> That there are more jobs today isn't a convincing argument.  You yourself said that automation means there is a net loss in jobs.  If that were true, there would be less jobs now than in 1900.  But the opposite is true.  Products are more efficiently reaching the consumer.  This means more people are buying more things.  This means producers have to hire more people or buy more raw materials.  Lets go with a real classic example.  Lets say that you and myself make sewing needles.  We both do it by hand, because in this example we are at the dawn of the industrial revolution, making a needle at a time.  Now lets say I figure out a way to make a machine that makes 100 needles in the time it took me to make 1, and because less of my time is going into each needle I can sell them cheaper.  I am now able to reach more stores than before to sell my sewing needles.  I have to hire some more people to make deliveries because I can only do so much by myself.  Now I also grow to the point of having to buy another machine because my business is booming.  People love my sewing needles.  But I can't man 2 machines, so I hire in another person.  Now I have more people making deliveries, and I no longer deliver myself because I am better at making needles than delivering them.  The guys supplying me with the metal to make the needles also had to hire some people to keep up with my demand.  And the people mining the metal for my needles also had to hire another miner.  This may sound like a made up story, but this sort of thing was going on at this time.    The argument that automation kills jobs has been around since before the industrial revolution.  * How much would your cell phone be if we were still using horse and cart to deliver goods?  * Would your mother/sister/girlfriend/wife/Yourself (if you are a girl) be able to have a full time job if they did not have a washing machine, iron, vacuum cleaner, other appliances?  * What kind of selection in the grocery store would you have if the tractor was never used?


I'm talking more corporate cartels, like the oil cartel, the banking cartel, the military and health care cartels, the telecomm cartel, etc. While government remains a cheap middleman that they can push around, a government is still the ONLY thing standing in the way of the population against profit-seeking psychopaths.


Will buying a flat which generates $250 rent per month be a good decision? Whether investing in real estate is a good decision or not depends on many things, including the current and future supply/demand for rental units in your particular area. There are many questions on this site about this topic, and another answer to this question which already addresses many risks associated with owning property (though there are also benefits to consider). I just want to focus on this point you raised: I personally think yes, because rent adjusts with inflation and the rise in the price of the property is another benefit. Could this help me become financially independent in the long run since inflation is getting adjusted in it? In my opinion, the fact that rental income general adjusts with 'inflation' is a hedge against some types of economic risk, not an absolute increase in value. First, consider buying a house to live in, instead of to rent:  If you pay off your mortgage before your retire, then you have reduced your cost of accommodations to only utilities, property taxes, and repairs. This gives you a (relatively) known, fixed requirement of cash outflows. If the value of property goes up by the time you retire - it doesn't cost you anything extra, because you already own your house. If the value of property goes down by the time you retire, then you don't save anything, because you already own your house. If you instead rent your whole life, and save money each month (instead of paying off a mortgage), then when you retire, you will have a larger amount of savings which you can use to pay your monthly rental costs each month. By the time you retire, your cost of accommodations will be the market price for rent at that time. If the value of property goes up by the time you retire - you will have to pay more on rent. If the value of property goes down by the time you retire, you will save money on rent. You will have larger savings, but your cash outflow will be a little bit less certain, because you don't know what the market price for rent will be. You can see that, because you need to put a roof over your own head, just by existing you bear risk of the cost of property rising. So, buying your own home can be a hedge against that risk. This is called a 'natural hedge', where two competing risks can mitigate each-other just by existing. This doesn't mean buying a house is always the right thing to do, it is just one piece of the puzzle to comparing the two alternatives [see many other threads on buying vs renting on this site, or on google]. Now, consider buying a house to rent out to other people:  In the extreme scenario, assume that you do everything you can to buy as much property as possible. Maybe by the time you retire, you own a small apartment building with 11 units, where you live in one of them (as an example), and you have no other savings. Before, owning your own home was, among other pros and cons, a natural hedge against the risk of your own personal cost of accommodations going up. But now, the risk of your many rental units is far greater than the risk of your own personal accommodations. That is, if rent goes up by $100 after you retire, your rental income goes up by $1,000, and your personal cost of accommodations only goes up by $100. If rent goes down by $50 after you retire, your rental income goes down by $500, and your personal cost of accommodations only goes down by $50. You can see that only investing in rental properties puts you at great risk of fluctuations in the rental market. This risk is larger than if you simply bought your own home, because at least in that case, you are guaranteeing your cost of accommodations, which you know you will need to pay one way or another. This is why most investment advice suggests that you diversify your investment portfolio. That means buying some stocks, some bonds, etc.. If you invest to heavily in a single thing, then you bear huge risks for that particular market. In the case of property, each investment is so large that you are often 'undiversified' if you invest heavily in it (you can't just buy a house $100 at a time, like you could a stock or bond). Of course, my above examples are very simplified. I am only trying to suggest the underlying principle, not the full complexities of the real estate market. Note also that there are many types of investments which typically adjust with inflation / cost of living; real estate is only one of them.


"A simple way to ask the question might be to say ""why can't I just use the same trick with my own shares to make money on the way down? Why is borrowing someone else's shares necessary to make the concept a viable one? Why isn't it just the inverse of 'going long'?"" A simple way to think about it is this: to make money by trading something, you must buy it for less than you sell it for.  This applies to stocks like anything else.  If you believe the price will go up, then you can buy them first and sell them later for a higher price.  But if you believe the price will go down, the only way to buy low and sell high is to sell first and buy later.  If you buy the stock and it goes down, any sale you make will lose you money. I'm still not sure I fully understand the point of your example, but one thing to note is that in both cases (i.e., whether you buy the share back at the end or not), you lost money.  You say that you ""made $5 on the share price dropping"", but that isn't true at all: you can see in your example that your final account balance is negative in both cases.  You paid $20 for the shares but only got $15 back; you lost $5 (or, in the other version of your example, paid $20 and got back $5 plus the depreciated shares). If you had bought the shares for $20 and sold them for, say, $25, then your account would end up with a positive $5 balance; that is what a gain would look like.  But you can't achieve that if you buy the shares for $20 and later sell them for less. At a guess, you seem to be confusing the concept of making a profit with the concept of cutting your losses.  It is true that if you buy the shares for $20 and sell them for $15, you lose only $5, whereas if you buy them for $20 and sell for $10, you lose the larger amount of $10.  But those are both losses.  Selling ""early"" as the price goes down doesn't make you any money; it just stops you from losing more money than you would if you sold later."


Corzine should be held accountable but it would have been nice if Donald Rumsfeld's losing $9 billion dollars in Iraq would have also produced the same sort of outrage from his fellow republicans.   The Republicans are complete hypocrites when it comes to prosecuting corruption.


"Sorry but you already provided the answer to your own question.  The simple answer is to 'not day trade' but hold things for a longer period and don't trade a large number of different stocks every week. Seriously, have a look at the rules and see what it implies.. an average of 20 buys and sells of longer term positions PER DAY is a pretty fair bit of trading, that's really churning through the positions compared to someone who might establish positions with say 25 well picked stocks and might change even 5 of those a week to a different stock.  Or even a larger number of stocks but seeking to hold them for over a year so you get taxed at the long term cap gains rate. If you want to day trade, be prepared to be labeled as such and deal with your broker on that basis.  Not like they will hate you given all the fees you are likely to rack up.  And the government will love you also, since you'll be paying short term gains taxes.  (and trust me, us bogelheads appreciate the liquidity the speculative and short term folks bring to the market.) In terms of how it would impact you, Expect to be required to have a fairly substantial balance ($25K) if you are maintaining a margin account. I'd suggest reading this thread My account's been labeled as ""day trader"" and I got a big margin call. What should I do? What trades can I place in the blocked period?"


Wow, so many idiots. Everyone has a nice fancy car that costs $300/month and cable and fancy clothes, and half of them are in debt. Pathetic. No sympathy whatsoever. I live frugally, which is precisely why I have a large surplus.


IRS has it spelled out Business or Hobby?


I fully appreciate your argument.    I feel that the current system doesn't allow for the growth that you take as an assumption.  The idea that somehow people will take a lower income job and automatically grow into a higher paying one.    Companies hire smart people to maximize profit... it's expected and it leads to trying to have a work force that is minimum wage with little room for growth.    Further, I believe that minimum wage hasn't kept up with inflation.    Yes, jobs are a worthy cry, but it cannot be the only metric we rely on to make sure everyone has the opportunity to live decently (a truly subjective term that we all have differing opinions on).    I personally have met far more full grown adults with high school and even college degrees working low paying jobs than teens or immigrants.


Office space for rent in noida sector 62 is the best option in Noida as it lies near NH 24, East Delhi & Indirapuram, Ghaziabad. Sector 62 Noida is among those sectors of noida which are typically designed for IT & IT enable services usage along with institutional properties. We have all type of office spaces at very economical rentals.


Why don't you just put your down payment on one of your credit cards? (Note: I'm not actually suggesting that you do this. Please read on.) There are a few reasons why you wouldn't (or couldn't) do this: The interest rates on the cards you have is very high.  You don't have enough of a credit limit on any one of your cards for the down payment.  These two reasons highlight the answer to your question.  Credit card companies charge very high interest rates. These high rates allow them to make money even when some of their customers default. They know that not everyone will pay them back, so they make sure to make a hefty profit on those who do.  Secondly, credit card limits are often much lower than the amounts of car and home loans. This limits the risk to the credit card company. Sure, you have $100,000 in total credit limit, but this is split among nine different companies.  When a bank offers a traditional loan for a large sum of money at relatively low interest, they need to be able to limit their risk somehow. They do this by ensuring that their customers actually have the ability to pay them back.


