Question: Will my Indian debit card work in the U.S.?

Debit cards with the Visa or Mastercard symbol on them work technically everywhere where credit cards work. There are some limitations where the respective business does not accept them, for example car rentals want a credit card for potential extra charges; but most of the time, for day-to-day shopping and dining, debit cards work fine. However, you should read up the potential risks. A credit card gives you some security by buffering incorrect/fraudulent charges from your account, and credit card companies also help you reverse incorrect charges, before you ever have to pay for it. If you use a debit card, it is your money on the line immediately - any incorrect charge, even accidential, takes your money from your account, and it is gone while you work on reversing the charge. Any theft, and your account can be cleaned out, and you will be without money while you go after the thief. Many people consider the debit card risk too high, and don't use them for this reason. However, many people do use them - it is up to you.

"Yes I agree, I remember the British Airways flight I took to Florida when I was 13 for the family holiday and idiots were rushing the gate when they weren't called. Eventually the gate agent got so pissed off he made an example of this stupid middle aged man who was trying to act all entitled in the style of ""LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THIS MAN HERE IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF SOMEONE WHO ARRIVES AT THE GATE WHEN THEIR ZONE IS **NOT** CALLED, AS A RESULT OF THIS YOU WILL BE BOARDING THE AIRCRAFT LAST SIR"" or words to that effect. He tried arguing against a piece of paper, you can't really win...  Also usually gate agents and checkin desks are staffed by airline services companies like Menzies Aviation as far as I know, I'm not sure if that's relevant however."

I'm not sure that you're considering all the options.   So you may not subtract $X from B, but you do compare NPV(B) to $Y.   Also, remember that we're not trying to figure out the return on B.  We're trying to figure out what to do next.  In terms of planning, the sunk cost is irrelevant.  But in terms of calculating return, A was a turkey.  And to calculate the return, we would include $X in our costs for B.  And for the second option, we'd subtract $X from $Y (may be negative).   Sunk costs are irrelevant to planning, but they are very relevant to retrospective analysis.  Please don't confuse the two.  When looking back, part of the cost for B will be that $X.  But in the middle, after paying $X and before starting B, the $X is gone.  You only have the building and have to make your decision based on the options you have at that moment.   You will sometimes hear $Y called the opportunity cost of B.  You could sell out for $Y or you could do B.  You should only do B if it is worth more than $Y.   The sunk cost fallacy would be comparing B to $X.  Assuming $Y is less than $X, this would make you not do B when it is your best path forward from that moment.  I.e. $Y < NPV(B) < $X means that you should do the project.  You will lose money (apparently that's a foregone conclusion), but you will lose less money than if you just sold out.   You should also do B if $Y < $X < NPV(B) or $X < $Y < NPV(B).  In general, you should do B any time $Y < NPV(B).  The only time you should not do B is if NPV(B) < $Y.  If they are exactly equal, then it doesn't matter financially whether you do B or not.

She massively raised wages of a bunch of people in management and wasted a lot of money on acquisitions that she later [shut down](http://gizmodo.com/heres-what-happened-to-all-of-marissa-mayers-yahoo-acqu-1781980352). Her job was to be the turnaround CEO, which she completely failed at. She did lengthen the amount of time it took until they threw in the towel, but in that time frame, she wasted a lot of shareholders' money.

When it comes to apps, ideas have little value compared to the ability to execute on an idea. If you are not a developer, ask yourself what value you bring to the business besides having an idea. Can you test the value of this idea before it's an app? Is there a market for it? Do you have capital to invest in development, marketing, and production?

Are there any laws against doing this?  so long as you are truthful in your application for the loan, none that I know of - technically you could use the loan to pay for school and the cash that you would have used instead to invest.   Are there other reasons why this is a very bad idea? I think you've already identified the biggest one, but here are my reasons: Will you go broke or go to jail? Likely not, but there is significant risk in investing with borrowed money. You might come out ahead, but you might also lose a bundle.  If you're willing to take that risk, that's your right, but I would not call it a good idea under any circumstances.

