My friend Harry Sit wrote an excellent article No Tax Advantage In RSU.  The punchline is this. The day the RSUs vested, it's pretty much you got $XXX in taxable income and then bought the stock at the price at that moment. The clock for long term gain starts the same as if I bought the stock that day.  Historical side note - In the insane days of the Dotcom bubble, people found they got RSUs vested and worth, say, $1M. Crash. The shares are worth $100K. The $1M was ordinary income, the basis was $1M and the $900K loss could offset cap gains, not ordinary income above $3000/yr. Let me be clear - the tax bill was $250K+ but the poor taxpayer had $100K in stock to sell to pay that bill. Ooops. This is the origin of the 'sell the day it vests' advice.  The shares you own will be long term for capital gain a year after vesting. After the year, be sure to sell those particular shares and you're all set. No different than anyone selling the LT shares of stock when owning multiple lots. But. Don't let the tax tail wag the investing dog. If you feel it's time to sell, you can easily lose the tax savings while watching the stock fall waiting for the clock to tick to one year.


">a totally unsustainable level  I get what you're saying, but this isn't the whole story. For most of the history of civilization, clothes were really, really expensive, so most people had only a few well-made outfits that they repaired and took good care of. It would be unsustainable for our modern lifestyle, but given the scope of human history up until around 80 years ago, totally normal. In fact, you could say that the way the modern clothing industry works is probable ""totally unsustainable,"" since land is being ruined through cotton production, and in all likelihood we *won't* be able to grow as much cotton as we do now, 50 years from now."


"With regard to PMI. You propose to put down 5% less, i.e. 15% instead of 20%. This is $12,500.  How much is the PMI? You will pay interest on the $12,500 extra you are borrowing, but also stuck paying that PMI for a number of years. Say the PMI is $100/mo. That's like paying nearly 10% on top of the interest you are already paying.  If you get a firm quote on what the PMI will cost you, you can make an informed decision. Borrowing at a bit of a premium may make sense, but much about 7-8%, and I'd rather take the risk of needing to raise cash elsewhere. PMI is tough to get rid of until you are at 80% LTV.  Edit -Beautiful link from Chad below. Now for the real math - You borrow 85K (to keep math easy) which is 15% down on a $100K house. 1.1% of $85K is $935/yr. But, you see, you are subject to that because you couldn't raise that last $5000. And $935 is 18.7% of that $5000. The PMI is on the whole mortgage, not on that extra bit you owe. Permit me to say ""holy crap! 18.7% is higher than my worst credit card, and more than I'd pay to borrow nearly anywhere else.""  The percent is the same regardless of the mortgage, this is the math to borrow at an 85% LTV. And why I suggest things like using one's 401(k) as a bridge for such amounts. For the OP, the $12K delta.  (Note, the link shows an update to 1.2% which makes the real cost 20.4%) The numbers are not as crazy when borrowing 95% LTV. ""only"" about 7.9% on the extra needed. Crazy as it sounds, this is how the math works."


perpetuity means perpetual. the assumption is that facebook will continue to be a 'going concern' which means they will operate indefinitely. this is a standard assumption and although it may not be true for facebook it serves its purpose as a baseline assumption. speculating on the exact timing of the demise of facebook would be even less accurate.


"Well if you weren't such an entitled prick, you'd know that it just flat out isn't as simple for some as ""find a better job"" or ""make more money"" or ""improve your lot in life"" as you have suggested here many different ways.   There are countless reasons why that just simply is not possible, and hence why there is, in fact, a need to require a living wage, no matter how hard you cover your ears and scream ""LALALALA"". If you weren't so self important, maybe you'd see that."


I keep track of the current casino bonus offers available at most big time online casinos but I was blown away when I came across the bonuses found on this site. They showed me what Slots Jungle had available and frankly, it was better than the rest.


It's pretty easy to disregard or outright learn to loathe the brands that are being advertised by intrusive digital ads that hijack your browser, and the ad networks that help make 1/10 of those ads a mobile hijack that won't let you back out forcing you to purge the app from memory. Seriously, those methods of advertising have a net negative effect just due to their obnoxious delivery.


> What it doesn't say is how many were opened, also how many were opened in the last 2 years thag they're closing.  DineEquity [planned 25-33 stores in 2016](https://www.foodnewsfeed.com/chain-restaurants/applebees-slows-development-plans-sales-decline), I didn't find their 2015 plans, nor organic, non-strategic closings. They [moved their HQ from Kansas City to the parent company's Los Angeles location](https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/blog/morning_call/2015/09/applebees-dineequity-headquarters-move.html), and [divested all remaining corporate-owned stores](https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/news/2015/07/24/applebees-100-percent-franchisee-owned.html) in 2015. They [franchise 2,016 stores system-wide](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applebee%27s) as of 2016. This closing announcement represents an approximate four years of organic closings if 2016 was any indication of normal, franchisee annual openings; it is definitely four years' worth of the the marginal organic openings rate, and about 5% system-wide shrinkage.  > I don't see Applebee's or chilli's doing well in the future. They just don't offer what people want anymore.  We [have the biggest population bulge](http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/04/25/millennials-overtake-baby-boomers/) entering the [traditional prime spending years with more debt than past generations](https://www.cheatsheet.com/money-career/millennial-long-term-debt-how-a-generation-ended-up-in-a-rut.html/?a=viewall), higher education costs are so high the graduation rates [favor the wealthy](https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2017/01/11/why-millennials-boomerang-home-its-not-student-loans-its-worse/#6ac6b5995d86), widening the lifetime income gap, and [HOOCOODANODE](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Talk:hoocoodanode)!? We'll survive fine through this; it isn't a nuclear war (much as some elements in the world are itching to mash that Big Red Button).  But vast swathes of the economic landscape that relied upon the Boomer-based lifetime income model will revamp for the Millennial new normal. I anticipate lots of asset revaluations and reallocations. Millennials worldwide see a much stretched-out period of income stagnation while waiting for older generations to retire out of the economy, then there will be a modest bump as they start filling in some of those vacant positions; automation will permanently eliminate many of those vacancies. For businesses, I anticipate this expresses as a worldwide, Japan-style constant, low-grade deflationary pressure and environment for several decades as the the landscape is reconfigured, before we find a new capital/credit/debt equilibrium that enables more dynamism and growth.


>When you hear mainstream economists offer detailed reasons why the Bush-Clinton tax increases were needed and why the Obama deficits are the right medicine for the economy, bear in mind these are the same economists who did not see the 2007 housing collapse coming, did not see the 2008 financial panic coming.     Here's the thing...neither did the economists in the other camp. Hardly anyone was openly talking about the problems.


if employees are difficult to fire, it make it difficult to hire to begin with. It is well proven phenomenon in South European countries. Making union powerful simply create two tire system whereby the system only protect those who are already employed.   North European countries, instead, adopt flexible system whereby business is free to fire but redundancy pay increase by the number of years of employment. Also, this is backed by robust unemployment benefit.


If you didn't receive the money in 2012 or have constructive receipt you really can't claim the income. If the company is going to give you a 1099 for the work they aren't going to give you one until next year and if you claim it this year you will have a hard time explaining the income difference. On the other hand if this isn't miscellaneous income, but rather self employment income and expenses you should be able to claim the expenses in 2012 and if you have a loss that would carry over to 2013. Note it is possible to use an accrual basis if you are running a business (which would allow you to do this), but it is more complex than the cash accounting individual tax payers use.


Yes, you're absolutely right. For such small amounts and such large fees, almost any investment choice is pointless. Some brokers allow for commission free ETF trading.  Seek them out. As you've noticed, bond interest rates are almost 0%.  This is a far cry from the days of Benjamin Graham, where the USD acted more like gold, with much more frequent booms and busts. During Graham's heyday, one could sell one's bonds at super low interest rates and buy them back again when high.  In his day, interest rates would be very high one year like in 2008 and next to nothing the next like in 2009, cycling back and forth, until the 1960s hit, and he didn't know what to do. Graham preferred to wait for the reversion to the mean, and act only when far from it.  Those opportunities are few and far between now since fiat currencies are far better managed than they were then, the Fed-caused 2009 total destruction as an outlier to recent times. In your case, it's best to leave the bonds to the insurance companies and buy equities.  If you want less volatility, buy a buy-write ETF.  Bonds will surely disappoint unless one is lucky enough to hold bonds while interest rates fall from ~6% to ~3%, an eventuality that shouldn't be expected to occur again, as Bill Gross is painfully discovering.


"Despite having a math degree, I basically only use basic algebra/probability/calculus on a day to day basis as my career has gone a different direction away from the modelling/quanty stuff.  Some fun reading:  * The SABR Model - [SABR/LIBOR Model](http://www.amazon.com/SABR-LIBOR-Market-Model-Interest-Rate/dp/0470740051) * Shevre's Stochastic Calculus for Finance - [Book 1](http://www.amazon.com/Stochastic-Calculus-Finance-Binomial-Textbooks/dp/0387249680/) & [Book 2](http://www.amazon.com/Stochastic-Calculus-Finance-Continuous-Time-Textbooks/dp/144192311X/)  One of the big 'hard' problems is calibrating a swap curve w/ what's known as the 3s6s Basis. As a number of true quants have said to me it is a ""non-trivial problem"". Its basically trying to match two curves with different compounding over a number of different knot points.  SABR Model, listed above, is all about calibrating and figuring out how the current rate enviroment is behaving, is it normal or lognormal? What is the blend between the two, how do you know when you are in a different environment etc. Can rates go negative?"