"I'm currently using You Need A Budget for this. It lets you track spending my category and ""save"" money in particular accounts from month to month. They also have some strong opinions about how one should manage one's cashflow, so check it out to see if it'll work for you. It's neither web-based nor free, but the licensing terms are very reasonable."


Why is this in /r/business?   Also, this has been posted (and reposted by same guy) in a [quite](http://www.reddit.com/r/TrueReddit/comments/mw542/the_signals_may_be_faint_but_they_are_consistent/) [a](http://www.reddit.com/r/China/comments/mu6za/how_organ_harvesting_from_political_and_religious/) [few](http://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/mtew2/the_xinjiang_procedure_chinese_medical/) other reddits with mixed reaction, probably b/c of the sensationalist and neo-con agenda.   Not trying to diminish what's happening, if true, just saying this has been debated quite a bit in other places already.


"It is if you want apps. The platform is stuck in a Catch-22, where people won't buy the phone because it has no apps, and devs won't make apps for it because no one is buying the phone. Windows 8 will probably ease the problem with its app store and presumed port channel, but given how MS has handled potential devs so far, the future is not bright. They should have been pursuing aggressively and digging into their massive warchest to basically throw money at devs to get hem on board and kick-start the ecosystem.  I personally couldn't give a crap about apps, as I just want my phone to  make and take calls, guide me with map directions, and let me Google quick bits of information on-demand. It's not a ""platform"" to me. It's a tool. But I'm apparently in the minority."


Thanks for your reply, Sarah!  I am sure there is no significance in the Washington Post disclosing that it is owned by Jeff Bezos, but my point is that if the patent was created for a cunning plan, I highly doubt Jeff would have let the cat out of the bag in this way, especially by a newspaper organization that he owns. As the other individual mentioned, I just think this is Bezos's flexing his muscles to other competitors--heck, he may even attempt to sell the innovation for a whopping amount of money.  Believe me, I LOVE innovation as well. I think it plays an instrumental role in society. However, there are some innovations that are detrimental to us as a people, even if it may seem infinitesimal at the moment. If you haven't noticed, but the more technology that is created, the less privacy we have, the dumber we become and the more jobs we lose to automation.   If Amazon succeeds and generates umpteen profit from operations at Whole Foods via electronic (automation) means, I see Wal-Mart coming back harder with automation services, which will prove detrimental to jobs.


True.  Unless the government steps-in and make some regulations.  For example, all customer service (talking to other people, also over the phone) must be done by humans. Also, humans must approve every decision and diagnostic done by AI machines. Every group of robots must be supervised by on-site human. Etc.  However, I am against taxing Robots and AI machines.  The bottom line, with Robots and AI doing most jobs that humans don't want to do or are not good at doing, humans can be happy if they have basic income, which can be very low because Robots and AI reduce the costs of goods and services tremendously.


Batteries are very cheap... if you have service stations to exchange them. Then, you can use much cheaper batteries that don't have such a long range.  Also, with battery exchange service stations, you DO NOT pay for the batteries as part of the car. Do you realize that?  You only pay for the electricity charged into the batteries... very very cheap.


Thank you monalisasnipples for voting on metric\_units.    This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://goodbot-badbot.herokuapp.com/).     ***    ^^Even ^^if ^^I ^^don't ^^reply ^^to ^^your ^^comment, ^^I'm ^^still ^^listening ^^for ^^votes. ^^Check ^^the ^^webpage ^^to ^^see ^^if ^^your ^^vote ^^registered!


Subsidies are anti-competitice practices. Its the government picking winners and losers over the market's preference.  Just like onerous regulations. Smaller companies aren't able to hire the overhead required to keep up with them, and are therefore fined out of existences due to this countries staggering regulatory burden.


"Lol master in computer science. I'm an idiot. K bro. I'm just calling it like it is.  The problem with finance guys is they look at rich guys and accept their word as law. I don't care if this guy is a ""VP"" or whatever, I care if he has the technical chops to understand the technology. I'm willing to bet money he hasn't read a single paper on the technology, including the original Bitcoin paper, which by the way explicitly says do not speculate on cryptocurrencies (fun fact). I agree it's overvalued, but it's because traders with no idea of the real value of the tech are speculating.  Everyone is speculating on crypto, but historically disruptive tech is far undervalued. Think Microsoft when the iPhone was coming out. People were literally saying Apps are stupid and will never take off. At the end of the day I have money in it and we'll see where it goes."


What if I told you that Best Buy stores and the center that your laptop was sent to are completely different entities?  As a former employee, I knew about situations like this that happened to customers in my store.  Let me tell you that the employee behind the counter feels just a bad and helpless as you do when this stuff happens.


"You have a few options, none of which are trade off free: Apply for a credit card, and live off of that.   Here, of course, you will go into debt, and there are minimums to pay.  But, it will tide you over.  In any case, you are getting unsecured credit, so your rates will probably be very, very high.  You don't want to build up a lot of 20% per annum debt. An alternative to this would be to go to any bank and ask for an unsecured loan.  Having no income, it will be difficult, though not necessarily impossible, to secure some funds.  When I was in between houses, once, for example, I was able to borrow $30,000 in unsecured debt (to help me construct my new house!), just based on my income.  Grant you, I paid it 2 months later, in order to avoid the 10% / year interest, but the point is that unsecured debt does exist.  Credit Cards are easier to get.  Arrange for personal financing through your parents or other relatives. If your parents can send you remittances, the terms will most likely be more generous.  They know your credit and your true ability to repay.  Just because they send you money doesn't mean you have to live with them.  As a parent, I have a stake in ensuring my children's success.  If I think that tiding them over briefly is in their best interest and mine, you better be sure I'll do it. A variation on this is Microfinance - something like Kiva.  Here, if you can write up a story compelling enough to get finance, there are people who might lend you money.  Kiva is normally directed towards poorer countries and entrepeneurs - but local variations exist. UPDATE: Google-backed 'LendingClub.com is far more appropriate to this situation than Kiva.  Same general idea, but that's the vendor. Find freelance, contract, or light employment. Your concern about employment is justified - you don't want to be in a position where you are unable to travel to an interview because Starbucks or McDonalds will fire you if you don't show up for a shift.  (Then again, do you really care if McDonald's lets you go?)  As such, you need to find income that is less bound by schedule.  Freelance work, in particular, will give you that freedom - assuming you have a skill you can trade.  Likewise, short term contract work is equally flexible - usually.  Finally, it may be easiest just to get temporary pickup work in a service capacity.  In any event, doing something will be better than doing nothing.  Who knows, you might want to be a manager / owner of a McDonalds some day.  Wouldn't hurt to say, ""I started at the bottom."""


With bad credit but good income, I would simply save a large down payment. You're much more likely to get a mortgage with 25% down and a history of recently saving that 25% to show.


The only people who should know my online bank password are me & my spouse. Forget it, I won't share that sensitive information with any other company. I might as well give a blank check! Besides, don't banks require people to keep their username & password & PIN private? I signed an agreement to that effect, I think!  So even if I did find the online services compelling enough to try, I would want to check with my own bank first & ask them if it's OK to give my password to somebody else. I wonder what they would say to that!!


> Taxation is theft.  No, and [we've already gone down this road](https://www.reddit.com/r/economy/comments/6leb2o/missouri_republicans_lower_st_louis_minimum_wage/dju1jjp/).  Are you familiar with US history and the time they had the [Articles of Confederation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_Confederation)?  I would be curious to know why you think it failed.


"#1  The Affordable Care Act is not a gift to anybody except the insurance and drug industries.   It actually saves the federal government and employers money by giving employers a semi credible ""RFOTA"" to lay off or cut the hours for their ""overpaid older workers"" </sarc> For the government money is saved by shifting families and low paid workers out of expensive government programs like SCIP and Medicaid into hugely profitable individual private insurance plans of lower actuarial value. That effectively shifts the burden to the states and sick people.  Why no discussion about the earth-changing implications of exponential growth in technology on employment?  We need to fund education substantially better or we are soon going to be a nation of largely unemployed people."


When you add points, a break-even date comes into play. That date varies depending on the rate and number of points. As an approximate example, having one point at those rates would have a break-even point of about 5 years. At that time, the amount you save with the lower rate makes up for the extra cash you paid for points. After that, you are saving money. If you don't plan on having the loan that long, the points are not worth it. Also, you need to calculate the break-even date based on your own parameters. I suggest searching for an online calculator or spreadsheet that supports point calculations. You may also be able to deduct 1/30th of your points every year. Ask you accountant about that.


"I haven't seen anything specifically about how PayPal operates, but my guess is that they maintain relationships with banks in many countries via affiliates, and they settle the money transfers internally within the PayPal system. You basically have two types of bank transfers (there are others as well that I'm not getting into): I think PayPal is a hybrid -- they send and receive money using drafts to keep costs down, and manage the international stuff by operating a proprietary network. So if you send money from Indonesia to the US, you pay ""PayPal Indonesia"", who then tells ""PayPal USA"" to issue funds to your recipient. So they are cheaper than a wire, faster than a check, but limited in terms of transaction size and some other factors."