"You should seriously just stop talking. The term legacy employees refers to legacy cost structures. Costs that linger from a time when the competitive environment was different than it is today are referred to as legacy costs. It is not derogatory.   Take airlines, for example. Airlines used to have incredible legacy costs from unionized employees incurred at a time when the airline industry was regulated. Regulation kept new airlines from starting up, so airlines could very easily afford to pay for pensions, huge benefits, massive salaries, etc. The few airlines in existence then had control over the industry.  Then the airlines were deregulated and anyone could start one up. Suddenly, the airlines that could afford massive pensions in the days where they effectively controlled pricing could no longer afford these pensions and benefits when competitors did not offer the same benefits to their employees. Hence, every single ""legacy"" airline went bankrupt over the next few decades."

If your parents can spare it, take the money from your parents and return it to them with interest. It is always better to pay interest to family than to a bank.


Question: Are there any caveats to withdrawing funds from brokerage?

Assuming a USA taxable account: Withdrawing funds from a brokerage account has nothing to do with taxes. Taxes are owed on the profit when you sell a stock, no matter what you do with the funds. Taxes are owed on any dividends the stock produces, no matter what you do with the dividend. The brokerage sends you a form 1099 each year that shows the amounts of dividends and profits. You have to figure out the taxes from that.

"I worked for a company a few years back that insisted all of us were ""non-supervised exempt technical workers,"" and they wanted 45 hours out of each person.  No matter to them that that was a 12.5% cut in hourly pay.  Unfortunately, they did no research and didn't bother to actually apply for any exemptions.  One of the analysts got sick of it, found another job, then turned over his timecards to the labor department.  Said company had to write him a check for $10k, as well as write smaller checks for every other person working there."

I am surprised no one has mentioned the two biggest things (in my opinion).  Or I should say, the two biggest things to me.  First, 1099 have to file quarterly self employment taxes.  I do not know for certain but I have heard that often times you will end up paying more this way then even a W-2 employees.  Second, an LLC allows you to deduct business expenses off the top prior to determining what you pay in taxes as pass-through income.  With 1099 you pay the same taxes regardless of your business expenses unless they are specifically allowed as a 1099 contractor (which most are not I believe).  So what you should really do is figure out the expense you incur as a result of doing your business and check with an accountant to see if those expenses would be deductible in an LLC and if it offsets a decent amount of your income to see if it would be worth it.  But I have read a lot of books and listened to a lot of interviews about wealthy people and most deal in companies not contracts.  Most would open a new business and add clients rather than dealing in 1099 contracts.  Just my two cents... Good luck and much prosperity.

Yeah, it can be a scam.  Lots of unscrupulous companies try to generate commissions by encouraging frequent trading - I can't recall the term they use right now, but I don't like to use these people for advice.  My bank has 100 free trades per year for each account, which is more than enough for me to never pay a commission.

"Most people are aware of the existence of merchant processing fees. If this really bothers anyone:  * Get a rewards credit card * Pay the bill off in full every month * Redeem your points for cash back   You've now recovered a good portion of the fees back and have still had the convenience of not carrying cash and all of the other random ""benefits"" (extended warranty, travel protection, etc) cards carry these days.   Some of the programs with 5% cash back will put more back in your pocket than what the fees are since they generally run around 2-4%."

Many services charge prices that do not scale linearly with usage.  This is because the service provider has fixed costs that they must recoup by charging a rate with a fixed component.  A 5-mile taxi ride is unlikely to cost half what a 10-mile taxi ride costs.  Even a half sandwich at a sandwich place usually costs more than half of what a full sandwich costs.  In this respect, insurance is no different from many other items you may purchase.

The company that sold of the debt, does write off the loan [and books loss on balance sheet]. Depending on the Company's policy the amount written of as loss varies. Some Companies only show loss on Principal for the outstanding period [The interest income and charges is not booked]. Some companies would show loss on Principal and the accrued unpaid interest ... So if the total outstanding is say 10,000 and it was sold to collector at say 3,000/- the balance 7,000 is written off as loss. There are multiple reasons, one they don't have time or there are only few cases. But most of the times when on initial delay in payment, it goes to a collection agency for follow-up [and the loan is not actually sold]. The agency gets a commission [around 10-15%] for every successful payment they recover.... its only after some period it actually gets sold completely to the agency for a heavy discount price. Often at 10% the actual value. The collection agency works on threat technique, if they get 50% of face value, they may loss that threat perception and everyone would not pay even if they can ... so it makes more sense for them to get 200% of face value [added interest, charges and other stuff] from one customer rather than get 50% from 4 customers ...