The regulations you're talking about (TR 1.263) are going into effect starting tax year 2016, so for purchases you made last year they're (kindof...) irrelevant. Kindof, because the IRS promises to not audit those that qualify under the regulations even if they use it before it goes into effect, but it doesn't legally have to. Since the regulations are new, I suggest you talk to a licensed professional who'd explain them to you and interpret them with regards to your specific situation. From my brief read, you can expense under these rules things that you would otherwise capitalize, with the $500 limit to the invoice. Meaning, if you bought a computer paying $500, which you use 50% for your business - you can expense $250. The benefit, comparing to the Sec. 179, is that you're not limited to new items, nor are you limited to business revenue. Otherwise, it looks like the applicability is similar. As I said - talk  to a licensed tax adviser (EA/CPA licensed in your State), since these rules are new and untested, and you should probably have a professional provide guidance. I'm not such a professional.


the person at the other end of the question is probably some low level employee getting paid less than $20 an hour, most likely, he'll just ask you if you have a point and then move on to the next person that actually needs something.  You are seriously overestimating reddit. Do you realize that the majority of redditors are young teens who don't even have bank accounts? Not to mention the amount of people who not only understand the equifax situation but actually care?


>$1160 per month, lets say you only have one kid.  >Oh, wait, taxes are taken out. You really only have about $1,000 to work with.  To be fair with your calculation, with $1,160 a month, you're not subject to federal income tax and most likely no state income tax, *especially* with a child.  That adds an extra $1,900 to the calculation.  Plus you'll get a $1,000 child tax credit from the government.  I'm not saying the extra $3,000 is enough to live on, but that calculation above leaves a bit out.  Edit: Brainfart - I forgot about Social Security / FICA.  In most years it's around 7.65%, which would be about $1,000.


Spoken like a true conspiracy theorist.  More realistically, the conservative audience includes a spectrum of people and viewpoints, so Fox includes a spectrum of people and viewpoints. While that spectrum all tends to fall into the conservative portion of the greater spectrum, it includes a range of people, as I said, from extremist commentators to legitimate newspeople because the conservative audience itself has that range and those demands.


A trust is a financial arrangement to put aside money over a period of time (typically years), for a specific purpose to benefit someone. Two purposes of trusts are 1) providing for retirement and 2) providing for a child or minor. There are three parties to a trust: 1) A grantor, the person who establishes and funds a trust. 2) A beneficiary, a person who receives the benefits. 3) a trustee, someone who acts in a fiduciary capacity between the grantor and beneficiary. No one person can be all three parties. A single person can be two of out those three parties. A RETIREMENT trust is something like an IRA (individual retirement account). Here, a person can be both the grantor (contributor) to the IRA, and the beneficiary (a withdrawer after retirement). But you need a bank or a broker to act as a fiduciary, and to handle the reporting to the IRS (Internal Revenue Service). Pension plans have employers as grantors, employees as beneficiaries, and (usually) a third party as trustee. A MINORS' trust can be established under a Gift to the Minors' Act, or other trust mechanisms, such as a Generation Skipping Trust. Here, a parent may be both grantor and trustee (although usually a third party is a trustee). A sum of money is put aside over a period of years for the benefit of a minor, for a college education, or for the minor's attaining a certain age: a minimum of 18, sometimes 21, possibly 25 or even older, depending on when the grantor feels that the minor is responsible enough to handle the money.


That is exactly the problem people aren't seeing. Automation. It makes things cheaper and more reliable than people. It also cuts the man hours needed down to a small fraction of what it was before. There haven't been enough new jobs created to make up for the jobs lost from automation.  In a perfect world, we would all just work a shorter schedule each and still live increasingly better lives as time went on but we all know that isn't going to happen, at least not without HUGE changes to the whole world.


"It is typically best to pay minimum payments to 2 of the loans and pay aggressively on the third loan. Some will tell you to pay the highest interest rate loan off first because ""personal finance"" is about ""finance"" and mathematically that saves you the most interest. Some will tell you to pay the smallest balance loan off first because ""personal finance"" is ""personal"" and the psychological ""win"" of paying off a loan is more valuable than the small amount of interest difference between this strategy and paying off the loan with the highest interest rate first."


">I think you are confusing ""understands technology"" with ""is technology guru"" or ""technology visionary"".  Nope.  I don't think Sculley really fits in ANY of those categories.  He's a marketer & speaker -- he learns just enough of the **buzzwords & jargon** to make it SOUND as if he knows what is going on... but -- like many other similar people -- he really doesn't have a frigging clue.  >Your timeline is flawed, as Sony's early work goes back well in to the 50's.  Sony was working on ""color TV's"" yes... but not anything related to what became the ""Trinitron"" -- that history is well documented (both in the patents that they licensed, and the people/teams & subsequent patents that they filed, as well as in various narrative histories from the people involved).  > I don't look at his work with the CRT as a demonstration of any particular brilliance  Of course you do... that's the entire reason you regurgitated that little ""myth"" -- to support this illusion/delusion you have that he HAS some ""technological brilliance"" -- all of your previous comments in this thread are in that vein.  >You should read Jobs' own accounts of meeting and recruiting Sculley. They had very extensive conversations about technology and while Jobs no doubt didn't see him as a visionary, the computer industry was new to Sculley so he had a lot to learn (particularly the first year), and Sculley clearly didn't get Jobs' design esthetic, but Jobs very much felt he could share his vision and Sculley would understand it and its implications. Similar comments from Markkula and others who worked with the guy then.  Jobs was **bullshitter** -- a very charismatic one no doubt -- but a bullshitter nonetheless.  > Sculley definitely sees himself not as a technical visionary or even a technologist, but as a master marketer.  ROTFLMAO... Riiiight... that's why he promotes himself as a ""technology visionary"" speaker:  >>In the Age of Smartphones, Smart Pads and Smart TVs, John Sculley is the Quintessential Smart Entrepreneur - A Compelling Public Speaker on Innovation in Global Business and Technology"


"here is what I don't get . . .when they say ""Unwind"" does it mean put a corkscrew up their ass and twist? because if they mean sell it back int the market, the problem was that there was no market and thats why it ended up on the Feds balance sheet.  There is still no market for those Toxic assets . . . so does that mean the Fed is going to write it off?  I bet we see QE 4 before any unwinding"


That's tricky, actually. First, as the section 1015 that you've referred to in your other question says - you take the lowest of the fair market value or the actual donor basis. Why is it important? Consider these examples: So, if the relative bought you a brand new car and you're the first title holder (i.e.: the relative paid, but the car was registered directly to you) - you can argue that the basis is the actual money paid. In essence you got a money gift that you used to purchase the car. If however the relative bought the car, took the title, and then drove it 5 miles to your house and signed the title over to you - the IRS can argue that the car basis is the FMV, which is lower because it is now a used car that you got. You're the second owner. That may be a significant difference, just by driving off the lot, the car can lose 10-15% of its value. If you got a car that's used, and the donor gives it to you - your basis is the fair market value (unless its higher than the donor's basis - in which case you get the donor's basis). You always get the lowest basis for losses (and depreciation is akin to a loss). Now consider the situation when your relative is a business owner and used the car for business. He didn't take the depreciation, but he was entitled to. IRS can argue that the fact that he didn't take is irrelevant and reduce the donor's basis by the allowable depreciation. That may bring your loss basis to below the FMV. I suggest you take it to a tax professional licensed in your state who will check all the facts and circumstances of your situation. Your relative might be slapped with a gift tax as well, if the car FMV is above certain amount (currently the exemption is $14000).


Putting 64% of a portfolio in gold and silver is pretty reckless from an investing standpoint. That being said, if he really did buy most of the stocks in 2002, he's probably made a good deal of money off these picks.


Many people have criticized the Groupon IPO model because it doesn't make sense as an investment, unless you are an insider with cheap shares. Basically, you have:


There's really not a simple yes/no answer.  It depends on whether you're doing short term trading or long term investing.  In the short term, it's not much different from sports betting (and would be almost an exact match if the bettors also got a percentage of the team's ticket sales), In the long term, though, your profit mostly comes from the growth of the company.  As a company - Apple, say, or Tesla - increases sales of iPhones or electric cars, it either pays out some of the income as dividends, or invests them in growing the company, so it becomes more valuable.  If you bought shares cheaply way back when, you profit from this increase when you sell them.  The person buying it doesn't lose, as s/he buys at today's market value in anticipation of continued growth.  Of course there's a risk that the value will go down in the future instead of up. Of course, there are also psychological factors, say when people buy Apple or Tesla because they're popular, instead of at a rational valuation.  Or when people start panic-selling, as in the '08 crash.  So then their loss is your gain - assuming you didn't panic, of course :-)


I live downtown in a pretty big city where taxis (or car2go) are the dominant form of public transportation.   Fuck taxis.   After dealing with them for years, I hate them. They're always driven by shitheads from Somalia who are always rude, they and their cars stink to hell, they're always yelling on the phone in Arabic, and that's just once you actually get in the car. First, you have to stand your ass on the street and flag one down, because if you call the dispatcher, you get another fucking Somalian who doesn't give a rats ass about where you are or when you need to be picked up. Going to a meeting or have dinner reservations? Good luck. After going out and trying to get a ride home, there's a 50/50 chance the asshole taxi driver won't let you in until you tell him you're destination, then he'll just speed off if he decides its not far enough. When it comes time to pay, they will agressively get in your face and demand you pay them in cash, *not with a credit card*. I've had my credit card info stolen after using it in a cab. On more than one occasion, my girlfriend paid with a card, the driver grabbed it from her,  *entered his own tip* and bitched at her the whole time.   Every **EVERY** single time I've used Lyft its been a great experience. The cars are always clean, the drivers are always super friendly, I know exactly where and when to expect them via the app, and paying is a cinch. Fuck taxis. Taxis are an old, inefficient system and I'm glad they're being replaced. I don't care about whatever consumer protections they don't have, Lyft had their own algorithm to calculate fares and its at least consistent.