I used to work for Ally Auto (formerly known as GMAC) and I'd advise not to pay off the account unless you need to free up some debt in your credit report since until the account is paid off it will show that you owe your financial institution the original loan amount. The reason why I am saying not to pay-off the account is because good/bad payments are sent to the credit bureau 30 days after the due date of the payment, and if you want to increase your credit score then its best to pay it on a monthly basis, the negative side to this is you will pay more interest by doing this.  If ever you decide to leave $1.00 in loan, I am pretty much sure that the financial institution will absorb the remaining balance and consider the account paid off.  What exactly is your goal here? Do you plan to increase your credit score? Do you need to free up some debt?


"I'm a mathematician, not an accountant.  But my feeling has been that the distinction between Asset and Liability is mainly a sign convention, and comes from a wish to avoid negative numbers. Suppose you take out a loan for $1000 and deposit the proceeds in your bank account.  Under normal accounting conventions, your bank account is an Asset and the loan is a Liability.  After the loan, Bank has a balance of 1000 and Loan has a balance of 1000.  You can compute your net worth by adding all Assets and subtracting all Liabilities (so in this case your net worth remains 0). If you treat Loan as an Asset account, then after taking out the loan, you should give it a balance of -1000.  Under this convention, you have lots of negative numbers to deal with everywhere, which I suspect early accountants would have found inconvenient.  The Asset/Liability convention means you only need to deal with negative numbers in unusual situations (overdrawn bank account, overpaid loan, etc). Likewise, in theory you could treat Expense accounts as negative Income. But I'm not sure why you feel the need to reinvent the wheel by ""simplifying"" double-entry accounting like this.  The standard conventions are not that complicated, and their major advantage is that they're standard: other people will be able to understand your books if they ever need to.  (Say you want to hire somebody to do your taxes at some point: if your books are kept in your own idiosyncratic system, their job will be at best error-prone and at worst impossible.)   It's a bit like a proposal to simplify English spelling: shur, a sistum waar yu rit lik this mit bee simplur in sum abstrakt sens, but if nobudee els can reed it eezulee, it izunt ackshyualee veree yusful."


There is no cancer coverup.  Where is the peer reviewed study conclusively linking glyphosate to cancer?  From the article:  >Glyphosate is the world's most used herbicide. Companies like Monsanto, Syngenta and Bayer produce more than 800,000 metric tons of the subtance every year and sell it around the world. Farmers use the agent to clean the slate while preparing fields for the new sowing season, or spray it on potato or rapeseed fields to kill the plants just before maturity, making harvesting easier.  The popular agricultural chemical has been in use for more than 40 years and can now be found almost everywhere: in the urine of humans and animals, in milk, in beer, in ice cream, and above all in feed pellets from the United States and Brazil, which also end up being fed to German cattle and pigs.  So its use is widespread over 40 years and is pervasive in the environment.  And yet, billions of people are not getting cancer.


"Lol. We also used to have actual trace amounts of cocaine in Coca Cola, used meth for medication, and have eaten some pretty nasty shit in the past. Doesn't mean we can't learn it's bad for us. Do you know how many societies that never had access to dairy are unilaterally lactose intolerant? The developed world had consistent access to cow milk and therefore maintained an unnatural lactose tolerance. If one doesn't continue its consumption, they become intolerant after infancy. If the natural human reaction to dairy without interference isn't ""natural"" I don't know what would convince you."


> Guess what, making money hand over fist   who owns walmart? shareholders - people. your neighbors. who benefits from their lower prices - same.   > There's this insane idea floating around Republican circles that the only way to really make it in business is to fuck everyone below you as hard and as fast as you can  im a libertarian.  but why can't people just get jobs elsewhere? and don't say because the economy is shit - the gov't caused that, not free markets. making a company efficient is good. it makes prices lower. it frees up people to do more valuable things. your arguments are the same as those who support trade barriers, tariffs, etc.


I'm in America on student visa and I can have 12 months of paid internship. I'd rather not waste the 12 months on a sophomore internship, you know? Of course, I'd still love to be paid for what I do and think that might make me try harder.


I'm amazed at how shoddy some (not all) products are after they start being made in China.  It's like there is no quality control and obviously head office back in the states is only looking at the bottom line.  Cheaper often is cheaper.


its not so much that NFIP is a problem, as it is that it subsidizes building there.  Without it, there would still be government bailouts/relief aid.  The problem with a privatized system instead of a fair assessed insurance price is the extra 20% tacked on to premiums to cover insurer profits.  Basically though, there has been some privatization of flood insurance in US areas, and premiums are skyrocketting.  Its politically difficult to raise these premiums, and all of the insurance companies believe in global warming/climate change.  Its easier to privatize and cause even higher premiums, than it is to vote for the one who will raise NFIP premiums.


And apparently they have started investigating, and the organization that certified the farm as fair trade etc. has also started investigating. What more should Victoria's Secret do? I think this is a good story, since it shows that their CSR system has worked.  Buy more Victoria's Secret panties, I say.


Yes, of course. Your business is active since it was established, it just didn't do anything. This is of course re the State taxes, the IRS considers LLC as a disregarded entity and it flows directly to your Schedule C if you're a single member, or your 1065 if you're multiple members. State of Texas never considers LLC as a disregarded (See here questions 13 and 14). You may not pay any taxes, but you have to file.


I don't see at as realistic. We all get less money to survive, except those who are automating their businesses have more money. Everyone wants more money, so yes, people will take on more jobs, etc.  The only way this will work long term is to have a highly redistributive tax policy, IMO.


Assuming that a person has good financial discipline and is generally responsible with spending, I think that having a few hundred or thousand dollars extra of available credit is usually worth more to that person for the choice/flexibility it provides in unforeseen circumstance, versus the relatively minor hit that could be taken to their credit score.


Suck it up. You will need the experience. Also have to remember pretty much wherever you start your first few years will be awful, truly awful; especially considering you will probably work for an american bank, which are notorious for long hours and face time.  Even if you learn nothing you can still say you did. Having that on your CV is worth miles more than nothing.


Her career should be over. She was ambitious at Yahoo, but her inexperience as a C-Level leader shined through very clearly and barely even delayed Yahoo!'s demise. Perhaps she has learned something, but it would be very interesting to see her run and very quickly tank Uber.


That is right, and instagram is okay with that.  They don't make anything on user advertisement.  Why would they want to host it?    Most instagram users consume content but don't post ads themselves.  That's the bulk of instagram's ad revenue.


In what world is this new information? and... why does anyone care?  Am I missing something here or is this article totally useless? The upper 1% of wage earners would have to make significantly more than $100k or else I would be able to buy a week's groceries for a dollar fifty and the cashier would make $0.10 an hour...


"The fee structures are different for PIN-based transactions versus ""credit"" style transactions. Usually there is a fixed fee (around $0.50) for PIN-based transactions and a varying fixed fee plus a percentage for credit transactions (something like $0.35 + 2.5%). There are also value limits for PIN-based transactions... I believe that you cannot exceed $400 in most places. The signature feature of credit transactions isn't there to protect you, it signifies your agreement to comply with the contract you and the credit card issuer, protecting the merchant from some types of chargeback. Some merchants waive the signature for low dollar value transactions to increase convenience and speed up the lines. All of your other questions are answered elsewhere on this site."


"If the default happens through mass monetary inflation rather than openly (""We're not paying interest on our bonds"") then make sure you pay off your house.  There may not be a very long window to do so. If the currency becomes worthless, then it depends on what you have of value that would be accepted by the lender as payment.  If you don't have anything, the lender will take it back, as they're probably entitled to on the notes."


There are no clear guidelines. If you are selling as individual, then what ever profit you make gets added to your overall income as you pay tax accordingly. This is true for sole proprietor or partnership kind of firms. If you are registered as a Company, the profits are taxed as business income. There may be VAT and other taxes. Please consult a CA who can guide you in specifics as for eCommerce, there is no defined law and one has to interpret various other tax laws.


And just as easily, someone could find a reason for such a derivative to exist.  Let's say I'm a vendor of memorabilia for a given sports team, but unlike most vendors I'm only a vendor for a particular team.  Given that there is a large lead time between orders placed and memorabilia received (perhaps on the order of a month between order and receipt), it is inherently risky to order large orders towards the end of a season.  However, if they're going to be in the playoffs, there's a huge opportunity to sell, but if they don't, you'd be left with tons of surplus inventory.  So, wouldn't it be handy for there to be a way to hedge that risk?    We've actually seen times when such things aren't unreasonable.  Large risks are [hedged away](http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303877604577380593015786140.html), even in sports.


">> So with all those ""maybe""(s), and since Trump did not Act on the subject, for God sake, why is that the FIRST thing you could say against Trump?  > You interjected those ""maybe""(s), not me. My issue on this topic has always been, and still is, that President Trump said...  You are in an endless loops of ""maybe""(s) and ""he said this and that"". No actions that you oppose, am I right?  >>>Global warming is a serious risk to this country.  >>Absolutely not!  > I have long studied arguments on both sides. The science is solid and the result in unequivocal. You are wrong... I can prove this is real  Trust me, I studied this too. It's nice to have the same weather and no changes, but it never was like this on Earth.  I am VERY concerned about emissions and pollution and recycling.   But the paranoia and ""end of the world"" folks do not impress me. With science we will be able to control the weather on earth easily. Easily!!!!  Do you know that [1 billion trees were planted in Pakistan](https://www.voanews.com/a/one-billion-trees-planted-in-pakistan-nw-province/3983609.html) recently?  >> So, please, tell me one substantial reason why you are against Trump?  > I have given you two and you have rejected them both.   You don't get it!  Look, I have more than 2 things I can say against Trump, of action he did. And yet I support him.  You can't come with one ACTION by Trump you oppose, and you are still against him.  >> ...do you really think that if Hillary was in charge it would be better?  > I'm not touching that one.   Because you voted for her, and would vote for her today despite the long list of terrible things she and the DNC did.  Tribalism?  Remember, I voted for Obama twice, for Al Gore (idiot) and Kerry (bigger idiot), never for Republican until the last elections."