OK, at least there is still an answer that doesn't seek to troll or be sarcastic.  I was thinking that it has to do with the fact that wealthy consumers in non-Western countries often desire to emulate Western lifestyles and consumer trends.


Question: Option on an option possible? (Have a LEAP, put to me?)

I understand what you're asking for (you want to write options ON call options... essentially the second derivative of the underlying security), and I've never heard of it. That's not to say it doesn't exist (I'm sure some investment banker has cooked something like this up at some point), but if it does exist, you wouldn't be able to trade it as easily as you can a put or a LEAP. I'm also not sure you'd actually want to buy such a thing - the amount of leverage would be enormous, and you'd need a massive amount of margin/collateral.  Additionally, a small downward movement in the stock price could wipe out the entire value of your option.

I'm in Estonia, so a while back I did some coding for a US company, who figured it would be cheaper to outsource to Estonia. Since I had too much on my plate at that time, I outsourced the task to a guy in the US, who was having a hard time finding a job, because of all the outsourcing.

I think the issue would be that Wachovia/Wells Fargo who converted the Traditional IRA to a Roth IRA has told the IRS that you did the conversion, and so the IRS will want taxes on  the money that came out of the Traditional IRA. You need to get Wells Fargo to issue a corrected 1099-R saying that it was a Roth to Roth roll-over, and possibly get a corrected 5498 for 2011 showing that the Wachovia Roth was converted to a Wells Fargo Roth. Else, the IRS might want an excise tax for a premature withdrawal from your Wachovia Roth, and assess penalties for excess contributions to a Traditional IRA in 2011 when the erroneous conversion was made, because to them it might look like you withdrew money from a Roth IRA, and made an excessive contribution to a Traditional IRA.

Dude you're literally trying to insult me by saying I have a job I don't have, but I guess there's not much you can actually say about my dope ass life. Go back to asking Reddit about which bars in NYC you can go to to make friends you awkward neckbeard lmaoo, talk about pathetic.

"Besides your credit score, there are other smart reasons to have a second line of credit.  (Your credit score doesn't affect you the majority of your life, but when it does whoooooo boy does it.) Should the first bank you have credit with create or find a clerical error, a second line of credit can provide a cushion while you sort it out with the first Should physically damage a card, or have it stolen, having a second backup at home will be helpful as you wait for a replacement. Getting a second line of credit with a different institution than your first allows you the flexibility to cancel one and move your business should the deal become unfavorable to you. Multiple lines of credit in of itself is a plus to your credit score (albeit a small one) You can organize your finances.  One card handles the recurring payments in your life, the second incidentals.  The expected activity type might make it easier to detect fraud. When you get your second line of credit, get it from a different institution than where you have any other business now.  (A credit union if you can, or a small local bank).  Make sure there is no annual fee, and if there is a reward, be certain it is worth it.  Cash back is my favorite because I can spend cash where I like, whereas ""points"" have to come out of product in their catalogs.  Lower interest rate is best of all.  Even though you always plan on paying it off every month like clockwork, you might one day run into an issue where you cannot.  Lower interest rate becomes very important in that plannings scenario."

Taylor Swift is popular precisely because she projects a fundamental decency and likeability that is mostly absent among the other poptarts.  The axis-of-strippers that is Beyonce', Madonna, and the rest of the rotting culture may be titilating, but everyone pretty much knows that all they're doing is selling softcore porn.  No one serious about music is listening to these popstar yowlings.  The London Symphony won't be accompanying the vocal stylings of Katie Perry anytime soon.  But, at least Swift is a likeable and apparently very nice young woman.  Beyonce et al should get some lessons in civility and adult behavior from her ...

>how could they possibly do that from a meaningful methodological point of view?  By years of experience, training, and hard work.  > Do you really think that have any real practical understanding of the situation,   Economically, yes  > would that make any difference at all to the travesty that is going on in Washington at the moment?  I doubt it. Thats not what I'm arguing.