Is it common in the US not to pay medical bills? Or do I misunderstood what had been said? There has definitely been a misunderstanding as it is not that common for people to not pay medical bills. Yes, there are those that cannot afford to pay them, and that does contribute to increasing prices, but overall people do pay. I think there is an aspect to this that has not been covered by the other two answers. What is common, at least in my experience, is that medical providers (i.e. doctors, hospitals, radiology, etc) are much more likely to work with you on establishing a payment plan than utilities, credit card companies, banks, etc are. This is different than holding off payment in the hopes of negotiating a reduction in payment. I am speaking of paying the total amount, but over multiple payments, and without a penalty for paying over multiple payments. And usually they will ask you what you can afford. If you can pay $50 per month, likely that will work. And even what I do that and call to pay the monthly amount, they will ask if I will pay that or some other (including lesser) amount. Also, if I skip a month (usually from forgetting, not intentionally) there is again no additional fee. This doesn't cover ALL providers, but so far has been consistent across all of the ones I have used. I suspect this is what your colleagues were referring to.


The thing is, one of the primary reasons tickets cost so much (the entire price including fees) is because the bands require more money than ever. Competing ticket vendors usually only cost a few dollars less than Ticketmaster. So, there's not really much of an alternative (on the whole ... I'm sure some bands out there would play for less money under certain circumstances) ... until the next shift in the music business becomes clear.


Have you owned the stock for longer than 2015?  The stock appears to have grown in value since December 2014 from 72.85 to 73.5 which is about 0.89% growth in the year to date (2015).


"I think the claim is that you shouldn't buy a house expecting it to increase in value as you would a stock portfolio. OTOH if you are looking at it from the stand point of ""I need housing, mortgage payments and rent are comparable and I build equity if I buy a house rather then rent"" that's potentiality a very different situation (that I'm not qualified to judge)."


It's very sustainable.  Let's say the Typical subscribing user stays on for 20 months at $20 a month, means that the LTV of a paying tinder user is $400.   Tinder even has a pyramid pricing, charging older users more in addition to their Super Premium gold users.   In app purchases of super-likes and blasts.  And ad revenue...   I think buying Tinder was smart


Take your problem-solving skills to the next level while learning to build. Game design courses allow students to create their own unique virtual worlds with blocks of material mined from the ground. Children interested in games, such as video or computer games, and how they work may enjoy attending some Game Design Programs. These Game design programs & courses give children a great opportunity to learn the basics of game design and computer programming. Checkout us online: http://www.homebuiltairplanes.com/forums/member.php?u=46817


"I think you're missing a fixed and variable breakout cost per unit here. Fixed costs per unit decrease as volume rises.  If you think VC and equity peeps would throw down bills to a company who can't reasonably argue or support a cash generating model, you're likely mistaken. Uber's infrastructure and rapid scaling are cost intensive, however, once implemented, their costs do not rise 1:1 with every person who hails an Uber, which is what you're implying by leaving us two identical profit margins at vastly different volumes, which only exists in fairy-tale ""unicorn"" land.   Also, to your comments below: Oh wow, you think a tech company is overvalued? Like that's not the real ""soundbite"" - same fuckin' soundbite I heard when Amazon was trading at 200 a share."


"LOL!!!! A BBC report about ""hate crime"" only listing attacks on migrants, but does not list attacks on Germans.  **Bottom line: Germany needed those migrants like it needed a bullet in its head. Meanwhile, Japan, Poland, Hungary, Norway, etc have not issue to deal with and they are doing just fine.**"


I think he is saying that the vote was not the reform needed. Some of you will be too young to understand but my only class action that I was in was Blockbuster. I ended up with like $1.45. If I had to guess I would spend about 20-50 bucks a month in late fees. Sometimes it was my fault because if I missed the weird time to return them I felt I might as well keep them for the fees and would be late again. I did not agree to sue them. I just did not opt out. Blockbuster made tons off of me and people like me. The lawyers who really just put people together as a class made millions. The customer is a pawn. That is what I think he means. You would need meaningful reform in the class action space for this to really matter. This is one of our boys are going to be sued and we should help them. Congress has basically protected Equifax downside risk. Yetto address the reality of the fact that the hack impacts the people congress supposedly works for and was caused by gross negligence. Maybe they should be building an RFP to replace them, not protect them.


I think Jobs had an impact based on his ideas, if you look at Apple under Scully and then again when Jobs came back there was a clear difference. The real test will be what happens to Apple now that he's gone for good.


"In the UK there is a School Rewards System used in many schools to teach kids and teens  about finance and economy. In the UK there is a framework for schools called ""Every Child Matters"" in which ‘achieving economic well-being’ is an important element. I think is important to offer to offer a real-life vehicle for financial learning beyond the theory."


Don't worry about your Smith & Wesson shares.  Sooner or later, some nut will shoot up a gun-free zone, then everyone will run off to by guns & ammo before the government comes to take them all.  It's gotten sadly predictable.


"If you do it, be sure to read what you sign. They'll sign you up on some type of ""credit insurance"" and not tell you about it. It costs like $10 a month. If you don't sign up for that, you should be fine. I bought my HDTV this way, though I wish I would have saved and paid up front. I'm moving more towards the ""cash only"" mindset."


The time when you might want to do this is if you think BBY is undervalued already.  If you'd be happy buying the stock now, you'd be happy buying it lower (at the strike price of the put option you sold).  If the stock doesn't go down, you win.  If it does, you still win, because you get the stock at the strike price. If I recall correctly Warren Buffett did this with Coca-Cola.  But that's Warren Buffett.


Also I don't need to put up as much money, and since I am a college student, that allows me to conserve capital, but still diversify into that market. I am still reading up on them before I jump in, but these securities fascinate me.


"In asnwer to your questions: As @joetaxpayer said, you really should look into a Solo 401(k). In 2017, this allows you to contribute up to $18k/year and your employer (the LLC) to contribute more, up to $54k/year total (subject to IRS rules). 401(k) usually have ROTH and traditional sides, just like IRA. I believe the employer-contributed funds also see less tax burden for both you and your LLC that if that same money had become salary (payroll taxes, etc.). You might start at irs.gov/retirement-plans/one-participant-401k-plans and go from there. ROTH vs. pre-tax: You can mix and match within years and between years. Figure out what income you want to have when you retire. Any year you expect to pay lower taxes (low income, kids, deductions, etc.), make ROTH contributions. Any year you expect high taxes (bonus, high wage, taxable capital gains, etc.), make pre-tax payments. I have had a uniformly bad experience with target date funds across multiple 401(k) plans from multiple plan adminstrators. They just don't perform well (a common problem with almost any actively managed fund). You probably don't want to deal with individual stocks in your retirement accounts, so rather pick passively managed index funds that track various markets segments you care about and just sit on them. For example, your high-risk money might be in fast-growing but volatile industries (e.g. tech, aerospace, medical), your medium-risk money might go in ""total market"" or S&P 500 index funds, and your low-risk money might go in treasury notes and bonds. The breakdown is up to you, but as an 18 year old you have a ~50 year horizon and so can afford to wait out anything short of another Great Depression (and maybe even that). So you'd want generally you want more or your money in the high-risk high-return  category, rebalancing to lower risk investments as you age. Diversifying into real estate, foreign investments, etc. might also make sense but I'm no expert on those."


"Honestly, I wonder if the other answerers aren't overthinking it. Their answers are detailed and correct, but what your coach may be saying is this: When you have bought a stock, on cash or margin, and you are watching it rise you are evaluating when you sell on the price of the stock you are seeing. In reality, you should look at the bid (price buyers will give you for the stock) and ask (price sellers will charge you for the stock) prices. If the stock is going up, odds are the price of the stock is very close to the ask price because it is purchases that are driving it up, but that's not what you're going to get when you sell. You're going to get something around the bid price. If the spread between the two is large (i.e. a volatile stock) this could be many cents or more lower than the ask price. Therefore, what your coach may mean by ""Selling on Ask"" is you're using the stock price when it's equal or close to the ask price to decide when to sell, instead of letting the stock peak and drop (when its price will approach the bid price) or letting the trailing bid offers catch up to your desired sell point and selling then (i.e. letting the stock point grow PAST your sell point, dragging the bid price up with it). Just a thought, but that sounds like a term a coach would come up with to mean selling and getting less than you thought you were going to from the sale. (I know it's a necro reply, but the Interwebs are immortal and people come via Google... I did)"


The Child Care Expense Deduction (line 214) dollar limits will each increase by $1000, to new amounts of $8000 for children under 7 and $5000 for children age 7–16. Notes: As a tax deduction, your tax liability gets reduced at your marginal income tax rate, not the lowest tax rate (as would be the case for a tax credit). Yes, you still need receipts from your child care provider to support any claim. The non-refundable child tax credit a.k.a. amount for children under age 18 (line 367) introduced in 2007 is being eliminated starting in tax year 2015 coincident with the UCCB enhancement above. The credit could previously reduce tax liability by ~$340. The Family Tax Cut is being introduced and will be effective for tax year 2014. That is, when you file your 2014 income tax return in early 2015, you may be able to take advantage of this measure for income already earned in 2014. Provided a couple has at least one child under the age of 18, the Family Tax Cut will permit the transfer of up to $50,000 of taxable income from the higher income spouse's income tax return to the lower income spouse's return. While the potential transfer of $50,000 of taxable income to lower tax brackets sounds like a really big deal, the maximum tax relief is capped at $2000.