> They have enough nationwide 800 MHz spectrum for good voice and LTE coverage and penetration, and they have enough 2.5 GHz spectrum to outdo every other carrier in capacity.   I didn't know this (non-American). Fair call.   > The argument about tower count is largely irrelevant with today's mobile data demand.  In the long run sure. In the short term I'm going to disagree with you. If I ask you to deploy 800mhz over a city and 2600mhz over a city for coverage purposes. You'll definitely have the first project done before the first (all else equal). Its like acceleration vs top-speed; the 800mhz car gets you to acceptable speed faster than the 2600mhz stuff, but in the long run getting to their top speeds take both players the same amount of time   > The argument about accuracy is also ridiculous considering the performance at the edge-of-cell and in the sector nulls; you're going to need multiple sites regardless if you want acceptable coverage for everyone.   I don't think it is ridiculous when you consider the planning required for a small city especially, if you have to do Greenfield deployments. But whatever I agree with your net conclusion T-Mobile is screwed. Sprint not so much.


"I am looking at a 1040A. Line 11a asks for total IRA distributions. 11b asks for the taxable amount. Enter ""QCD"" as explanation and remove the Qualified Charitable Deduction amount from 11a to get 11b which is added to your income if there's any positive balance."


"BlackJack's answer is technically correct: government credit ratings are independent of corporate credit ratings.  The rating should reflect the borrower's ability to repay its obligations. One reason the book you read may have stated that corporate credit ratings cannot be better than the government's credit rating is that the government, unlike the corporation, can steal (or in government parlance ""tax"") from anywhere or anyone.  So if a government finds itself in financial difficulty it could simply take the cash from corporations or people with high credit ratings by a variety of methods: implement windfall profit taxes, take over industries, take peoples gold, tax pension savings, or simply take peoples pensions or retirement savings.  This increases the risk of doing business in a country with an over-extended government. Over extended governments do not die gracefully.  They only die when there is nothing left to steal."


How do you know people want jobs?  People get jobs because they want money, not because they want a job.  I think when a lot of people say they like their job they are lying to you and themselves because that job is the only viable option or all they know.  Nobody wants to admit they are not getting everything out of life they want.  This system of economics intimidates people into financial slavery with threats of starvation and homelessness.  I have never been opposed to hard work, but the restraints of full time jobs always sucked.  I think a lot of people enjoy rewarding work, not shitty go nowhere, uninteresting, unfulfilling, unrewarding jobs that suck all their energy serving others at their own personal expense.  Knowing how much money sloshes around in this country and how little is allocated for ninety percent of us is depressing.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.axios.com/jobs-are-plentiful-for-rock-bottom-pay-across-the-west-2497970172.html) reduced by 58%. (I'm a bot) ***** > What&#039;s new: AlphaGo&#039;s initial iteration was trained on a database of human Go games whereas the newer AlphaGo Zero&#039;s artificial neural networks use the current state of the game as input.  > The DeepMind researchers wrote: &quot;The self-learned player performed much better overall, defeating the human-trained player within the first 24h of training. This suggests that AlphaGo Zero may be learning a strategy that is qualitatively different to human play.""  > He points out though that the roughly 5 million training games of self-play it took for AlphaGo Zero to beat AlphaGo is &quot;Vastly more&quot; than the number of games Sedol had played to become a champion.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/77able/workers_in_the_wealthier_nations_are_facing/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~230884 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*: **AlphaGo**^#1 **game**^#2 **play**^#3 **learns**^#4 **Zero**^#5"


Not saying it is bad, just saying they put a positive spin on it when in fact it just something that makes good business sense.   Both you and I know that Reddit is filled with people complaining about minimum raise and earning a living...etc. This article paints Costco as the good guy, but overall it means one guy gets a well paying job while another one gets no job at all.


And it was just as true when he said it in previous years, while the exact year is unpredictable that much is certain: Sooner rather than latter the chickens will come home to roost. You don't believe this is an actual sustainable boom right ?


What are the consequences if I ignore the emails? That would depend on how much efforts the collection agency is ready to put in. I got a social security number when I took up on campus jobs at the school and I do have a credit score. Can they get a hold of this and report to the credit bureaus even though I don't live in America? Possibly yes, they may already be doing it. Will they know when I come to America and arrest me at the border or can they take away my passport? For this, they would have to file a civil case in the court and get an injunction to arrest you. Edit: Generally it is unlikely that the court may grant an arrest warrant, unless in specific cases. A lawyer advise would be more appropriate. End Edits It is possible that the visa would also get rejected as you would have to declare previous visits and credit history is not good.


"futility of your beliefs... what are you, a supervillian? Don't write like that, it makes what you say sound ridiculous. It's not my ""dogma"" that makes me not want to discuss this issue with you, its that people with a libertarian mindset tend to have a zealous ideology that makes it impossible to talk to them about anything without them going into full on proselytize mode and say shit like, ""If you keep your head buried in the sand, you won't see the ocean creeping up to drown you."" No, Sir, I am aware of your set of beliefs and I don't agree with them. The end."


For example, the apartment complex could’ve relied on a water source heat pump system which can provide both warm and cool air at the same time. As the name implies, this system relies on water held between 60 to 90°F, which is then pumped throughout the complex and into individual compressor units in each room.


"The amount of hype and uneducated investors/speculators driving its prices up. Just by that I would say its prices are inflated. Bear in mind that Facebook don't sell anything tangible. They can go down as fast as they went up. Most of their income is ad based and single-product oriented, and as such highly dependent on usage and trends (remember MySpace?). Having said that, all the other ""classic"" valuation techniques are still valid and you should utilize them."


"Along with the commercials for ""frog"" protection from Discover, most credit card issuers provide fraud protection and zero liability for any unauthorized purchases. As was mentioned in one of the comments, many issuers also will allow temporary ""virtual cards"" that can be used in places that may not appear to be as reputable.  Depending on the type of pre-paid card you are using, you're likely paying some form of a fee for it, and you're certainly not taking advantage of the benefits that a credit card can provide, cash back being a big one. There are no annual fee cards out there that get 2%  cash back on every purchase."


Nice ad hominem attack. You are basically acting like people that work minimum wages are lesser people and undeserving of things, like owning a house. Maybe someone enjoys low skilled labor like working at a cafe or working with their hands. There is nothing wrong with that. That doesn't mean they are lesser than you and/or incapable of owning a house, they just may not be able to afford as nice of things. Jesus, if you have to assume the worst of people to bolster your argument, then you have fucking terrible argument.


Many companies and careers there are no rungs. If you hire 20 roofers and 1 manager not all those 20 roofers will get to move up to management, it just can't happen. And being a good roofer does not make them a good manager, it is necessary to understand the job of the people you're managing but management is an entirely different skill set on it's own.


because it cost the insurer more, obviously. while this sounds snarky, it's important to realize that actual insurance companies set their insurance rates based on actual historical costs. for some reason people who report low miles have cost the company more dollars per reported mile than people who report high miles. in that sense, insurance is not overpriced. if it were truly overpriced, then an insurer would specialize in such insurance and make a killing on the free market. the more interesting questions is why do drivers who claim to travel very few miles cost the insurance companies so much per mile? that question has a host of possible answers and it's difficult to say which is the largest cost. here are just a few:


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


> every instinct in my body is telling me that giving Washington another blank check is a really bad idea. In my minds eye I can see senators lining up with pet pork projects for their home states and it makes me physically sick to my stomach  I can sympathize with that, but there's no shortcut around the ongoing hard work of governance. Tying our own hands financially doesn't make for smarter government, just less capable and more likely to drown when the water rises.


I'm pretty sure you already know this, so I'm probably just wasting time. You know, I can't think of a better analogy to the whole global warming debate than this 97% number. A misleading statistic that means nothing is used to mislead the public. The origin of this number was a survey of over 10,000 Earth scientists in climate related fields a few years back. First, it was a non-scientific survey, and only 3000 people bothered to respond. The two questions were:  The first: “When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?” Few would be expected to dispute this…the planet began thawing out of the “Little Ice Age” in the middle 19th century, predating the Industrial Revolution. (That was the coldest period since the last real Ice Age ended roughly 10,000 years ago. 97% of skeptics would answer yes to this.  The 2nd: Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?” So what constitutes “significant”? Does “changing” include both cooling and warming… and for both “better” and “worse”? And which contributions…does this include land use changes, such as agriculture and deforestation? Once again, many skeptics would answer yes.  Surprisingly, of the 3000 respondents, only 82% answered yes to both questions So there is your real consensus. Well, this wasn't acceptable of course, so they waded through the 3000, and found 79 that they classified as climate scientists. 76 of 79 responded yes to the first question. 96.4 % (What the heck, we have real published scientists who don't even think the earth has warmed?) So then 2 of the 3 who answered no to the first question didn't answer the second question. I think it is fair to say that if they think there was no warming, then they didn't feel that mankind had contributed. But for the survey, they just reported 75 of 77 (97% plus) responded yes to the 2nd question. So even using their own bull$#@!--- picking of a subset of 3000 that got the answer they wanted, they still cheated and reported the 97% statistic, since the honest 95% answer didn't sound good enough to them. Now that's the true origin of the statistic. And you could probably get 90% of skeptics to agree to the two questions.  And none of the questions address the real thing being debated. What is the real feedback going to be from CO2 warming? You can't even get a consensus on whether it will be positive or negative.