Couple of ways they save money which doesn't seem significant but actually makes a big difference    * debit and cash only    * shoppers get and put away their own carts    * low shop size    * private label and high number of product turnover    * Low employee counts    * Low technology costs & decoration costs    * Cash on order (from shop to distributor)    * Just in time supply chain     * German efficiency


Question: How much house can a retired person afford

"Consider property taxes (school, municipal, county, etc.) summing to 10% of the property value.  So each year, another .02N is removed.  Assume the property value rises with inflation.  Allow for a 5% after inflation return on a 70/30 stock bond mix for N.   After inflation return.   Let's assume a 20% rate.  And let's bump the .05N after inflation to .07N before inflation.  Inflation is still taxable.   Result  Drop in value of investment funds due to purchase.   Return after inflation.   After-inflation return minus property taxes.   Taxes are on the return including inflation, so we'll assume .06N and a 20% rate (may be lower than that, but better safe than sorry).   Amount left.   If no property, you would have .036N to live on after taxes.  But with the property, that drops to .008N.  Given the constraints of the problem, .008N could be anywhere from $8k to $80k.   So if we ignore housing, can you live on $8k a year?  If so, then no problem.  If not, then you need to constrain N more or make do with less house.   On the bright side, you don't have to pay rent out of the .008N.  You still need housing out of the .036N without the house.   These formulas should be considered examples.  I don't know how much your property taxes might be.  Nor do I know how much you'll pay in taxes.  Heck, I don't know that you'll average a 5% return after inflation.  You may have to put some of the money into cash equivalents with negligible return.  But this should allow you to research more what your situation really is.   If we set returns to 3.5% after inflation and 2.4% after inflation and taxes, that changes the numbers slightly but importantly.  The ""no house"" number becomes .024N.  The ""with house"" number becomes  So that's $24,000 (which needs to include rent) versus -$800 (no rent needed).  There is not enough money in that plan to have any remainder to live on in the ""with house"" option.  Given the constraints for N and these assumptions about returns, you would be $800 to $8000 short every year.   This continues to assume that property taxes are 10% of the property value annually.  Lower property taxes would of course make this better.  Higher property taxes would be even less feasible.   When comparing to people with homes, remember the option of selling the home.  If you sell your .2N home for .2N and buy a .08N condo instead, that's not just .12N more that is invested.  You'll also have less tied up with property taxes.  It's a lot easier to live on $20k than $8k.   Or do a reverse mortgage where the lender pays the property taxes.  You'll get some more savings up front, have a place to live while you're alive, and save money annually.   There are options with a house that you don't have without one."

Highest possible is meaningless.  Ex: Use 17x Leverage on E-mini S&P 500 Futures, perfectly long before an uptick and short before a downtick every minute. Goes to the moon in a day of 1,440 minutes.  You are supposed to use a Buy-and-Hold SPY, with leverage that makes the Standard Deviation of SPY same as your Portfolio/Algorithm, as benchmark.

"You have a good thing going. One of the luxuries of being invested in an index fund for the long term is that you don't have to sweat the inevitable short term dips in the market. Instead, look at the opportunity that presents itself on market dips: now your monthly investment is getting in at a lower price. ""Buy low, sell high."" ""Don't lose money."" These are common mantras for long term investment mentality. 5-8 years is plenty of time -- I'd call it ""medium-term"". As you get closer to your goals (~2-3 years out) you should start slowly moving money out of your index fund and start dollar cost averaging out into cash or short-term bonds (but that's another question). Keep putting money in, wait, and sell high. If it's not high, wait another year or two to buy the house. A lot of people do the opposite for their entire lives: buying high, panic selling on the dips, then buying again when it goes up. That's bad! I recommend a search on ""dollar cost averaging"", which is exactly what you are doing right now with your monthly investments."

It would make sense to refuse a raise when it pushes your effective marginal 'tax' (including reduced benefits) above 100%.  The working poor (family of 4, 20K-40K in the US) often face marginal rates above 100% when you consider the phase out of various government benefits (EITC, insurance, housing,etc.)  You can see the research here and here.

"The only thing that makes a stock worthless is when the company goes out of business. Note that bankruptcy, by itself, does not mean the company is closing. It could successfully restructure its affairs and come out of bankruptcy with a better outlook. Being a small or unprofitable business may cause a company's to trade in the ""penny stock"" range, but there is still some value there. Since most dying companies will pass through the penny stock phase, you may be able to track down what you're looking for by finding companies who have been (or are about to be) delisted. Delisting is not death, it's just the point at which the company's shares no longer meet the qualifications to be traded on a particular exchange. If you find old stock certificates in your grandmother's sock drawer, they may be a treasure, or they may be worthless pieces of paper if the company changed its ownership and Grandma didn't know about it."