The collectible value of coins will probably increase with the underlying metal value. I'd collect coins for that reason and because I enjoy collecting them. I wouldn't recommend buying bags of rolled nickels or anything though.


If you have non-salary income, you might be required to file 1040ES estimated tax for the next year on a quarterly basis. You can instead pay some or all in advance from your previous year's refund. In theory, you lose the interest you might have made by holding that money for a few months. In practice it might be worth it to avoid needing to send forms and checks every quarter. For instance if you had a $1000 estimated tax requirement and the alternative was to get 1% taxable savings account interest for six months, you'd make about $3 from holding it for the year. I would choose to just pay in advance. If you had a very large estimation, or you could pay off a high-rate debt and get a different effective rate of return, the tradeoff may be different.


"I think what you are looking for is a secured credit card. They are mostly used by people who have ruined their credit and want to rebuild it, but it might also serve your purpose.  Essentially you deposit some money in an account and the credit card can be used up to the amount left in the account. Each month when you pay the bill, it resets the balance that you can charge. Also, many credit card providers also offer ""disposable"" or ""one use"" credit card numbers for the express purpose of using it online. It still gets charged against your regular account, but you get a separate number that can only be used for up to X dollars of transactions."


It is through a vendor leasing to a provider(99% coverage lol).  Our municipality does not allow private entities to attach to the fixtures so that puts me in the cats seat.  They will be metering their own electric so that is not a problem.   You seem to be pretty knowledgeable,  would it benefit me to argue for yearly payments instead of monthly?


You can take a look at EDGAR (Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval), a big database run by the SEC where  all companies, foreign and domestic, are required to file registration statements, periodic reports, and other forms electronically.


Oh, don't expect us to take sides, we love both our parents the same! As to the pragmatic decision making - simple math. The disagreement is whether to pay off the HELOC or to invest into the mutual fund instead. Well, check the yield of the fund, compare to the costs of keeping the HELOC balance, and see which one makes more sense. Just compare the expected payments and gains for each of the scenarios and you'll get your answer.


Well, which is it?  Police or Fire?  >Police and Fire  You are either one or the other, not both.  And NEITHER is really among the most dangerous jobs (yes there are police forces in certain locales that have higher than average death & disability rates, but for the majority of the country, the rates are actually below average).


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/17/a-gary-cohn-resignation-would-crash-the-markets-jeffrey-sonnenfeld.html) reduced by 66%. (I'm a bot) ***** > The New York Times reported Wednesday that Cohn, who is Jewish, was &quot;Upset&quot; and &quot;Disgusted&quot; with President Donald Trump&#039;s response to Saturday&#039;s deadly white nationalist rally in Virginia.  > During a heated press conference Tuesday, Trump defended his comments that &quot;Both sides&quot; were to blame for the violence over the weekend that left a counterprotester dead. That prompted several members of Trump&#039;s advisory councils to announce their resignations, which caused Trump to eventually dissolve the councils entirely.  > A Cohn resignation could be a hit to Trump&#039;s plans to revamp the tax code.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6ub6qf/a_gary_cohn_resignation_would_crash_the_markets/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~193173 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*: **Trump**^#1 **Cohn**^#2 **White**^#3 **markets**^#4 **CNBC**^#5"


"There are two types of insurance: whole life and term. I don't recommend whole life insurance, because you are insuring against something that will happen, your death. Maybe you could buy it if members of your family have a history of outliving the averages. This is called ""adverse selection."" Term is different: it insures against your UNTIMELY death. Many people I know take term insurance for the X years until their last child leaves college, or some other well defined ""term."" They don't want to die before this term but will be satisfied with the insurance as a ""consolation"" prize."


The days are long gone when offered mortgages were simply based on salary multiples. These days it's all about affordability, taking into account all incomes and all outgoings. Different lenders will have different rules about what they do and don't accept as incomes; these rules may even vary per-product within the same lender's product list.  So for example a mortgage specifically offered as buy-to-let might accept rental income (with a suitable void-period multiplier) into consideration, but an owner-occupier mortgage product might not. Similarly, business rules will vary about acceptance of regular overtime, bonuses, and so on. Guessing at specific answers: #1 maybe, if it's a buy-to-let product, Note that these generally carry a higher interest rate than owner-occupier mortgages; expect about 2% more #2 in my opinion it's extremely unlikely that any lender would consider rental income from your cohabiting spouse #3 probably yes, if it's a buy-to-let product


Yes.  The investment world is extremely fast-paced and competitive. There are loads of professional traders with supercomputers working day in and day out to make smarter, faster trade decisions than you. If you try to compete with them, there’s a better than fair chance you’ll lose precious time and money, which kind of defeats the purpose. A good wealth manager: In short, they can save you time and money and help you take the most advantage of your current savings. Or, you can think about it in terms of cost. Most wealth managers charge an annual fee (as a % of the amount invested) for their services. This fee can range anywhere from close to zero, to 0.75% depending upon how sophisticated the strategy is that the money will be invested in, and what kind of additional services they have to offer. Investing in the S&P500 on the behalf of the investor shouldn’t need a fee, but investing in a smart beta or an alpha strategy, that generates returns independent of the market’s movement and certainly commands a fee. But how does one figure if that fee is justified? It is really simple. What is the risk-adjusted performance of the strategy? What is the Sharpe ratio? Large successful funds like Renaissance Technologies and Citadel can charge 3% in addition to 30% of profits because even after that their returns are much better than the market. I have this rule of thumb for money-management fees that I am willing to pay:


Maybe this just me, but learn to talk like an adult. I know it sounds like an insult to say this, but many interns where I work speak very casually, say 'like' frequently, and end all their sentences with an upturn, like a question.   I've worked many suit type jobs, and I find that young people are taken more seriously if they present themselves as adults.


When interest rates rise, the price of bonds fall because bonds have a fixed coupon rate, and since the interest rate has risen, the bond's rate is now lower than what you can get on the market, so it's price falls because it's now less valuable. Bonds diversify your portfolio as they are considered safer than stocks and less volatile. However, they also provide less potential for gains. Although diversification is a good idea, for the individual investor it is far too complicated and incurs too much transaction costs, not to mention that rebalancing would have to be done on a regular basis. In your case where you have mutual funds already, it is probably a good idea to keep investing in mutual funds with a theme which you understand the industry's role in the economy today rather than investing in some special bonds which you cannot relate to. The benefit of having a mutual fund is to have a professional manage your money, and that includes diversification as well so that you don't have to do that.


400 games a day are released in the app stores. There will always be random small games that find success but the vast majority of devs without diversified portfolios and cash flow will fail quickly. It's like any other entertainment industry with way more music tracks/movies/games than demand. It's incredibly risky (not to mention freaking hard as hell to make something 'fun'), especially compared to taking those programming skills and making a decent, steady salary as an engineer.


"Ok, I was being a bit rhetorical, sorry, it failed to come across.  I know there are other firms, but I have never seen anyone say ""ex-Bain people"". Is McKinsey sort of used like you just used google, not to refer to the company but as a type of thing (google = search engines; McKinsey = management consultants)?"


Exchange traded options are issued in a way that there is no counter party risk.  Consider, stocks and options are held in street name. So, for example, if I am short and you are long shares, no matter what happens on my end, your shares are yours.  To be complete, it's possible to enter into a direct deal, where you have a contract for some non-standard option, but that would be very rare for the average investor.


The balance is the amount due.


The problem I have with all this is won those tours against EVERYONE ELSE WHO WAS ALSO DOPING. I'm not sure he gained a competitive advantage when the entire field was also doping.   Lewis Blacks rant on John Stewart earlier this week was spot on.


This article leaves quite a bit of information out, I gather. Poorly written. How many corporations is he getting paid from? What were the terms of the agreement? It sounds like Kiyosaki himself isn't going bankrupt, it sounds like some small, off-shoot is taking the brunt of the damages so the rest of his assets can move on. This guy knows how to protect himself and his companies. This could be nothing more than a parking ticket for him, and this news website decided to sensationalize it. What a surprise.


>> Why would the executives take accept a salary at 80% of the market wage when they could just get a job at 100% of the market wage.  >This may be true for managers, but research has found little to no evidence of a relationship between executive pay and performance.  If that were true, the company shareholders could replace them all with monkeys, and give all that executive pay to themselves.  > without telling shareholders how much they're costing them.  Now that just seems disingenuous. How do you think they could possibly hide that from the shareholders?