This study fails to note that a higher minimum wage is a significant factor in the stronger seattle economy, which they conveniently cite as the dominant factor in higher earnings. You can separate the two and identify which is the primary effect, but not with their methodology.


Admins can often be the face (or voice) of a firm that leaves the first impression. You're totally right, you can usually tell what kind of place it is by the way they are treated and the way they treat clients and others. Hopefully she lives up to her impression and not her username!


Linear Title has demonstrated a commitment to philanthropy, both on a corporate and on an individual level. Linear Title believes very strongly in contributing to the community, and that an investment in today’s society is an investment in the future of our nation.Linear Title is pleased to announce that its chief financial officer, Todd Costa, will be joining the board of House of Hope, an organization that works with and advocates for homeless individuals and families.


I have always thought that most of the time spent in a class was a waste. I also do not think that school prepares people for the harsh realities of a full time job. Also I was not prepared by school to make money, manage money, or survive life better than someone who didn’t go to college. I am a pharmacist, I have an MBA and a PhD.


Hi u/Sagiv1,  Short answer: Yes, you do have to pay taxes in Israel for all your worldincome.  Long answer: All countries within the OCDE consider you as a fiscal resident in the country where you spend over half a year in (183 days and up). If you do not spend that much time in any country, there are other tying measures to avoid people not being fiscal residents in any country.  Since you are living in Israel, you will have to pay all your worlwide generated income in Israel, following the tax regulation that is in place there. I am no Isarely Tax Lawyer so I cannot help you there.  Having a lot of business internationally brings other headaches with it. Taking for example the U.S. there is a possibility that they withold taxes in their payments. It is unlikely, though, as they have a Tax Treaty to prevent double taxation. You can ask for this witholded money to be returned from the U.S. or other countries through each country's internal process.  Another thing to take into account is that you can be taxed in other countries for any revenue you generate in said country. This is especially relevant for revenue that comes from Real Estate. The country where the real estate is will tax you in the country and you will have to deduct these taxes paid in your country, Israel in this case. If there is no tax treaty you might possibly be paying twice.  I know you said you do promotion, but I have to warn you about this, because I ignore what other countries tax or do not tax. So been giving more info won't hurt.  If the US is the main and/or only country you will be doing business with, I strongly recommend you real the Tax treaty with lots of love and patience. You can find it here: https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-trty/israel.pdf or here:  Treaty:http://mfa.gov.il/Style%20Library/AmanotPdf/005118.pdf Amendment: http://mfa.gov.il/Style%20Library/AmanotPdf/005120.pdf  If you are from Israel and prefer it in Hebrew, here are the treaties in your language:  Treaty: http://mfa.gov.il/Style%20Library/AmanotPdf/005119.pdf Amendment: http://mfa.gov.il/Style%20Library/AmanotPdf/005121.pdf   Normally most IRS Departments have sections with very uselful help on these sort of matters. I'd recomment you to take a look at yours.   Last, what I've explained is the normal process that applies almost all over the world. But each country has their own distinctions and you need to look carefully. Take what I said as a starting point and do your own research or ideally try to find a tax consultant/lawyer who helps you.  Best of luck.


It's interesting how too much(?) freedom pretty much translates back into *homo homini lupus*.  The inherent selfishness of mankind needs to be confined by the state for the greater good if entities fail to adhere to decent human standards.


A rundown of what we accept as the most basic and fundamental SEO rehearses that each brand ought to receive. This includes everything from a far-reaching SEO meeting and review to zoom in on the individual components that can fortify and draw in your surge of clients and create content for both On-page and off-page search engine optimization in dubai improvement. As a long-standing Google Analytics Certified Partner search engine optimization daddy is remarkably situated to enable you to coordinate Google Analytics and Tag Managers into your current web framework, break down your activity from various edges and produce significant reports that can direct your advanced promoting endeavors.


"See if you can find a buyer's agent who will represent you at an hourly rate, and refund the balance of the buying agent's commission.  As I noted in a comment, I know of at least two agencies that will do this in Chicago. Start with a google search of something like ""[MyCity] discount real estate brokers""."


The only certain way is to have the issuer confirm it. You'd think there would be a better way, but no there isn't. I suggest you read this story about what can happen even if you are the innocent victim trying to cash a fraudulent Cashier's Check. The consequences included some jail time and huge attorney fees for this unlucky person.


Pensions have nothing to do with republicans or democrats.  All states and cities and levels of government have problems with pensions, and it's because most taxpayers don't vote, but all government employees do vote.  Whether you're republican or democrat, you're going to have to pander to the police union, and the fire union, and all the other unions, and your opponent is going to make unreasonable promises based on erroneous assumption to get the union votes, so if you want to win, you have to do the same.  It's not a problem until 40 years later, maybe longer if the population keeps growing, but now here we are and people are having fewer kids and making less money, so good luck kicking the can down the road.


So it voids what you claim. And hardly anyone renounces their citizenship. Something tells me the government won't allow apple to pack up and move to Europe seeing as large companies have to get permission to buy or merge with other companies. And I don't think the executives would enjoy flying to Europe.


>[**Moneyspeedclub. Новый проект с доходом до 8 % в сутки!!! Хороший способ приумножить капитал [4:32]**](http://youtu.be/ym6gnfh1Mn0)  >>Приветствую Вас Друзья! в этом видео, есть информация о новом хайп проекте  !  > [*^Финансовый ^Вектор*](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAOABF2yT1SjVqI7RK9aIUg) ^in ^People ^& ^Blogs  >*^1 ^views ^since ^Sep ^2017*  [^bot ^info](/r/youtubefactsbot/wiki/index)


"Do you have any idea what a product manager does? It's a pretty accurate description of the job.  The PM is responsible for strategy, direction, product/market fit, features, roadmap, and pretty much everything associated with that product. You own the P&L. The buck stops with you when it comes to the product.  The ""CEO of your product"" description is the classical description of what a PM is, because you're running an entire line of business that can be worth hundreds of millions of dollars."


You bought the right – but not the obligation – to buy a certain number of shares at $15 from  whomsoever sold you the option, and you paid a premium for it.  You can choose whether you want to buy the shares at $15 during the period agreed upon. If you call for the shares, the other guy has to sell the shares to you for $15 each, even if the market price is higher. You can then turn around and promptly resell the purchased shares at the higher market price. If the market price never rises above $15 at any time while the option is open, you still have the right to buy the shares for $15 if you choose to do so. Most rational people would let the option expire without exercising it, but this is not a legal requirement.  Doing things like buying shares at $15 when the market price is below $15 is perfectly legal; just not very savvy.  You cannot cancel the option in the sense of going to the seller of the option and demanding your premium money back because you don't  intend to exercise the option because the market price is below $15.  Of course, if the market price is above $15 and you tell the seller to cancel the contract, they will be happy to do so, since it lets them off the hook. They may or may not give you the premium back in this case.


The most relevant aspect of Islamic banking that distinguishes it from non-Islamic banking is the prohibition of charging interest. There is no prohibition on the utilization of technology.   Since banks that comply with Sharia make direct investments (sharing of profit/loss), and leasing, many banks that are sharia-compliant are very modern, sophisticated, and behave very much like private equity or even in some cases hedge funds. There is a prohibition in Sharia to avoid excessive risk, so many modern Islamic financial institutions deploy and trade financial derivatives to provide the means to risk management. This is done on a very technological level with expertise.  London has become a hub of Islamic banking and there have been efforts by the financial sector to push to make London the center of Islamic banking. These institutions are as advanced as any non-Islamic banks.   Here is a source to check out: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/11435465/Britain-to-lead-the-world-in-Islamic-finance.html  Here is an article discussing the streamlining of banking through technology: http://asianbankingandfinance.net/islamic-banking/exclusive/are-islamic-banks-ready-jump-digital-bandwagon


"When the strike price ($25 in this case) is in-the-money, even by $0.01, your shares will be sold the day after expiration if you take no action. If you want to let your shares go,. allow assignment rather than close the short position and sell the long position...it will be cheaper that way. If you want to keep your shares you must buy back the option prior to 4Pm EST on expiration Friday. First ask yourself why you want to keep the shares. Is it to write another option? Is it to hold for a longer term strategy? Assuming this is a covered call writing account, you should consider ""rolling"" the option. This involves buying back the near-term option and selling the later date option of a similar or higher strike. Make sure to check to see if there is an upcoming earnings report in the latter month because you may want to avoid writing a call in that situation. I never write a call when there's an upcoming ER prior to expiration. Good luck. Alan"


You need to talk to an accountant who practices tax accounting, preferaby someone who is an Enrolled Agent (EA) with the IRS, and possibly an attorney who specializes in tax law.  There are multiple issues here, and the executor of your father's estate might need to be involved here too.  Presumably you were a minor in 2007 since the transactions took place in a custodial account, and perhaps you were a dependent of your father in 2007.  So, were the transactions reported on your father's 2007 income tax return? or did he file a separate income tax return in your name? You say you have a W2 for 2007. So you were  earning some income in 2007? This complicates matters. It is necessary to determine who has the responsibility to file income tax returns for a minor with earned income. Above all, I urge you to not file income tax returns on your own or using a tax return preparation program, or after talking to a tax return preparation service (where you will likely get someone who works on a seasonal basis and is unlikely to be familiar with tax law as of 2007).