It is also not helped that governments globally are pressing banks to improve capital ratios; i.e. hold more in reserve. While this will reduce the likelihood of a bailout in the near future, it severely reduces the access to money and damages the economy.

CDR Group uses a Career Analysis Profile Questionnaire in order to determine the strengths of the job seeker and figure out how best to market those positive attributes. The questionnaire can be completed manually and mailed in, or electronically over the Internet.

"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-markets/feds-great-unwinding-lifts-dollar-china-rating-gets-the-chop-idUSKCN1BW03Z?il=0) reduced by 83%. (I'm a bot) ***** > NEW YORK - The U.S. Treasury yield curve flattened to a two-and-a half month low and key world stock markets fell on Thursday, as investors assessed indications from the U.S. Federal Reserve that it may raise interest rates a third time this year.  > U.S. stocks pulled back from their all-time highs, though bank stocks cheered the prospect of higher interest rates which should help their profits.  > China&#039;s markets were already closed by the time it came but it kept the pressure on emerging markets stocks.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/71lga0/feds_great_unwinding_lifts_dollar_china_rating/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~214093 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*: **percent**^#1 **market**^#2 **rate**^#3 **U.S.**^#4 **more**^#5"


Question: Recovering over-contribution to Social Security between two employers?

This is a common occurrence when somebody has multiple jobs in one year. The employer can't know if you have reached the annual limit. They know to stop when you have hit the maximum for their company, but don't have information on the other jobs. In fact the IRS doesn't let them factor in the other jobs. They have to keep making their payment until you hit the max for their company. When you fill out the 1040 there will be a line that checks that the total social security amount for each person was not over the annual limit. The extra will be refunded when you file your taxes. In the future if this happens again you can adjust your withholding to minimize the overage. For the example given in the question to get the 4K extra sooner, increase the number of allowances on the W-4.  You can under withhold federal income tax because you will over withhold social security tax.

"Definitions are in order: These definitions are important. Someone making 1,000,000 a year who spends all of it is poor. Someone who makes 500K, spends 450K a year and has three million in stocks and a paid-for million dollar home may be rich but they can't retire. They need another seven to eight million to retire. Someone with a million dollars in assets who makes 40K a year through their job, can be Financially Independent and retire.  This last example is important. In The Millionaire Next Door the authors share their discovery that the average millionaire accumulated their wealth with just a working income of around 50K (the book is a bit dated so the number should be elevated if you adjust for inflation). Finance Independent is a strange thing to wrap your head around and people with high incomes often fall victim to misunderstanding it. When figuring out how much a person needs to accumulate for their ""nest egg"", their working income is not a direct variable. Their spending and savings rate are. A doctor making 500K, who spends 450K needs to work for 51 years if they are planning to keep spending 450K/year (adjusted for inflation) forever. Someone making 60K starting at age 21 who saves 18K (30%), could retire at 49. Someone with a truly low income and poor, say 30K and under and living in a old developed nation, investing will help them a bit. Say they save 10% of their income, by the time they reach 65 (the typical age federal retirement pensions begin), they'll have enough money to live off of in perpetuity and in comfort.  They'll actually have a higher retirement income than income while they were working. But, it is challenging at those levels to save 10% of your net income. Events like your car randomly deciding to break down one day can destroy an entire year's saving."

I'm not mad at anyone, I am aware of what a business large and small have always done and will always do.  This is why we need to make some changes to the law.  If your company turns a profit at some level, you must be required to spend X dollars on your peoples benefits be it through direct compensation or healthcare/whatever.  I don't see a problem with a private company picking up the tab for their employees if they have the means to do so.  Why should you and I pay for Walmarts employees?

So like any market, the housing market will *on average* trend upward. But the extreme prices we're seeing in Toronto or San Francisco are not part of the normal market growth. There's a lot of factors that can affect housing outside of just increased demand. Here's a few of the big ones.  1) Low-Interest Rates: Since (2008? I think) interests rates have been really low, meaning mortgages are really low. If you can borrow money at 4% and the inflation rate is 8%, you've borrowed expensive dollars and are paying back in cheap dollars.  2)NIMBY (Not in my back yard): If you have enough land to build 10 houses or one 100 apartment building, what do you build? Theoretically the apartment building, but in reality, the people that already paid for their million dollar house, don't want a giant apartment complex bringing down the value of the neighborhood and ruining their views. So they pass laws preventing new and bigger buildings, meaning higher prices for the homes that already exist. And as a bonus, it's easier on the city to have 10 people who make a million dollars a year than a 100 people who make 100,000 a year.  Foreign investment: So there's a lot of places where people have money, but because of corruption or shaky economies, it's not safe to hold it there. So you buy properties in the U.S. or Canada because you know no one's going to seize it and it's (generally) not going to lose value. So you end up with foreign dollars competing with the local markets for housing, driving the price up.