"So? In the past, if you did not know, only 2% of the population had bachelor degrees.  You know very well that, unless you physically drop from high school, you will graduate, even if you can barely read, write or answer ""if you drive 70 MPH, how long does it take to drive 70 miles?""  And as a former professor in the university, I was told I can't fail students even if they are complete illiterate idiots.  33% (one in three!) of the population having [worthless] Bachelor degrees and going into debt because of that is terrible!!! It's not realistic.  They lowered the requirement to finish high school and bachelor degree so much that those degrees became worthless."


Those folks should be introduced to some real estate folks I know, they'd get along famously, being as how they still think it's 2007. The amount of housing out there requires that a large market of consumers is available to purchase them. If housing prices rose infinitely ahead of salaries, the market for potential buyers would continue to shrink until supply would outstrip demand. And then we have the wonderful housing bubble like the one that we just went through (or in some places like China, have the potential to go through). Short version: It violates the relationship between supply and demand.


"If they made deposits 20 years ago, and none since, the S&P is up over 300% since then. i.e. a return of $40,000 on $10,000 invested. We wouldn't expect to see that full return, as a prudent mix of stock and bonds (or any treasury bills/CDs, etc) would lower the overall return during this period.  Advice ""Transfer the money, directly to an IRA at a broker, Fidelity, Schwab, Vanguard, etc.""  For most people, going after the advisor isn't worth it, unless the sums are large and the poor management, pretty clear.  The lesson for readers here - monitor your investments. Ask questions. It's not about ""beating the market"" which can actually create more risk, but about understanding the returns you see, and the fees you are spending. The mistake didn't occur at the time the money was invested, but every year it wasn't monitored."


You can but there is no point trading CFD's seeing you may still lose more than your investment due to slippage


If I understand you right, people are giving the LLC money for an ownership share.  That is NOT income - it would go under equity on the balance sheet.  It is analogous to getting a loan from the bank.  It is not income - you get cash (an asset) and have an increase to debt (a liability)


Alright business types, how is facebook worth anywhere near 24B? Where is this revenue coming from?   Also, how are they so sure facebook isn't going to be the next myspace, given how fickle the population is and how many people are already fed up with facebook to the point where they have closed accounts?


In reference to the original question: You put pretax (untaxed) money into an IRA.  If this was a rollover from a company plan (like a 401k), your company may have also put pretax dollars in.  As the account grows, you get gains on all of this money.  The government gives you this amazing deal because they want you to save for retirement.  But, they also want you to eventually spend the money in retirement and they want to collect those deferred taxes.  So they require RMDs starting at age 70.5.  To guarantee that people follow the rules, they make a stiff penalty for not doing so. The IRS has the option to forgive a forgotten RMD distribution penalty, if you can convince them that it was a true oversight and not a deliberate flouting of the rules.


It depends what you want to do with them.  If you are just simply going to drip-feed into pre-identified shares or ETFs every few months at the market price, you don't need fancy features: just go with whoever is cheaper.   You can always open another account later if you need something more exotic. Some brokerages are associated with banks and that may give you a benefit if you already deal with that bank: faster transfers (anz-etrade), or zero brokerage (westpac brokerage on westpac structured products.) There's normally no account fee so you can shop around.


This answer fills in some of the details you are unsure about, since I'm further along than you. I bought the ESPP shares in 2012.  I didn't sell immediately, but in 2015, so I qualify for the long-term capital gains rate. Here's how it was reported: The 15% discount was reported on a W2 as  it was also mentioned twice in the info box (not all of my W2's come with one of these) but also  This showed the sale trade, with my cost basis as the discounted price of $5000. And for interests sake, I also got the following in 2012: WARNING! This means that just going ahead and entering the numbers means you will be taxed twice! once as income and once as capital gains. I only noticed this was happening because I no longer worked for the company, so this W2 only had this one item on it. This is another example of the US tax system baffling me with its blend of obsessive compulsive need for documentation coupled with inexplicably missing information that's critical to sensible accounting. The 1099 documents must (says the IRS since 2015) show the basis value as the award price (your discounted price).   So reading the form 8949: Note: If you checked Box D above but the basis reported to the IRS was   incorrect, enter in column (e) the basis as reported to the IRS, and   enter an adjustment in column (g) to correct the basis. We discover the number is incorrect and must adjust.  The actual value you need to adjust it by may be reported on your 1099, but also may not (I have examples of both). I calculated the required adjustment by looking at the W2, as detailed above. I gleaned this information from the following documents provided by my stock management company (you should the tax resources section of your provider):


Sounds like there are a lot of smarts behind that young brain. Or does he have the right people working for him?  Does anyone think he will turn into a typical young hollywood icon? Burned out, drugged up, and done with everything by 24?


omg, finally! I really did not feel like going through the whole anti-process. That would have been a cluster I swear. Can someone send this to google or apple?  PS pro tip, if this can make to the DoJ's desk pick up those netflix shares since after breaking these two up Netflix will finally earn a real margin.


Vanguard offers an index fund. Their FTSE Social Index Fund. For more information on it, go here.


Depends whom the 1099 was issued to. If it was issued to your corporation - then its your corporation's income, not yours. Why would it go to your tax return? Your corporation and you are two separate legal entities. You will have to file the 1120S, whether you have corporate income or not, it has to be filed each year. So why make a mess of your reporting and not just report the corporation income on its return and your personal income on your own return? If you no longer use the corporation and all the 1099's are issued to you personally, then just dissolve it so that you won't have to file an empty 1120S every year and pay additional fees for maintaining it.


There are really two answers, depending on your goal. You're either trying to preserve wealth, or increase wealth. In the case of preserving wealth, undervalued blue chip stocks are always a great move. Bonus points if they have a history of increasing dividend payments. The best example I have is bank stocks - the continuously change their dividend payouts (usually to the benefit of investors), and at the same time, many have been undervalued, or over-whelped during the downturn.  Alternatively, you can let things sit, and buy high quality corporate bonds. I'm seeing (daily) offers from my brokerage's new issues list for high quality bonds paying 5.75%-7.25%. While you have to lock in your money for the period, the rate of return tends to offset lock-in worries, and you can still usually sell the shares in a secondary market, or through your broker.


"If I recall, Duke and Dynergy were both heavily involved in the Enron-style defrauding of California back in the late 90s where they'd split their business into various ""independent"" sectors, the parent company would charge sub-companies lots and pass those costs to the division servicing energy to CA while claiming ""thin margins"" justifying high energy fees.  I wonder if this is a pre-cursor to try to do the same thing to the midwest that they did to CA just before the elections in 2000. Drive up energy costs dramatically to incite anger at the existing administration, perhaps targeting individual states?"


Profit = Sale price - Basis Basis = Purchase price - any depreciation taken, including expensing it.


He alienated whole countries and races of people. He also alienated more than half of America and he's wondering why  no one wants to buy his tacky condos or stay in his sub standard hotels? Moron. His base can't afford to buy those condos or stay at his hotels not till he gets rid those damn immigrants stealing coal jobs.


Here is a list of threads in other subreddits about the same content:   * [Sales of beer down 3.1% in Germany in the first nine months of 2017](https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/79nk88/sales_of_beer_down_31_in_germany_in_the_first/) on /r/Economics with 0 karma (created at 2017-10-30 21:04:28 by /u/piaxtla)  ----   ^^I ^^am ^^a ^^bot  ^^[FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/DuplicatesBot/wiki/index)-[Code](https://github.com/PokestarFan/DuplicateBot)-[Bugs](https://www.reddit.com/r/DuplicatesBot/comments/6ypgmx/bugs_and_problems/)-[Suggestions](https://www.reddit.com/r/DuplicatesBot/comments/6ypg85/suggestion_for_duplicatesbot/)-[Block](https://www.reddit.com/r/DuplicatesBot/wiki/index#wiki_block_bot_from_tagging_on_your_posts)  ^^Now ^^you ^^can ^^remove ^^the ^^comment ^^by ^^replying ^^delete!


Our standard of living is much higher than our grandparent's or great grandparent's. Do we really need to list all the consumer goods that are now considered essential to a modern middle class family that simply did not exist 50-100 years ago? A lot of people complain that they can't afford the things their parents had, but how much of what you do have or pay a monthly bill for do you really need?


Yeah, it ends up being a bail out.   But then again, the tax payers bailed out the banks during the financial crisis (a crisis that was largely perpetuated by them) so should it be okay not to help bail these homeowners out during an actual natural disaster...


