork. do I have to declare this fact in the tax filings in US given that my tax is already deducted?  Yes, interest would be taxable in US. Does my father have to declare the additional deposits? No.  Edit to reply to comment: RBI Economic Times"


Somewhere between #3 and #4 is finding a market maker to act as an authorized participant (AP) for the fund's launch. This includes the initial seeding of the fund as well as agreeing to make consistent, high quality markets in the fund throughout its launch.


Investing requires capital, and the fastest way to get the capital is to develop good saving habits. Investing is an ongoing process to help you accumulate wealth, so to take advantage of compounding, the earlier you start, the better.  I can suggest a few pointers to get you started on the investing journey. Godspeed! :)


Still, tweets are becoming a growing part of our political discourse thanks to a certain US president. They feature in news stories and television reports. I am not surprised by their success at all, judging by how much their company has been discussed in the media.


In Sri Lanka, this is the normal practice. We, employees are free from the burden of paying tax for the income we get as a salary. Because that part is been taken care of by the company/employer.


Depends. What are the options available for the 401k? If they are low expense ratio options, that can be a great start. Otherwise, just do your own tax deductible IRA  At 40, with no retirement savings other than one 401k, you're likely behind. Its time to get serious; no reason you can't with that income.  Look into an IRA at Vanguard to start for up to 5500 a year per person if the 401(k) is no good.


There has to be a better way than how we do it now, I think we can all agree on that. The purpose of my post was to show that UBI is simply unrealistic and more than enough time has been spent on it in this subreddit. I would be fascinated to read new ideas, rather than UBI every day.


The contract should address this issue. It will specify the types of remedies and damages that would result if either side tries to back out of the deal. There can be monetary penalties, and the courts can force the seller to complete the deal. Where I have experienced this it generally takes only a gentle reminder from the agent regarding the consequences. There is also limited indirect protection via the contract between the seller and their real-estate agent. Many times that contract will require the seller to pay the agent their commission if there isn't a valid reason to cancel the deal. The contract was to find a fully qualified buyer. The threat of having to pay 6% of list price to the agent, and not selling the house can be enough to get them to complete the deal. All this assumes there was fraud, which could bring in criminal penalties.


Not bad. Do you do similar bullets for the future of the world economy?  To add to your Academic Bubble points:   * the black market will increase, with students simply defaulting on the debt, and getting jobs that pay cash.  * people will go back to apprenticeships to train young people more efficiently, like it's been done for centuries.  * online learning and standardized tests will replace expensive college system.


"> Though I'd counter that if your goal is to manipulate economic exchanges between individuals with the intention of guiding the economy at large to a specific desired outcome, I think that capitalism is not the economic system for you :P   Touche :)   I will say that, to your point, I have come to believe that there are two forces at odds that are required for a robust and long lived prosperous society:  1.  A capitalist system that encourages innovation through competition and  2.  A government to check the inevitable concentration of wealth that capitalism naturally trends toward.  They most effective ways for a government to check that concentration is through a progressive tax system, and a check on the power that the concentration of wealth creates (eg: forcing employers to pay a living wage instead of using a bully pulpit to extract the maximum effort for the lowest possible cost, as shown by the ""robber barons"" etc of the 1900s).  Either way, I'll admit that I am not talking about pure capitalism.  However, like the philosopher Georg Hegel theorized, all ideas go through a process of thesis (the first idea: aka capitalism), antithesis (the countering idea: in this case socialism), and then synthesis (the resulting compromise).  The synthesis then becomes the new thesis for the system to further evolve upon.  It's time for American capitalism to evolve."


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://jacobinmag.com/2017/10/finance-capital-shareholders-profit-market) reduced by 81%. (I'm a bot) ***** > The term financialization is used all over the place, but it&#039;s usually defined in a pretty circular way: financialization means &quot;More finance,&quot; more things controlled by finance.  > The role of finance in enforcing a certain kind of policy on the state, a certain kind of logic, a certain kind of organization - whether it&#039;s the bond market or whoever else we imagine here - is even more clear-cut.  > To me, that&#039;s a narrower, more specific, and maybe more fruitful way of thinking about financialization than just &quot;There&#039;s more finance.""   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/78t6so/the_disruptors_jacobin_magazine_via/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~235206 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*: **logic**^#1 **More**^#2 **finance**^#3 **way**^#4 **corporation**^#5"