"Here I thought I would not ever answer a question on this site and boom first ten minutes.  First and foremost I am in the automotive industry, specifically one of our core competencies is finance department management consulting and the sales process both for the sale of the care as well  as  the financial transaction. First and foremost new vehicle gross profits are nowhere near 20% for the dealership.  In an entry level vehicle like say a Toyota Corolla there is only a  few hundreds of dollars in markup from invoice to M.S.R.P.  There is also something called holdback that dealers get for achieving certain goals such as sales volume. These are usually pretty easy to hit. As a matter of fact I have never heard of a dealer not getting the hold back on a deal.  This hold back is there to cover overhead for the car, the cost of getting it ready to sell, having a lot to park it on, making it ready for delivery, offset some of the cost of sales labor  etc.  Most dealerships consider the holdback portion of the invoice to not be part of the deal when it comes to  negotiations.  Certain brands such as KIA and Chrysler have something called ""Dealer Cash"" these payouts are usually stair stepped according to volume and vary by dealer, location, past history, how the guys at the factory feel that day and any number of combinations.  Then there is CSI or Customer Service Index payments, these payments are usually made every 1/4 are on the Parts Statement not the Sales Doc and while they effect the dealers bottom line they almost never affect the sales managers or sales persons payroll so they are not considered a part of the cost of the car.  They are however extremely important to  the dealer and this is  why after you have your new car they want you to bring in your survey for a free oil change or something.  IF you are going to give a bad survey they want to throw it away and not send it in, if you are going to give a good survey they want to  make sure you fill it out correctly.  This is because lets say they ask you on a scale of 1-10 how was your sales person and you put a 9 that is a failing score. Dumb I know but that is how every factory CSI score system I have seen worked.  According to NADA the average New Vehicle gross profit including hold back and dealer cash is around $1000.00.  No where near 20%.  Dealerships would love it if they made 20% on your new F250 Supercrew Diesel at around $50,000.00.  One last thing there is something on the invoice called Wholesale Finance Reserve.  This is the amount of money the factory forwards to the Dealership to offset the cost of financing vehicle on the floor plan so they can have it for you to look at before you buy.  This is usually equal to around 3 months of interest and while you might buy a vehicle that has been on the lot for 2 days they have plenty that have been there much longer so this equals out in a fair to middling run store. General Mangers that know what they are doing can make this really pad their net profit to statement. On to incentives, there are basically 3 kinds.  Cash to customer in the form of rebates, Dealer Cash in the form of incentives to dealerships based on volume or the undesirability of a vehicle, and incentive rates or Subvented leases.  The rates are pretty self explanatory as they advertised as such (example 0% for 60 Months).  Subvented Leased are harder to figure out and usually not disclosed as they are hard to explain and also a source of increased profit.  Subvented leases are usually powered by lower cost of money called a money factor (think of it as an interest rate) that is discounted from the lease company or a subsidized residual.  Subsidized residuals are virtually verboten on domestic vehicles due to their poor resell values.  A subsidized residual works like this, you buy a Toyota Camry and the ALG (automotive lease guide) says it has a residual at 36 months of 48%.  Well Toyota Motor Credit says we will give you a subvented residual of 60% basically subsidizing a 2% increase in residual.  Since they do not expect to be able to sell the car at auction for that amount they have to set aside the 2% as a future expense.  What does this mean to you, it means a lower payment.  Also a good rule of thumb if you are told a money factor by your salesperson to figure out what the interest rate is just multiply it by 2400.  