The Limit Order are matched based on amount and time. The orders are listed Highest to Lowest on the Buy Side. The orders are listed Lowest to Highest on the Sell Side. If there are 2 Sell orders for same amount the order which is first in time [fractions of milliseconds] is first.  The about is the example as to how the orders would look like on any exchange.  Now the highest price the buyer is ready to pay is 20.21 and the lowest price a seller is ready to sell for is 20.25. Hence there is no trade. Now if a new Buy order comes in at 20.25, it matches with the sell and the deal is made. If a new Buy order comes in at 20.30, it still matches at 20.25. Similarly if a Sell order come in at 20.21, it matches and a deal is made. If a Sell order come in at 20.11, it still matches 20.21.   Incase of market order, with the above example if there is a Buy order, it would match with the lowest sell order at 20.25, if there is not enough quantity , it would match the remaining quantity to the next highest at 20.31 and continue down. Similarly if there is a Sell market order, the it would match to the maximum a seller is ready to buy, ie 20.21, if there is not sufficient buy quantity at 20.21, it will match with next for 20.19   If say there are new buy order at 20.22 and sell orders at 20.24, these will sit first the the above queue to be matched. In your above example the Lowest Sell order was at 20.10 at time t1 and hence any buy order after time t1 for amount 20.10 or greater would match to this and the price would be 20.10. However if the Buy order was first ie at t1 there was a buy order for 20.21 and then at time later than t1, there is a sell order for say 20.10 [amount less than or equal to 20.21] it would match for 20.21. Essentially the market looks at who was the first to sell at lower price or who was the first to buy at higher price and then decide the trade.  Edit [To Clarify xyz]: Say if there is an Sell order at $10 Qty 100. There is a buyer who is willing to pay Max $20 and is looking for Qty 500. Your key assumption that the Buyer does not know the current SELL price of $10 is incorrect. Now there are multiple things, the Buyer knows the lowest Sell order is at $10, he can put a matching Buy order at $10 Qty 100, and say $11 Qty 100 etc. This is painful. Second, lets say he puts a Buy order at $10 Qty 100, by the time the order hits the system someone else has put the trade at $10 and his order is fulfilled. So this buyer has to keep looking at booking and keep making adjustments, if its a large order, it would be extremely difficult and frustrating for this Buyer. Hence the logic of giving preference. The later Buy order says ... The Max I can pay is $20, match eveything at the current price and get the required shares.


If you want the cheapest online broker in Australia, you can't go past CMC Markets, they charge $9.90 upto a $10,000 trade and 0.1% above that. There is no ongoing fees unless you choose to have dynamic data (stock prices get updated automatically as they change). However, the dynamic data fee does get waived if you have about 10 or more trades per month. You don't really need the dynamic data unless you are a regular trader anyway. They also provide some good research tools and some basic charting. Your funds with them are kept segragated in a Bankwest Account, so are resonably safe. They don't provide the best interest on funds kept in the account, so it is best to just deposit the funds when you are looking to buy, and move your funds elswhere (earning higher interest) when selling. Hopes this helps, regards Victor. Update They have now increased their basic brokerage to a minimum of $11 per trade unless you are a frequent trader.


"I think Swenson's insight was that the traditional recommendation of 60% stocks plus 40% bonds has two serious flaws: 1) You are exposed to way too much risk by having a portfolio that is so strongly tied to US equities (especially in the way it has historically been recommend). 2) You have too little reward by investing so much of your portfolio in bonds. If you can mix a decent number of asset classes that all have equity-like returns, and those asset classes have a low correlation with each other, then you can achieve equity-like returns without the equity-like risk. This improvement can be explicitly measured in the Sharpe ratio of you portfolio. (The Vanguard Risk Factor looks pretty squishy and lame to me.) The book the ""The Ivy Portfolio"" does a great job at covering the Swenson model and explains how to reasonably replicate it yourself using low fee ETFs."


The following have been recommended to me for the UK: When I was doing my investigations, all had good reputations but Interactive Investor looked to have the nicer service and their fees seemed a bit more reasonable.  TD Waterhouse has the advantage of a number of sites serving local markets (TD Ameritrade for the US, for instance).


I was in Mexico after The Donald got elected. Mexicans were friendly with me but definitely uneasy. Hopefully the ones I talked to about Trump were put at ease when I said he is just full of hot air and not much else. So far, that's the case.


I had a similar decision to make. I got offered a modest salary near Philly, or a better salary plus a nice bonus in New York. I chose New York. I'm loving it so far but who knows what will happen. I'm actually saving a lot of money as I automatically have it deduct from my paycheck and disperse into several savings accounts. I guess it's different for everyone and you have to consider your situation before applying a blanket advice


"So many complicated answers for a straight forward question. First to this point ""I am failing to see why would a person get an IRA, instead of just putting the same amount of money into a mutual fund..."" An IRA can be invested in a mutual fund.  The IRA benefit over standard mutual fund is pre-tax contribution lowering your current tax liability. The advantage of an IRA over a 401k is control.  Your employer controls where the 401k is invested, you control where your IRA is invested.  Often employers have a very small number of options, because this keeps their costs with the brokerage low. 401k is AMAZING if you have employer matched contributions.  Use them to the maximum your employer will match.  After that OWN your IRA.  Control is key when it comes to your money. On IRA's. Buy ROTH first.  Contribute the calendar maximum.  Then get a traditional.  The benefit of ROTH is that you already paid taxes on the contribution so your withdrawal is not taxed AND they do not tax the interest earned like they do on a standard mutual fund."


Be serious about delivering value in everything. Be serious about answering your emails. Be serious about returning your voice messages. Be serious about delivering positive results. Be serious about treating clients like they are actually paying your salary. Be serious about tracking metrics. Be serious about putting your goals on paper…a Word file works. Be serious about positioning your company to win. Be serious about flying with the eagles. Be serious about being lean. Be serious about making your company legal. Be serious about finding a good accountant. Be serious about being visible everywhere it counts. Be serious about going mobile. Be serious about writing that book. Be serious about getting out of your comfort zone. Be serious about putting technology in its place. Be serious about generating qualified leads. Be serious about broadening your sales funnel. Be serious about moving the needle. Be serious about following influencers. Be serious about mentoring someone. Be serious about forming strategic alliances. Be serious about accepting change. Be serious about being the best at your core skills. Be serious about not following shinning objects. Be serious about not wasting time.  What comes to your mind when you think about being serious in the coming business year? Let us in on your thoughts.


The closer the contribution is to the December 31st date, the more profitable that specific contribution is, only taking into consideration the 5% discount. On your case, the first contribution that beats your student loans interest rate is the August one, where you get about 9% annual return, the remaining contributions go up from there.


"Sensitive topic ;) Inflation is a consequence of the mismatch between supply and demand.  In an ideal world the amount of goods available would exactly match the demand for those goods.   We don't live in an ideal world. One example of oversupply is dollar stores where you can buy remainders from companies that misjudged demand.  Most recently we've seen wheat prices rise as fires outside Moscow damaged the harvest and the Russian government banned exports. And that introduces the danger of inflation. Inflation is a signal, like the pain you feel after an injury.  If you simply took a painkiller you may completely ignore a broken leg until gangrene took your life. Governments sometimes ""ban"" inflation by fixing prices.  Both the Zimbabwean and Venezuelan governments have tried this recently.  The consequence of that is goods become unavailable as producers refuse to create supply for less than the cost of production. As CrimonsX pointed out, governments do desperately want to avoid deflation as much as they want to avoid hyperinflation. There is a ""correct"" level and that has resulted in the monetary policy called ""Inflation targetting"" where central banks attempt to manage inflation into a target range (usually around 2% to 6%). The reason is simply that limited inflation drives investment and consumption.  With a guaranteed return on investment people with cash will lend it to people with ideas.  Consumers will buy goods today if they fear that the price will rise tomorrow. If prices fall (as they have done during the two decades of deflation in Japan) then the result is lower levels of investment and employment as companies cut production capacity.  If prices rise to quickly (as in Zimbabwe and Venezuela) then people cannot save enough or earn enough and so their wealth is drained away. Add to this the continual process of innovation and you see how difficult it is to manage inflation at all.  Innovation can result in increased efficiency which can reduce prices.  It can also result in a new product which is sufficiently unique to allow predatory pricing (the Apple iPhone, new types of medicines, and so on). The best mechanism we have for figuring out where money should be invested and who is the best recipient of any good is the price mechanism.  Inflation is the signal that investors need to learn how best to manage their efforts. We hide from it at our peril."


It's not totally serious, but it's an interesting solution to the problem.  You pay them in equity into a trust that then has some operational control.  Meaning they are being compensated for their labor and have their sentience acknowledged.  This would mean they merit more reasonable accommodations since they're employees, and produce distributions which can be used to buy more control or for environmental charity.   I'd also find the inevitable editorials / comments that their QoL has surpassed the foreign labor going through Disney University amusing.


Firstly it is completely legal for a company to buy its own shares, I don't believe it would be legal to do so secretly. It would also be very difficult to do that secretly.   So hypothetically we have a company Johnbbob Inc. It doesn't have any assets other than $100 in a bank account and there are 100 shares each owned by a different person. Each share would be worth $1. So the company decides to buy one share. Now there is $99 in the account and 99 shares, each share is still worth $1. So the company continues to buy shares until there is only one share left and $1 in the account. If the company buys that last share it will no longer have any assets and will cease to exist, effectively dissolving the company.  TL:DR it is called dissolving the company or dissolution and it happens fairly often with limited liability corporations.


"People borrow money all the time to buy a house. Banks will lend money on one (up to 80%, sometimes more), because they consider it an ""investment."" If you own a large company and want to expand, a bank or bond issuer will first look at what you plan to do with the money, like build new factories, or whatever. Based on their experience, they may judge that you will earn enough money to pay them back. If you don't, they may ""repossess"" your factories and sell them to someone who can pay. As protection, you may be asked to ""mortgage"" your existing company to protect the lenders of the new money. If you don't pay back the money, the lenders get not only your new ""factories"" but also your existing company."