Pitfalls of paying plastic That being said, you can also find cards that have better than the 1% it looks like you are getting. I have a card that gives 2% cash back on Gas Stations, Utilities (including stuff like AT&T) and Food Stores (Walmart included).  There are also limited time deals from cards - my fiance's discover has 5% cash back Oct/Nov/Dec on Online purchases. Make sure to remain diligent, keep your balances low and don't get hit with interest rates or fees (I had HORRIBLE credit and I refused to get a card with an annual fee). Why pay full price with cash, when you can get 2-5% cash back?


"Maybe just put all his correspondence back in the Post Box and mark it   ""Wrong address""? Precisely. Without opening. Just tell the postman that that person doesn't live there and have it returned to sender. The Revenue will figure it out. Most definitely do not accept any certified or registered mail not addressed to you personally."


> That's just false. Burning wood is definitely less efficient, but overall poor people release less carbon that wealthy nations.  OK, do you have a source? My understanding is that due to their much greater numbers, the poor actually contribute more CO2 than do the rich.


There was a book written by Harry Dent in the early 90's that talked about the approaching demographic problem. The simple version of his theory is that people spend the most money between 45-49, after which people begin to become a drain on the economy as they utilize government benefits and begin draining retirement plans.   Boomers are moving out of this range and there is no group substantially large enough to follow them, according to him, until the mid 2020s when the Echo Boomers come through.   While he had some things way off and, u fortunately, seems to be overcompensating as of late and only hawking his newsletters, he had some great points in his first book.   To me, you can't fudge those numbers and what he said makes a lot of sense. That seems to be very similar to this article.


In general you cannot. Once the security is no longer listed on the exchange - it doesn't have to provide information to the exchange and regulators (unless it wants to be re-listed). That's one of the reasons companies go private - to keep their (financial and other) information private. If it was listed in 1999, and is no longer listed now - you can dig through SEC archives for the information. You can try and reach out to the company's investors' relations contact and see if they can help you with the specific information you're looking for.


"According to the following links, it is commonly pronounced ""Cecil"".   https://kaufmanrossin.com/blog/bank-ready-meet-cecil/ The proposed model introduces the concept of shifting from an incurred   loss model to the current expected credit loss model commonly referred   to as CECL (pronounced “Cecil”). http://www.gonzobanker.com/2016/02/cecl-the-blind-leading-the-blurry/ [...] and its name is CECL (Current Estimated Credit Losses, pronounced like   the name “Cecil”). The name Cecil means “blind,” which is ironic, because FASB’s upcoming   guidance will push FIs to clarify the future performance of their loan   portfolios by using models to predict CECL of all loan portfolios. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/operational-financial-impact-cecl-banks-nikhil-deshmukh Termed as Current Expected Credit Loss (CECL, or Cecil, as some call   it), [...]"


Use other currencies, if available. I'm not familiar with the banking system in South Africa; if they haven't placed any currency freezes or restrictions, you might want to do this sooner than later.  In full crises, like Russian and Ukraine, once the crisis worsened, they started limiting purchases of foreign currencies. PayPal might allow currency swaps (it implies that it does at the bottom of this page); if not, I know Uphold does. Short the currency Brokerage in the US allow us to short the US Dollar.  If banks allow you to short the ZAR, you can always use that for protection.  I looked at the interest rates in the ZAR to see how the central bank is offsetting this currency crisis - WOW - I'd be running, not walking toward the nearest exit.  A USA analogy during the late 70s/early 80s would be Paul Volcker holding interest rates at 2.5%, thinking that would contain 10% inflation. Bitcoin Comes with significant risks itself, but if you use it as a temporary medium of exchange for swaps - like Uphold or with some bitcoin exchanges like BTC-e - you can get other currencies by converting to bitcoin then swapping for other assets.  Bitcoin's strength is remitting and swapping; holding on to it is high risk. Commodities I think these are higher risk right now as part of the ZAR's problem is that it's heavily reliant on commodities.  I looked at your stock market to see how well it's done, and I also see that it's done poorly too and I think the commodity bloodbath has something to do with that.  If you know of any commodity that can stay stable during uncertainty, like food that doesn't expire, you can at least buy without worrying about costs rising in the future.  I always joke that if hyperinflation happened in the United States, everyone would wish they lived in Utah.


Anyone with a background in finance should have been well aware that the government would swoop in with a bailout of the major banks. Such a scenario was even discussed in money and banking textbooks pre financial crisis.   Since I have no excess cash,  and wad in senior year of college, I was unable to capitalize on that, but I did invest in the banks in market simulating games 😁


The concept of a social contract is absolute. A constitution defines the 'how' of a state. The social contract addresses the question why a state even exists and what justifies its existence. And I say it again: the only justification for the existence of a state is the protection of your rights and freedoms from others.  Capitalism is based on the exchange of goods and services based on mutual agreement and respect for each other's property. Its driving force is competition.  It is an invisible force that has been there since the very beginning. Every other system can be defined as a restriction to capitalism.  We agree on that. You can work because the state ensures your safety and the protection of your rights. That's the social contract again.  Police, courts and military might be on the list of those necessary services. However mandatory public healthcare is not.  Preventing a monopoly is not about wealth redistribution. The driving force behind all the benefits of capitalism is competition, once you have a monopoly the whole thing turns sideways in that area. You need to introduce a few market regulations and a handful of guidelines for competition, but redistribution of wealth won't stop its formation.


>While these workers don't need college degrees, they need at least two years of specialized training plus strong math, reading and writing skills.  Ever hear of training? How about promoting from within? Any company who doesn't hire anyone even when they need manpower because they have a set of mandatory requirements is a dumb company. They reap what they sow.


so if we rent it out we don't want to just charge what we're paying on our mortgage - we'd definitely be losing money if we did that. I think you're overlooking one thing: your profit/loss is not monthly. Your profit is the property that's left after the mortgage ends. Even if you have to add extra $100 every month because you rent lower than the mortgage + maintenance + taxes, after 30 years you're left with property worth ie.$200k while you've paid for it ie. 30 years * 12 months * $100 = $36k. You can rent it lower than your costs and still make a profit in the long run.


There are many situations where injecting a certain amount of cash at the right time may reap rewards far in excess of the value of the cash injected. For example, if someone who needs a car to get to work gets in a wreck and that person does not have ready money to make it driveable may have no choice but to secure very expensive financing.  Receipt of $1000 in ready money to repair the car may thus save the person from having to take out a loan that would cost $1200 or more to repay. While the insurance business has sufficient overhead that it is unlikely that insurance would generally have a positive net expectation even considering such factors, it is at least theoretically possible that insurance could have a positive expected value for both the insurer and the insured (and in some cases it may have positive expected values for both parties in practice as well).


People that have kids and aren't rich are in for a rude awakening if they want to live in NYC.  Plus nobody moves to NYC and becomes a janitor making 100k.  You have to be born into a position like that and he probably has rent controlled apartment or bought 50 years ago.  He probably has it better than most.


quantycuenta is right, if a halt is in place, then no trading will occur, simple as that. But in the practice of risk management it is a little different. Want to remind you that you are assuming that trading is halted immediately upon the drop in price. That doesn't always happen, so if there is any time between the actual price drop and halt of trading, then it is possible that your order will be filled, depending on how liquid your security is. Also not every security has circuit breakers in place and the exact requirements to trigger a breaker is not public information.  In some cases, trades are ordered to be rolled back (reversed) by the exchange but this is usually reserved for institutional traders who make some sort of mistake.  This article below mentions day traders who bought at or near the bottom of the May 6, 2010 flash crash. This was before circuit breakers but I think it's a good story for someone looking to understand the finer workings of the electronic market.  http://www.marketwatch.com/story/book-takes-a-look-inside-professional-day-traders-1339513989350


Yes, I agree on that and it would have been a better lead. It’s a better story saying tech companies are having a hard time hiring because of the high cost of housing than trying to hammer in the idea that the bay area is losing jobs.


Make sure your handling the legal side of things. At your age, at least in the US usually, your parents are the one responsible for things like contracts and such. You can't legally get into contracts on your own and if your going to go into business, even at your age, a contract of work should be a must.