So if a money factor is give of .00345 you know your actual interest rate is a little bit lower than 8.28% (illustration purposes only money factors are much lower than that right now). So how does this save you money well a lease is basically calculated by multiplying the MSRP by the residual and then subtracting that amount from the ""Capitalized Cost"" which is the Price paid for the car - trade in + payoff + TT&L-Rebate-Down Payment.  That is the depreciation.  Then you divide that number by the term of the loan and you have the depreciation amount.  So if you have 20K CC and 10K R your D = 10K / 36 = 277 monthly payment.  For the rest of the monthly payment you add (I think been a long time since I did this with out a computer) the Residual plus the CC for $30,000 * MF of .00345 = 107 for a total payment of 404 ish.  This is not completely accurate but you can use it to  make sure a salesperson/finance person is not trying to do one thing and  say another as so often happens on leases. 0% how the  heck do  they make money at that, well its simple.  First in 2008 the Fed made all the ""Captive"" lenders into actual banks instead of whatever they were before.  So now they have access to the Fed's discounting window which with todays monetary policies make it almost free money.  In the past these lenders had to go through all kinds of hoops to raise funds and  securitize loans even for super prime credit.  Those days are essentially over.  Now they get their short term money just like Bank of America does.  Eventually they still bundle these loans and sell them.  So in the short term YOU pay for the 0% by giving up part or all of your rebate.  This is really important DO NOT GIVE up your rebate for 0% unless it makes sense to do so.  When you can get the money at 2.5% and get a $7000.00 rebate (customer cash) on that F250 or 0% take the cash.  First of all make the finance guy/gal show you the the difference in total cost they can do do this using the federal truth in lending disclosures on a finance contract.  Secondly how long will you keep the vehicle?  If you come out ahead by say $1500 by taking the lower rate but you usually trade out every three years this is not going to work.  Also and this is important if you are involved in a situation with a total loss like a stolen car or even worse a bad wreck before the breakeven point you lose that price break.  Finally on judging what is right for you, just know that future value of the vehicle on for resell or trade-in will take into effect all of these past rebates and value the car accordingly.  So if a vehicle depreciates 20% a year for the first 3 years the starting point will essentially be $7000.00 less than you actually paid,  using rough numbers. How does this help the dealers and car companies?  Well while a dealer struggles to make money on new cars the factory makes all of their money on the  new cars and the new car financing.  While your individual loan might lose money that money is offset by the loss of rebate and I think Ford does actually pay Ford Motor Credit Company the difference in the rate.  The most important thing is what happens later FMCC now has 2500 loans with people with perfect credit.  They can now use those loans to budle with people with not so perfect credit that they financed at 12%-18% and buy that money with interest rates in the 2%-3% range.  Well that is a hell of a lot of profit.  'How does it help the dealership, well the more super prime credit they have in their portfolio the more subprime credit the banks will buy for them.  This means they have more loans originated that are more profitable for them.  Say you come in for the 0% but have 590 credit score, they get FMCC to buy the deal because they have a good portfolio and you win because the dealer gets to buy the money at say 9% and sell it to you at say 12% making the spread.  You win there because you actually qualified for a rate of around 18% with a subprime company like Santander or Capital One (yes that capital one) so  you save a ton on your overall cost of the car. Any dealership that is half way well run makes as much or money in the finance and insurance office than the rest of the dealership.  When you factor in what a good F&I Director can do to get deals done with favorable terms that really goes up.  Think about that the guys sitting a desk drinking coffee making more than the  service department guys all put together. Well that was long winded but there I broke down the car business for whoever read this far."