She might change her mind later on in her career.  My background's in consulting rather than IBD, but having a prestigious name on my resume seems to make a significant difference. I'm currently looking at moving, and am surprised by the number of roles that are only open to candidates with MBB experience...


You need to first visit the website of whatever state you're looking to rent the property in and you're going to want to form the LLC in that particular state. Find the Department of Licensing link and inquire about forming a standard LLC to register as the owner of the property and you should easily see how much it costs. If the LLC has no income history, it would be difficult for the bank to allow this without requiring you to personally guarantee the loan. The obvious benefit of protecting yourself with the LLC is that you protect any other personal assets you have in your name. Your liability would stop at the loan.  The LLC would file its own taxes and be able to record the income against the losses (i.e. interest payments and other operating expenses.). This is can be beneficial depening on your current tax situation. I would definitely recommend the use of a tax accountant at that point.  You need to be sure you can really afford this property in the worst case scenario and think about market leasing assumption, property taxes, maintenance and management (especially if you've moved to another state.)


That might happen if this incident leads to a deflationary demand for consumer credit instruments in the US to approaching Third World penetration levels. Ironic, as the consumer credit industry is spending gigadollars trying to spark the same consumer credit frenzy in those countries.  The demographics are already primed for turning away from consumer credit, as the Millennials are already increasingly predisposed against credit as they age.


Get a BMO US Mastercard and pay everything using that Mastercard? Unless you really have to pay using Chequing and Savings account.


There is still public education in California, even if it is declining.   Single payer healthcare can also run into the same issue or declining funding.       Prop 13 in California is a disaster, enriching the elderly at the expense of the young.   Millennials copped it twice, with lower quality education through schooling AND now no affordable housing for their families, due to boomers not moving out of enormous housing due to taxes.


I don't think anyone can give you a definitive answer without knowing all about your situation, but some things to consider: If you are on a 1099, you have to pay self-employment tax, while on a W-2 you do not. That is, social security tax is 12.4% of your income. If you're a 1099, you pay the full 12.4%. If you're W-2, you pay 6.2% and the employer pays 6.2%. So if they offer you the same nominal rate of pay, you're 6.2% better off with the W-2. What sort of insurance could you get privately and what would it cost you? I have no idea what the going rates for insurance are in California. If you're all in generally good health, you might want to consider a high-deductible policy. Then if no one gets seriously sick you've saved a bunch of money on premiums. If someone does get sick you might still pay less paying the deductible than you would have paid on higher premiums. I won't go into further details as that's getting off into another question. Even if the benefits are poor, if there are any benefits at all it can be better than nothing. The only advantage I see to going with a 1099 is that if you are legally an independent contractor, then all your business expenses are deductible, while if you are an employee, there are sharp limits on deducting employee business expenses. Maybe others can think of other advantages. If there is some reason to go the 1099 route, I understand that setting up an LLC is not that hard. I've never done it, but I briefly looked into it once and it appeared to basically be a matter of filling out a form and paying a modest fee.


I am not sure about your country but I think each country must be having some fixed time frame for reversal of the transaction (Which must be less than a month), please inquire if that time limit has passed or not ? If it hasn't best will be to wait for some more time before informing them.  Once the reversal time limit has passed no one (Except government agencies with court orders) can withdraw money from your bank account without your written consent even if they have deposited it themselves. World would have been a strange place if this restriction was not there.  Since you want to close the account you can approach your previous boss (or executive from HR/Account department) and tell them your intention. After that either you can transfer money online to their account or give them a cheque which they can deposit in their account. This way things will end faster and you will be freed from this extra account.  If above process takes time another solution will be to transfer the money to your another (permanent) account and give them a cheque from this account. Here also you can use online transfers or by sending them a cheque through courier.  Whichever mode you choose to pay the money back make sure you have some documented proof that may be helpful in future.


"> But I explicitly mentioned the customer experience, which is completely different and no matter how much you want your industry experience to matter for that, it doesn't affect it.  You mentioned the customer experience randomly in some parts, then threw in Wikileaks in others. If we're talking about the customer experience, we need to drop the payment processors aspect, because the majority of the time, the consumer doesn't even know who processes their card payments let alone care, and again, PayPal is not even close to the only option. If this were 1998 and people were really wary of buying online, then it would be a bigger deal to be banned from PayPal. But it's not 1998, and a ton of people don't care, and there are all kinds of alternatives.  PayPal can deny service all it wants (and it does that on a regular basis) and that in no way means that a business can't accept cards. You're ""customer experience"" premise is flawed. I literally spend all day helping businesses set up credit card processing, and PayPal is a drop in the bucket.   >Could you clarify for me how VISA/MasterCard managed to block a merchant, who presumably wasn't a direct customer (but instead a payment processor customer), but cannot block a card holder? (yes, this is an honest question)  Visa and Mastercard have relationships with banks and/or processors, who have relationships with merchants. Visa and MC's agreements with banks and processors stipulate that those banks and processors can't offer services to companies engaging in illegal activity. Wikileaks was (allegedly) engaging in illegal activity, and it's on that basis that Visa and MC denied service to WL.  Visa and Mastercard have almost nothing to do with cardholders. They don't issue credit cards to cardholders, they aren't the ones that do credit checks to determine creditworthiness, they aren't the ones helping you with your monthly statement or a dispute, etc. Cardholders aren't Visa and MC's clients. When a transaction is run, it's authenticated by the bank that issued the card, not by Visa or MC, and it's the bank, not Visa or MC, that would block transactions or freeze a cardholder account.   >The WikiLeaks blockade was clearly political. What makes you say otherwise? And this is political.  So your argument is that anything political is the same as anything else political? Kind of a stretch..  Wikileaks was denied service by the card brands for allegedly engaging in illegal activity. PayPal is denying service of its own volition, which FYI, it does every day to legal businesses. As long as their reasons for doing so aren't discriminatory based on status in a protected class, they are (and should be) allowed to refuse service."


Get involved a lawyer and Accountant. Without it you may not be sure what you are getting. What exactly will 30% mean for me? It will mean exactly what gets written in contract. It can mean you are owner of 30% of the company. If this is structured as partnership, it would also mean you are party to 30% loss. It can mean by current valuation, you get x fixed shares. In future if the directors creates more shares, your % ownership can get diluted. Or anything else. It all depends on what is written in contract and how the contract is structured. Is there anything I should I be aware of before agreeing? Get a draft and talk to a Lawyer and Accountant, they should be able to tell you exactly what it means and you can then decide if you agree to it or not; or need this contract worded differently.


"Came across this very nice video which explains the ""Long Straddle"". Thought will share the link here: http://www.khanacademy.org/finance-economics/core-finance/v/long-straddle"


I get CapIQ and Bloomberg, and I definitely prefer Bloomberg just because of the completeness of information. There's nowhere else that you can get a full financial statement breakdown and then seconds later have a debt distribution schedule and then with another couple keystrokes get a complete credit ratings history and have that only be scratching the surface of the info available. CapIQ is sometimes better than Bloomberg for street consensus estimates going out more than a year or two but I don't find myself using it that much.


If you look at S&P 500's closing price for the first trading day on December and January for the last 20 years, you will see that for 10 of these years, stocks did better overall and for 10 others they did worse. Thus you can see that the price of stocks do no necessarily increase. You can play around with the data here


"> http://www.economist.com/node/654077  I appreciate the link but it doesn't support your position that rich descendants squander their fortunes.  It repeats your ""shirtsleeve"" saying (evening admitting it is only a saying) and then talks about how it is easier for Americans to invest and preserve that wealth.  > Only 4% of dynasties survive 4 generations.  Your article does say this but you've rephrased it so it sounds like the fourth generation is wiped out.  A family business does not survive 4 generations but that doesn't mean the descendants are now poor.  Hell, this entire article is advice to abandon the family business and diversify investments to make the most money.  > John Rockefeller was a rich man and his descendants are paupers.  You said Rockefeller but your link was for Vanderbilts.  Both of these families gave a lot to charities.  Bill Gates is planning to leave almost nothing to his kids but that doesn't mean the kids squandered their dad's money."


>I would also imagine the Latinos you see are american  Some are. Many almost definitely aren't. Whatever their immigration status, they've all been exposed to good burritos. Some people simply care more about food/flavor than other people.   Interesting about Minneapolis! I had no idea. MN in general seems like a nice place on the outside, but I haven't spent any significant amount of time there. I was hoping the area would be cold enough to prevent mosquitoes, but it sounds like that's not the case.


"Mutual funds generally make distributions once a year in December with the exact date (and the estimated amount) usually being made public in late October or November. Generally, the estimated amounts can get updated as time goes on, but the date does not change. Some funds (money market, bond funds, GNMA funds etc) distribute dividends on the last business day of each month, and the amounts are rarely made available beforehand. Capital gains are usually distributed once a year as per the general statement above. Some funds (e.g. S&P 500 index funds) distribute dividends towards the end of each quarter or on the last business day of the quarter, and capital gains once a year as per the general statement above. Some funds make semi-annual distributions but not necessarily at six-month intervals. Vanguard's Health Care Fund has distributed dividends and capital gains in March and December for as long as I have held it. VDIGX claims to make semi-annual distributions but made distributions three times in 2014 (March, June, December) and has made/will make two distributions this year already (March is done, June is pending -- the fund has gone ex-dividend with  re-investment today and payment on 22nd). You can, as Chris Rea suggests, call the fund company directly, but in my experience, they are reluctant to divulge the date of the distribution (""The fund manager has not made the date public as yet"") let alone an estimated amount. Even getting a ""Yes, the fund intends to make a distribution later this month"" was difficult to get from my ""Personal Representative"" in early March, and he had to put me on hold to talk to someone at the fund before he was willing to say so."