STEM activities which mean Science Technology Engineering and Math are the entire buzz in education. Kids enjoy finding out how things work out through hands-on projects, fun and educators love knowing that they are also preparing their students for their tech future. In this program, participants of STEM For Kids program will learn and know how to make a basic computer programs & codes for games etc. Get more details on hands-on projects on STEM For Kids at:http://www.newjerseyhunter.com/forums/members/57378.html


The absolute best advice I ever received was this:  You will need three categories of savings in your life: 1) Retirement Savings  This is money you put away (in 401-Ks and IRAs) for the time in your life when you can no longer earn enough income to support yourself. You do not borrow against it nor do you withdraw from it in emergencies or to buy a house.  2) Catestrophic savings  This is money you put back in case of serious events. Events like: prolonged job loss, hospitalization, extended illness, loss of home, severe and significant loss of transportation, very large aplliance loss or damage. You do not take trips to the Bahamas or buy diamond rings with this money.  3) Urgent, relatively small,  need savings. This is the savings you can use from time to time. Use it for bills that arise unexpectedly, unforseen shortfalls in your budget, needed repairs such as car repairs and small appliance repairs, surprising fines, fees, and bills.  Put 10% of your income into each category of savings. 10% intro retirement savings, another, separate, 10% intro Catestrophic savings, and yet another 10% intro urgent, small need, savings.  So, as you can see, already 30% of your income is already spoken for. Divide up the remaining 70% intro fixed (I recommend 50% toward fixed expenses) and variable expenses. Fixed includes those things that you pay once every month such as housing, utilities, car payment, debt repayment, etc. Variable includes discretionary things like eating out, gifts, and  splurges.  Most importantly, partner with someone who is your opposite. If you are a saver at heart partner with a spender. If you are a spender partner with a saver.  There are three rules to live by regarding the budget: A) no one spends any money unless it is in the budget B) the budget only includes those things to which both the saver and the spender agree C) the budget can, and will, be modified as the pay period unfolds.  A budget is a plan not a means to beat the other person up. Plans change as new information arises. A budget must be flexible. The urgent use savings will help to make  the budget flexible.  Edit due to comments: @enderland Perhaps you do not have children living with you. I am a saver, my wife is a spender. When it came time to do the budget I would forget things like the birthdays of my children, school fees due next pay period, shopping for Christmas gifts, needed new clothes and shoes for the children, broken small appliances that needed to be fixed or replaced, special (non reoccurring) house maintenence (like steam cleaning the carpet), gifts to relatives and friends, exceptional assistance to relatives, etc.  As my wife was the spender she would remind me of these things. Perhaps  you do not have these events in your life. I am glad to have these events in my life as that means that I have people in my life that I care about.  What good is a fat savings account if I have no loved ones that benefit from it?


Owners of American-style options may exercise at any time before the   option expires, while owners of European-style options may exercise   only at expiration. Read more: American Vs. European Options


Well to start with I would make sure that the interest total you are collecting each month is greater than the interest total you are paying each month on your credit card debt.  So if you have $200 a month in interest you pay the credit card company I would make sure that the interest you collect on the loan is more than $200 a month.  And make sure that you use some portion of the principle payment to pay down the credit card debt so that you are still even or ahead of the interest you owe the credit card company. Beyond that I would want the rate to be higher than the borrower could expect from a bank.  This will incentivize the borrower to either pay it off early or refinance the loan through a bank effectively paying it off early for you.  Anything that shifts the risk off of you and onto someone else is in your favor here. You could also implement some sort of final payment fee and reduce this fee by a certain amount (presumably up to 100%) if it is paid off early.  I would graduate that amount so there is still incentive if the buyer misses the original date but still incentive to meet the date.  If the loan was for 10 years then I would probably do around .5% per year early.   I would also get an attorney to draw up the loan paperwork to make sure that you(and potentially your heirs) are covered should you need to recover from a default, bankruptcy, or other potential problems.  I would bet the lawyer fees will save you 5x+ the amount if only in headaches.  And if you are dealing with family the lawyer makes a great fall guy to say I wish I could do that but the lawyer won't let me if the family member tries to take advantage.


>There are always companies involved between big farms and grocery stores  This is inaccurate and reeks of an assumption that you made rather than knowledge you have.  I can think of quite a few circumstances, off the top of my head, where farms of all sizes have sold to grocery stores, again of *all* sizes - directly.


"You don't. No one uses vanilla double entry accounting software for ""Held-For-Trading Security"".  Your broker or trading software is responsible for providing month-end statement of changes.  You use ""Mark To Market"" valuation at the end of each month.  For example, if your cash position is -$5000 and stock position is +$10000, all you do is write-up/down the account value to $5000.  There should be no sub-accounts for your ""Investment"" account in GNUCash.  So at the end of the month, there would be the following entries:"


"So my understanding is that Google is prioritizing it's own comparison shopping services at the expense of others since it is acting essentially as the ""gateway to the internet"" in the EU.  Some people say this is like Coke being forced to put Pepsi in its machines but I don't see it that way. I see it as Google unfairly giving its own services priority in Google Search Listings when the algorithm they use should be non-biased.  Overall, a very interesting decision which could have great ramifications in the US"


Between now and October, your $3,000 will earn $30 in your savings account. If you are late on a payment for your 0% loan, your interest rate will skyrocket.  In my opinion, the risk is just not worth the tiny gain you are trying to achieve in the savings account. If it was me, I would pay off the loan today. A few more thoughts: There is a reason that businesses offer 0% consumer loans.  They are designed to trick you into thinking that you are getting a better deal than you are.  Businesses don't lose money on these loans.  The price of the loan is built into the cost of the purchase, whether you are buying expensive furniture, or a car.  Typically with a car, you forfeit a rebate by taking the 0% loan, essentially paying all the interest up-front.  Now that you have the loan, you might be ahead a few dollars by waiting to pay it off, but only because you've already paid the interest.  Don't make the mistake of thinking that you can come out ahead by buying things at 0%.  It's really not free money. In the comments, @JoeTaxpayer mentioned that fear of mistakes can lead to missed rewards.  I understand that; however, these 0% loans are full of small print designed to trip you up.  A single mistake can negate years and years of these small gains.  You don't want to be penny wise and pound foolish.


When people are crowing about their achievements, they often take liberties with those achievements. Vitalik's interpretation -- net worth, is probably what you would naturally come to mind. But when someone is bragging, that could mean anything -- $1M of total revenue.


Most bond ETFs have switched to monthly dividends paid on the first of each month, in an attempt to standardize across the market.  For ETFs (but perhaps not bond mutual funds, as suggested in the above answer) interest does accrue in the NAV, so the price of the fund does drop on ex-date by an amount equal to the dividend paid. A great example of this dynamic can be seen in FLOT, a bond ETF holding floating rate corporate bonds.  As you can see in this screenshot, the NAV has followed a sharp up and down pattern, almost like the teeth of a saw. This is explained by interest accruing in the NAV over the course of each month, until it is paid out in a dividend, dropping the NAV sharply in one day. The effect has been particularly pronounced recently because the floating coupon payments have increased significantly (benchmark interest rates are higher) and mark-to-market changes in credit spreads of the constituent bonds have been very muted.


"Generally, a polite decline. However, I have dealt with sales people who take first refusal as a ""test"" response, and decide to go into the details anyway. The longer they talk the more robust my responses. See this Telegraph article that discusses why their experts think it's a ripoff, and why you should check your credit cards and home insurance policies as they may already have you covered (possibly UK/Europe only). http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/2820644/Extended-warranties-In-our-view-its-a-rip-off.html On a different note, see this list of questions to ask if you are considering going with the extended warranty. The source doesn't rule for or against the idea, leaving it at caveat emptor: http://www.choice.com.au/reviews-and-tests/technology/home-entertainment/accessories/extended-warranties/page/questions%20to%20ask.aspx"


It should be in the name(s) of whomever puts money in the account.  When filing your taxes there will be a question or space to mark the percentage of income in each others name. If you're just looking for small amounts of income splitting, then it's legal for the higher earning spouse to pay household expenses and then the lower earning spouse can save all or some of his/her income. Whether or not to have 2 accounts or not has more to do with estate planning and minimizing account fees if applicable.  It can also help in a small way for asset allocation if that's based on family assets and also, minimizing commissions.


"In that case, would it then be assured that the entire classes scores are high if they are based on the weakest student as the bar?  *some of the implementations of ""No Child Left Behind"" encourage pacing to the slowest student rather than challenging all of them at the level they can be challenged. It's pretty broken.*"


A commercial space that would give wings to your dreams. A place that boasts of supreme architecture and a business-friendly environment. Located on the heart of the city's trading district, it's the perfect place to make your business ready for the next big leap to success. Make this embodiment of status and power yours today


> Public employees should fly what is cheapest and pay for an upgrade out-of-pocket if so desired because we the taxpayers pay their tickets/salaries  Eh, that still comes down to what the purpose of the flight is.  If you need someone to come off a flight in a functional state, flying coach isn't going to do that.  Flying at a higher level isn't just about being luxurious - it's about being able to be operational at a high level post-flight.


"left out of the pictures is the degree to which the ECB is buying their own bonds.  At least with the FedResInk, we know what sort of ""open market"" action is being taken to keep interest rates held as close to zero as possible.  I coke dealer can make sure his ""sales"" are through the roof by using his own product, but eventually he has to buy more supply.  I think people are confused about central banks being that coke dealer or being his supplier."


This is the thing, with EU and North America thinking sanctions on Russia are good, for the short-run they will work but Iran has been steadily making allies on their home turf, the $400 billion deal with China, now Iran and I wouldn't be surprised if they have one in the works with India. These countries don't care about sanctions, they have an economic/population crisis and they need to focus on that hence all these deals pulling through.


I was frankly surprised at the writing style and the amount of info presented in this post. Are you interested to accept a guest blogging gig for a blog with the same niche topics that you deal with? Please let me know..