"Just to really drive home how wrong you are, let's review both:  **Government** - you get 1 single binary choice every 2, 4 or 6 years not on an actual decision but for another PERSON to make the choices for you, without your input from then on, without any liability. If they lie to win their election, there's nothing you can do. There was no contract. You get no refund. They have control over the 1/3 of your income that taxation gives them. The most control you get is to wait those 730-2,191 days and get an *exchange* in the person who then gets to control your money and your choices. Voting in this system doesn't give you any control, it merely gives another person 1,000,000s of times as much control as everyone else. They are lawyers who won basically a popularity contest to gain control of $Trillions of our money.  **""Horrible"" corporation** - the only provider of a service, sets the prices they want. You want the service, there's no doubt about it, but you want to pay less and get better quality. They'd *love* to be able to force you to pay for their service even if you don't want it, but they cannot. Soon enough, because of the high profits of the corporation, a new competitor arises, such as Verizon, Time Warner,  or Google fiber and prices start dropping and quality goes up.  All companies wish they were governments, where they could just force people with guns and threats of imprisonment to make them pay for their bloated services. Notice how the closer a company appears like a monopoly, the more it resembles the largest monopoly? Compare how similar the long lines at Walmart resemble the long lines at the post office or DMV?"


very understandable concern.  people say that it's like 10% idea and 90% execution, but i agree that if i had some absolutely brilliant, new idea, I probably wouldn't be too eager to share it.  i expect most posts to be from people that are in the process of launching... i.e. the product is ready (or is nearly ready) but they want to get feedback on how to tweak it to improve.


I recommend you consider a Roth IRA. Invest it as others here suggest, safely, CDs, money market,etc. You can put in $5000/yr. When you spend, use this last, there is no penalty to withdraw the deposits. But if you make it through grad school without needing it, you'll have great start on your retirement savings.


You're in a good spot: making good money with prospects for that to continue for the foreseeable future. Even if/when you quit dancing nursing pays quite well. Leaving all that money in a savings account is a mistake. At a minimum: Open an IRA account at any of the discount brokers (Schwab, Fidelity, etc). Roth is fine to start, once your taxable income goes up consider switching to a traditional IRA. Max out your IRA every year. Invest in low-fee index funds. There are frankly too many options these days, but an S&P 500 Index fund is almost never a mistake. Open a regular taxable investment account where you can invest additional money. Leave some cash/savings for emergencies. But if you do #3 you can always sell some investments in a cash emergency. Yes, it may lose money in the short term, but given your steady income, not a huge concern. I think if you read all the investment advice out there, you'll see a familiar theme along these lines. Your nest egg will grow considerably when you invest.


"I've found that good old fashioned ""Monopoly"" teaches children about cash flow, mortgaging properties, and paying income taxes."


Citation? Please go looking for yourself, it should be easy for a curious mind to do.  How many jobs were lost to just china?  In rochester, ny alone, kodak has big investments and production moved to china.    Now, take xerox they are outsourcing jobs to india.  software and engineering, you get transfered and go work for the indian company or cya.  Look at Delphi, they are in Juarez mexico big time.  Search out the trade $, we trade large w/ these countries and more.  I don't mind trading but it should be balanced.  So much of them buying here and so much us buying there.  There are certain sectors of higher paying manufacturing jobs that are gone to not just to china but also mexico and india.  What jobs replaced them?    Of greater concern should be the stagnant wages of the last 30 years.


I'm not too sure tbh, i'm just getting my series 7 first before anything. But thank you for such a well thought out response.  I'd probably trade something that has a bit more volatility like BAC or something though.


I once called Amex to cancel a card with an annual fee. Instead, they were able to give me a different card with no fee. They were happy to do it. Of course, Amex has fantastic customer service, while Capital One is not known for it. But, its worth a five minute call, and you will retain your good score.


I don't like paying a house off early. Houses are quite illiquid investments. Lose your job, you can't get the money out. Housing prices go down, can't get your money out. Etc. You are in a better state owing 50k more on a house and with 50k in the bank, and if that money gets you in the habit of savings and investing, all the better.


I only used disposable diapers for my baby's first month.  However, I now use half disposable diapers (for part-time daycare) and half cloth.  My son is now 1 year and during a normal weekday, I go through 4 disposable diapers and 3-4 cloth diapers (this count includes a double thick cloth diaper for night).  On the weekend, I use about 7-8 cloth diapers a day.   For disposable, I buy Costco's Kirkland brand diapers which gives me about 200 diapers for $50.  I tend to go through one pack every other month.  For cloth, I bought FuzziBunz One-Size Diapers.  These are pretty expensive diapers (about $19/each) but I wanted ones that would last over multiple children (I chose these over the BumGenius because I thought snaps would last longer than velcro).  I bought 24 new cloth diapers which means I wash diapers every 2-3 days.  A couple of weeks ago I totaled up my receipts for cloth and disposable diapers and determined that I will recoup my diaper costs at around 16 months of part-time use. Notes:


"Treat each position or partial position as a separate LOT. Each time you open a position, a new lot of shares is created. If you sell the whole position, then the lot is closed. Done. But if you sell a partial quantity, you need to create a new lot. Split the original lot into two. The quantities in each are the amount sold, and the amount remaining. If you were to then buy a few more shares, create a third lot. If you then sell the entire position, you'll be closing out all the remaining lots. This allows you to track each buy/sell pairing. For each lot, simply calculate return based on cost and proceeds. You can't derive an annualized number for ALL the lots as a group, because there's no common timeframe that they share. If you wish to calculate your return over time on the whole series of trades, consider using TWIRR. It treats these positions, plus the cash they represent, as a whole portfolio. See my post in this thread: How can I calculate a ""running"" return using XIRR in a spreadsheet?"