If you can borrow for an asset that gives you income that's more than the cost of carrying the debt, then go for it. But the kinds of debts you have now aren't those kinds of debt, so get rid of them.


What is it that you think he is producing? He sells timeshares. If he quit selling timeshares someone else would. Maybe someone who thinks making 25% is good enough. That's how business works. It is why when you arrest one drug king pin 3 more pop up. Maybe even an employee at the current company.


Except they aren't a publicly traded company so their stock price is based on investment valuation.   Uber's value may or may not increase due to his resignation, but this sub is so full of armchair experts getting upvoted for half-truths that sound logical.


It's been a long time since I've used MS Money and/or Quickbooks (never Quicken), but I've used GnuCash over the past year or so. It works, but it does suffer from some usability problems. Some of the UI is clunky. Data entry sequences are a little harder than they should be. Reports could be a little prettier. But overall it does work, and it's the best I've found on linux. (I would definitely appreciate pointers to something better.)


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.smh.com.au/business/comment-and-analysis/metrics-obsessed-managers-should-be-careful-what-they-wish-for-unlike-the-banks-20170820-gy03je.html) reduced by 89%. (I'm a bot) ***** > The slogans of the metrics brigade say &quot;You can&#039;t manage what you don&#039;t measure&quot; and &quot;What gets measured gets done&quot;.  > Money-obsessed managers who see attaching money to performance indicators as the perfect way to ensure people are motivated to achieve the firm&#039;s goals have failed to think hard about motivation.  > Participants were randomly assigned to five different groups, which varied according to how employees were paid - fixed, or variable according to profits generated - and whether managers emphasised making profits or controlling risks.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6w2762/metricsobsessed_managers_should_be_careful_what/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~198562 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*: **measure**^#1 **risk**^#2 **manage**^#3 **profit**^#4 **compliance**^#5"


The only reason inflation has yet to show in the CPI is because the dollar is the global reserve currency and is the best house in a bad neighborhood, but that just means the rest of the world is becoming poorer at the same time as the U.S. - QE was 4 trillion. That's a debasement of the currency even if, for the reason I've already stated, it's not reflected in CPI.


We had a pilot restaurant in downtown Huntington Beach, it was called U.S. Taco Co. I'm not sure it is even there still. It was really great I mean I was very shocked to hear they were affiliated. Looking it up, it looks like it was closed...meh.


It depends on the size of the payroll, not on the number of employees.  Probably you need to file Form 941 quarterly under this scenario.  You may or may not need to deposit taxes more frequently.  If you must deposit, then you need to do it electronically. I excerpted this from the instructions for Form 941: If your total taxes (line 10) are less than $2,500 for   the current quarter or the preceding quarter, and you   did not incur a $100,000 next-day deposit obligation   during the current quarter. You do not have to make a deposit. To avoid a penalty, you must pay the amount in full with a timely filed return or you must deposit the amount timely. ... If you are not sure your total tax liability for the current quarter will be less than $2,500 (and your liability for the preceding quarter was not less than $2,500), make deposits using the semiweekly or monthly rules so you won't be subject to failure to deposit penalties. If your total taxes (line 10) are $2,500 or more for the   current quarter and the preceding quarter.  You must   make deposits according to your deposit schedule. See   section 11 of Pub. 15 (Circular E) for information and rules   about federal tax deposits. I would say that probably for two employees, you need to deposit by the 15th of each month for the prior month, but you really need to check the limits above and the deposit schedule in Pub 15 (as referenced above) based on your actual payroll size. Note that if you have a requirement to deposit, that must be done either through EFTPS or by wire-transfer.  The former is free but requires registration in advance of your first payment (they snail-mail you a PIN that you need to log-in) and it requires that you get your payment in by the night before.  The latter does not incur a charge from the IRS, but your bank will likely charge you a fee.  You can do the wire-transfer on the due date, however, so it's handy if don't get into ETFPS in time. This is all for federal.  You may also need to deposit for your state, and then you'll need to check the state's rules.


As others have pointed out, the value of Apple's stock and the NASDAQ are most likely highly correlated for a number of reasons, not least among them the fact that Apple is part of the NASDAQ. However, because numerous factors affect the entire market, or at least a significant subset of it, it makes sense to develop a strategy to remove all of these factors without resorting to use of an index. Using an index to remove the effect of these factors might be a good idea, but you run the risk of potentially introducing other factors that affect the index, but not Apple. I don't know what those would be, but it's a valid theoretical concern.  In your question, you said you wanted to subtract them from each other, and only see an Apple curve moving around a horizontal line. The basic strategy I plan to use is similar but even simpler. Instead of graphing Apple's stock price, we can plot the difference between its stock price on business day t and business day t-1, which gives us this graph, which is essentially what you're looking for:  While this is only the preliminaries, it should give you a basic idea of one procedure that's used extensively to do just what you're asking. I don't know of a website that will automatically give you such a metric, but you could download the price data and use Excel, Stata, etc. to analyze this.  The reasoning behind this methodology builds heavily on time series econometrics, which for the sake of simplicity I won't go into in great detail, but I'll provide a brief explanation to satisfy the curious. In simple econometrics, most time series are approximated by a mathematical process comprised of several components: In the simplest case, the equations for a time series containing one or more of the above components are of the form that taking the first difference (the procedure I used above) will leave only the random component. However, if you want to pursue this rigorously, you would first perform a set of tests to determine if these components exist and if differencing is the best procedure to remove those that are present. Once you've reduced the series to its random component, you can use that component to examine how the process underlying the stock price has changed over the years. In my example, I highlighted Steve Jobs' death on the chart because it's one factor that may have led to the increased standard deviation/volatility of Apple's stock price. Although charts are somewhat subjective, it appears that the volatility was already increasing before his death, which could reflect other factors or the increasing expectation that he wouldn't be running the company in the near future, for whatever reason. My discussion of time series decomposition and the definitions of various components relies heavily on Walter Ender's text Applied Econometric Time Series. If you're interested, simple mathematical representations and a few relevant graphs are found on pages 1-3. Another related procedure would be to take the logarithm of the quotient of the current day's price and the previous day's price. In Apple's case, doing so yields this graph:  This reduces the overall magnitude of the values and allows you to see potential outliers more clearly. This produces a similar effect to the difference taken above because the log of a quotient is the same as the difference of the logs The significant drop depicted during the year 2000 occurred between September 28th and September 29th, where the stock price dropped from 26.36 to 12.69. Apart from the general environment of the dot-com bubble bursting, I'm not sure why this occurred. Another excellent resource for time series econometrics is James Hamilton's book, Time Series Analysis. It's considered a classic in the field of econometrics, although similar to Enders' book, it's fairly advanced for most investors.  I used Stata to generate the graphs above with data from Yahoo! Finance: There are a couple of nuances in this code related to how I defined the time series and the presence of weekends, but they don't affect the overall concept. For a robust analysis, I would make a few quick tweaks that would make the graphs less appealing without more work, but would allow for more accurate econometrics.


Depends on the stock involved, but for the most part brokerages allow you gain entry at 50%, meaning you can short twice the cash on hand you have.   Going forward, you need to maintain 30%, so on a $10,000 short, you'd have to maintain $3000 in your account. Example, an account with $5000 cash - You can short $10,000 securities.  Let say 100 shares of xyz at $100 per share. After trade settles, you won't receive a margin call until your balance falls to $3000, probably right around the time xyz rises to $120 per share.  Riskier stocks will have higher margin maintenance requirements - leveraged vehicles like FAS/FAZ (triple leveraged) require 90% margin (3x30%) if they are allowed to be 'shorted' at all.


At some point I just wanted to make free apps for grocery stores just so I could stop wandering around their stores, especially in new locations.  Every single time someone who works there reminds me that you can't touch any of the digital systems as they're old and finicky and nobody is just going to go in there and add huge new features like that.  Blows my mind that even relatively simple stuff like inventory management can grow into these complex things, even though on the surface it doesn't appear to do very much.


"I don't know which field of work you're in, but in my field I found the classic ""fuck you, pay me now"" to be very beneficial to me. Go check it out. I hope it helps you out as much as it has helped me: http://creativemornings.com/talks/mike-monteiro--2/1"


"The obvious disadvantage of paying loans off more slowly is that you will pay a lot more in total interest... Which means less savings and less disposable income on the long term. Unless you are doing something with the money which produces more income than the interest costs you, this is very much ""penny wise, pound foolish"". If you aren't making money by paying that money, all you can do is loose money at the slowest rate you can afford. You do that by paying off the loan as quickly as you can afford to do so. It's up to you to look seriously at your finances and decide what your real needs are, how you're going to meet them, and how much you can afford beyond that while still paying off the loans as quickly as possible. Sloppiness now will cost you much more than you expect layer, due to the compounding you will have missed out on. Really.  See the questions about how to start saving/investing for answers that discuss how to prioritize your money. There are some steps you should be taking ASAP if you haven't already done so."