> You're right about the accuracy of axioms being important though. If you can disprove an axiom you can disprove the theory, that's why the fewer axioms taken, and the simpler those axioms are, the stronger the resultant argument becomes.  That is true philosophical argument and is however quite a bit removed from the original point of this discussion. Your point, which I rebutted several times over the course of this thread - is that lowering taxes will lead to increased growth, compensating for the revenue deficit. You are basing this on the Laffer curve - which states that there is a particular taxation point where the total collected taxes are maximized. The curve itself seems fairly common sense at a first glance, but are we to the right of the curve? Several papers have argued that we are on the left^[1](http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/261018),[2](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S105353579690013X),[3](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0304393295012249).  Additionally, the curve itself is doubtful - as it has not been observed in a real world setting. Austerity measures almost wrecked European economies in the early part of this decade, while the Kansas experiment was a utter bust.   > We can make certain simple assumptions about human nature, such as that all else being equal, people will chose to take actions that aligns with their wants/needs over ones that do not.  And this is an incomplete statement. People will take actions in a boundary of possibility. That boundary is much higher for somebody whose wealth puts them at 99.9% of the scale rather than being at 20%. And taking the point further, the wants/needs are also very different for somebody at different social stratums. Given that, there is no evidence (and rather there is a wealth of contradictory evidence) that giving a tax cut to the highest income earners would boost the economy.  Your assumptions and axioms are wrong, and a simple introductory economics course ([MITX](https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/economics/14-02-principles-of-macroeconomics-spring-2014/), [edX](https://www.edx.org/course/introduction-economics-macroeconomics-snux-snu044-088-2x)) will solve your misconceptions.  Beyond mathematical mastery, the true mark of a rational, scientific person is a willingness to accept mistakes and be humble about it. I see neither in you. On the contrary when presented with evidence, you raise straw man arguments (eg: the validity of epistemological vs empirical observations), obfuscate facts and changing of goalposts. When presented with economic reason, I see pride in not knowing modern economic advancements. You see that as a mark of intelligence, but that is idiocy that belongs on /r/iamverysmart


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?


That seems like a very high valuation. 2 years ago in the Ellen Pao lawsuit Pao's side claimed Reddit was worth $250mm, and the press had claimed it was $500mm. Either Reddit's valuation has more than tripled in 2 years, or this article is misleading.


A person who always saves and appropriately invests 20% of their income can expect to have a secure retirement. If you start early enough, you don't need anything close to 20%. Now, there are many good reasons to save for things other than just retirement, of course. You say that you can save 80% of your income, and you expect most people could save at least 50% without problems. That's just unrealistic for most people. Taxes, rent (or mortgage payments), utilities, food, and other such mandatory expenses take far more than 50% of your income. Most people simply don't have the ability to save (or invest) 50% of their income. Or even 25% of their income.


> shopping is the be-all-end-all of consumerism  This is a fact. What has amazon acquired that is worse off for the consumer than before the acquisition? I can think of when walmart has been shit, like when they basically bankrupted rubbermaid over a single digit percentage price increase. Amazon seems to have the consumer's interests in mind, directly behind maximizing profits.


"First, your question contains a couple of false premises: Options in the U.S. do not trade on the NYSE, which is a stock exchange.  You must have been looking at a listing from an options exchange. There are a handful of options exchanges in the U.S., and while two of these have ""NYSE"" in the name, referring to ""NYSE"" by itself still refers to the stock exchange. Companies typically don't decide themselves whether options will trade for their stock.  The exchange and other market participants (market makers) decide whether to create a market for them. The Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) is also a stock exchange.  It doesn't list any options.  If you want to see Canadian-listed options on equities, you're looking in the wrong place. Next, yes, RY does have listed options in Canada. Here are some.  Did you know about the Montreal Exchange (MX)?  The MX is part of the TMX Group, which owns both the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) and the Montreal Exchange. You'll find lots of Canadian equity and index options trading at the MX.  If you have an options trading account with a decent Canadian broker, you should have access to trade options at the MX. Finally, even considering the existence of the MX, you'll still find that a lot of Canadian companies don't have any options listed.  Simply: smaller and/or less liquid stocks don't have enough demand for options, so the options exchange & market makers don't offer any. It isn't cost-effective for them to create a market where there will be very few participants."


This is a problem more than the first commenter realizes.  I have visited the UAE and marveled at the buildings in Dubai and Abu Dhabi.  Yesterday I learned that they have to get sand for their concrete from Australia! Just the waste in shipping sand. Then again they've got the money.  I knew like others, desert sand isn't useful for concrete.  Concrete is amazing stuff and under appreciated.  There is r/concrete where I read that modern Portland cement technology that's used in modern concrete uses far more heat to process than ancient Roman technology, the original concrete builders, and that the Romans made a longer lasting durable concrete. Modem concrete, like plastics, are not designed to last hundreds of years.


"Not really.  They didn't account for the fact that the income would first be spread out over 8 billion people.  I don't know if anyone in Keynes time was thinking about dozens of industries closed in America and moved directly to China.  Had you suggested that to them I think they would have thought it ridiculous but that is in fact what happened.  Also, theories on trade suggest that it makes everyone better off.  So if you ask any economist at any given point if more free trade is better they will probably say ""yes"".  That was all fine until about the 1980s when computer networks made it possible to globalize supply chains.  Suddenly vast CAD/CAM systems sprung up and suddenly you could pay a worker a $1 a day to do what someone in the US was getting $45 an hour to do.  The economics of it for corporations were absolutely irresistible and they lobbied hard to make sure noting got in the way (note that free trade pacts passed under both parties).  In order to mask the fact that this was happening a giant credit bubble was created in the developed world using the newfound savings of the developing world.  Living standards were temporarily maintained in developed countries by borrowing money from the people they had sent their jobs to.  The effects of this are all pretty clear.  Most developed nations are now burdened under a mountain of debt.  Central banks are having a difficult time maintaining enough liquidity to support the illusion of buying power in developed nations that is no longer present without enormous artificial support.  Many Americans alive today cannot even remember a time when America's current account deficit was not deeply in the red.  So far the only thing propping up developed nations is the use (and threat of use) of vastly superior military force.  That hasn't really changed but every day the developing nations encroach a little bit more on the resources of the world for consumption rather than just production.  As that happens the hollowed out shells of the developed world start to feel more and more pressured as they come to realize they really don't have much of value to trade.  America's biggest exports are food and services.  Food is surely important but one farmer can farm like 100,000 acres.  And services just means we can export the time of a Wall Street douchebag at a high rate of pay.  yippee."


"It will happen about 5 or 6 months before the tragedy that makes everyone wonder why the fuck we thought it was a good idea. The issue is not just computers being ""faster"", it is ow the receive and process information, the reliability of their sensors, how they react to conflicting information, etc, etc, etc."


When you give your credit card number and authorize a merchant to charge your credit card, the merchant then gives the information to their merchant processor which in turns bills the bank that issued the card (it's a little more complex and it all happens instantly unless the merchant is using the very old fasion imprinting gizmos). It is possible for a merchant to attempt to charge you more than you authorized but if they do they risk a fine ($25-$50 for a chargeback) from their processor, the legitimate portion of the charge as well as increasing the processing fees charged by their processor or even the possibility of loosing their merchant account entirely and being permanently blacklisted by Visa/Mastercard. In short no legitimate business is going to intentionally over charge your credit card.  There really isn't significant risk in using a reputable online retailer's order forms. There is the possibility that their database could be compromised but that risk is lower than the risk of having an employee steal your credit number when you give it to them in person. Besides in the US at least the most you can legally be held liable for is $50 assuming you notice the discrepancy within 60 days of statement the charge appears on and most banks limit liability to $0.  Over the years I have had a number of different credit card numbers stolen and used fraudulently and I have never had to pay any fraudulent charges.


First off, great job on your finances so far. You are off on the right foot and have some sense of planning for the future.  Also, it is a great question.   First, I agree with @littleadv. Take advantage of your employer match. Do not drop your 401(k) contributions below that. Also, good job on putting your contributions into the Roth account. Second, I would ask: Are you out of debt?  If not, put all your extra income towards paying off debt, and then you can work your plan. Third, time to do some math.  What will your business look like?  How much capital would you need to get started?  Are there things you can do now on a part-time basis to start this business or prepare you to start the business? Come up with a figure, find some mutual funds that have a low beta, and back out how much money you need to save per month, so you have around that total.  Then you have a figure. e.g. Assume you need $20,000, and you find a fund that has done 8% over the past 20 years.  Then, you would need to save about $110/month to be ready to go in 10 years, or $273/month to go in about 5 years.  (It's a time value of money calculation.) The house is really a long way off, but you could do the same kind of calculation.  I feel that you think your income, and possibly locale, will change dramatically over the next few years.  It might not be bad to double what you are saving for the business, and designate one half for the house.


What is your focus in your finance coursework? Investments? Wealth management? Corporate finance?  Find something that compliments your desired path. Finance in-and-of itself is one of the most marketable business degrees available (if not THE most), and anything to show you're well-rounded will help get a job.   Don't add real estate as a minor. Most school teach across a $eme$ter what you can learn in a month or two when studying to get your RE license. So, pay thousands of tuition dollar$, or pay the several hundred bucks for your test/course materials.   Experience: finance degree, now a commercial real estate broker


With new credit scores tend to be very volatile. It could be something as small as carrying a higher balance or credit inquiries.  Like I mentioned, check Credit Karma to confirm nothing has changed. Also, see your inquiries. That may have impacted your score