"One interesting part of this history that is often forgotten was how absolutely close we came to a universal basic income under Nixon. FAP went through the (Democratic dominated) House without much trouble in late 1969-early 1970. It carried a very decisive margin. Absent a confluence of rather unique circumstances in 1970 (high among them the Cambodian Campaign-for a host of reasons, that created a chill between Nixon and the Senate, from which their relations would never truly recover), it is not at all hard to imagine it being passed.   One wonders how welfare policy would have developed with that. Keep in mind: FAP was meant to help both the working poor and working class as well as (really, more than) the underclass-which was part of how Moynihan knew how to appeal to Nixon.   Other factors in FAP's downfall include:  1) The domination of the finance committees (these things often were passed down by generation) by strongly conservative Southern Democrats, whose states-being largely still the poorest, the New South was only getting started-would have disproportionately effected by FAP. Largely against their own political interests-unlike the Great Society, FAP would have given recipients direct cash payouts, and would have largely ""gone over their heads"", so to speak. And after the Cambodian Campaign, Nixon could ill afford to alienate them.   2) Nixon's shift in attention in the summer of 1970 to other areas, prominent among them national security and foreign policy. For the former, the violently illegal (to the point where J. Edgar Hoover, no shrinking violet when it came to treating the civil rights of certain US citizens with some flexibility, objected) Huston Plan would be created in the summer of '70. As for the latter, this was when the China initiative was just beginning to take off and Vietnamization getting into high gear following the destruction of the sanctuaries. Absent both of these, Nixon would have his hands full at any rate that autumn with the dual crisis of the Black September and Cienfuegos, right at the moment FAP was in its death throes in front of the aforementioned finance committees.  Nixon would take a subsequent conservative turn for the 1970 elections, following a very... Buchananite/Agnewite strategy, with little to no success, which shaped his 1972 strategy.   3) The strong resistance of the Senate GOP to the measure, especially in the wake of the Great Society. Some proto-libertarians did support the FAP, but intended it to replace the welfare state, as opposed to Nixon wishing to supplement it/reshape it into something more fiscally feasible. The GOP cognoscenti were strongly resistant in general to Nixon's attempts to transform the GOP into something they fundamentally didn't wish to be.   (The ultimate symbolism of this was, had Nixon had his way, his VP and eventual successor would have been John Connally, former Texas governor and LBJ's *de facto* right-hand man cum top fixer, who epitomized the kind of conservative Democrat that Nixon wanted to transform the GOP with-into what would have essentially been a Gaullist/Disraeli Tory style party. This was not the same vision the people who dominated the GOP at the local level had in mind, to say the least, and was a contributing factor into why Nixon didn't invest a lot of energy into stumping for the GOP during the '72 landslide-and why the party returned the favor during Watergate.)   4) The resistance of a lot of Senate liberals to anything that would have given Nixon a domestic success, especially after Cambodia and before the '70 midterms. Merely the Clinton Wars in reverse, in a sense-Clinton's triangulation strategy in 1995, after the Democratic slaughter in the midterms of 1994, was ironically patterned off of Nixon's in 1971 following the disappointing results of the 1970 midterms for the GOP.  The FAP would be attempted again twice, but it never really had the same chance of passing that it did the first time. As for Cheney and Rumsfeld, I'm not terribly shocked. Both of them belong to the heavily natsec influenced wing of the party that historically hasn't had much attachment to small government style thinking found in the Congressional part of the GOP. They both have a knack for thinking politically, too-Cheney defended Bush Senior's decision to not boot the Ba'athists out of Baghdad in the early 90s, when few in the GOP were. The next decade would dramatically change things as the dominant foreign policy ideology of the part transformed to neoconservatism, the ideology of Democratic intellectuals that came over to the basement in the Reagan years and revolted in '92 against Bush the Elder, who epitomized (along with Snowcroft) the old-style Nixon/Kissinger realist foreign policy school of the party. Cheney knew where his bread was buttered and where the winds were going.  (Rumsfeld was also a dove on Vietnam by '71, believe it or not, to the point where it somewhat alienated Nixon and Kissinger. Rumsfeld eventually incurred the wrath of HR Haldeman-*normally*, a very unwise move in the Nixon White House-to the point where he got kicked upstairs to a post in Brussels dealing with NATO. The reason I emphasized *normally* is because this let Rumsfeld escape Watergate completely unscathed. Had that not happened, there's no way he'd have had the clout to pull off the Halloween Massacre in '75, at that youthful age.)"