The short answer is you are not required to.  The longer answer depends on whether you are referring to your organization as a sole proprietorship in your state, or for federal taxation.  For federal tax purposes, I would suggest filing each side job as a separate Sch C though.  The IRS uses the information you provide about your sole proprietorship to determine whether or not your categorization of expenses makes sense for the type of business you are.  This information is used by the IRS to help them determine who to audit.  So, if you are a service based business, but you are reporting cost of goods sold, you are likely to be audited.

Well, Lowes has always had a domestic, friendly, home-grown marketing appeal to them. Being based in Winston-Salem NC makes their brand a have small-American-city, friendly, non-threatening, community vibe. With this move, some of that could leave a lasting impression on some people. Certainly the 120 people and their friends and family who were laid off. And maybe some people will perceive their brand differently after reading this article/headline.

This isn't the case with everyone.  Now if you want to talk about BMW and Mercedes hybrids, the prices are so much higher it doesn't make sense financially, even if you consider the amount of money you'll save on gas.


Question: How to open a Mega Money Market account without an ssn?

According to the IRS:  Aliens who are not eligible to apply for a U.S. social security   number, or who do not meet the Social Security Administration's   evidence requirements for an SSN, may apply for an Individual Taxpayer   Identification Numbers (ITIN) from the Internal Revenue Service if   they have a valid tax reason for needing an ITIN, as explained in the   Form W-7 instructions. Seeing as you don't have a valid tax reason for an ITIN, your request will probably be denied by the IRS.

There is a measure of protection for investors. It is not the level of protection provided by FDIC or NCUA but it does exist: Securities Investor Protection Corporation What SIPC Protects SIPC protects against the loss of cash and securities – such as stocks   and bonds – held by a customer at a financially-troubled SIPC-member   brokerage firm. The limit of SIPC protection is $500,000, which   includes a $250,000 limit for cash. Most customers of failed brokerage   firms when assets are missing from customer accounts are protected.   There is no requirement that a customer reside in or be a citizen of   the United States. A non-U.S. citizen with an account at a brokerage   firm that is a member of SIPC is treated the same as a resident or   citizen of the United States with an account at a brokerage firm that   is a member of SIPC. SIPC protection is limited. SIPC only protects the custody function of   the broker dealer, which means that SIPC works to restore to customers   their securities and cash that are in their accounts when the   brokerage firm liquidation begins. SIPC does not protect against the decline in value of your securities.   SIPC does not protect individuals who are sold worthless stocks and   other securities. SIPC does not protect claims against a broker for   bad investment advice, or for recommending inappropriate investments. It is important to recognize that SIPC protection is not the same as   protection for your cash at a Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation   (FDIC) insured banking institution because SIPC does not protect the   value of any security. Investments in the stock market are subject to fluctuations in market   value. SIPC was not created to protect these risks. That is why SIPC   does not bail out investors when the value of their stocks, bonds and   other investment falls for any reason. Instead, in a liquidation, SIPC   replaces the missing stocks and other securities when it is possible   to do so.

There are peer to peer services these days which work by trying to match someone who wants to convert currency X to currency Y with other people who want to convert Y to X. Obviously this works better with major currencies. They tend to give you the midmarket interbank rate banks use to trade with each  less their commission of 1-2%. Banks can charge up to 5% and use different rates for buying and selling. Transfers may take a day or two, although you may be able to do it faster if you pay extra. Transferwise, CurrencyFair and MidPoint are examples of such services though there are many others. Here's a link to a newspaper article with more details.

"Joke warning: These days, it seems that rogue trading programs are the big market makers (this concludes the joke) Historically, exchange members were market makers. One or more members guaranteed a market in a particular stock, and would buy whatever you wanted to sell (or vice-versa). In a balanced market -- one where there were an equal number of buyers and sellers -- the spread was indeed profit for them. To make this work, market makers need an enormous amount of liquidity (ability to hold an inventory of stocks) to deal with temporary imbalances. And a day like October 29, 1929, can make that liquidity evaporate. I say ""historically,"" because I don't think that any stock market works this way today (I was discussing this very topic with a colleague last week, went to Wikipedia to look at the structure of the NYSE, and saw no mention of exchange members as market makers -- in fact, it appears that the NYSE is no longer a member-based exchange). Instead, today most (all?) trading happens on ""electronic crossing networks,"" where the spread is simply the difference between the highest bid and lowest ask. In a liquid stock, there will be hundreds if not thousands of orders clustered around the ""current"" price, usually diverging by fractions of a cent. In an illiquid stock, there may be a spread, but eventually one bid will move up or one ask will move down (or new bids will come in). You could claim that an entity with a large block of stock to move takes the role of market maker, but it doesn't have the same meaning as an exchange market maker. Since there's no entity between the bidder and asker, there's no profit in the spread, just a fee taken  by the ECN. Edit: I think you have a misconception of what the ""spread"" is. It's simply the difference between the highest bid and the lowest offer. At the instant a trade takes place, the spread is 0: the highest bid equals the lowest offer, and the bidder and seller exchange shares for money. As soon as that trade is completed, the spread re-appears. The only way that a trade happens is if buyer and seller agree on price. The traditional market maker is simply an entity that has the ability to buy or sell an effectively unlimited number of shares. However, if the market maker sets a price and there are no buyers, then no trade takes place. And if there's another entity willing to sell shares below the market maker's price, then the buyers will go to that entity unless the market's rules forbid it."

"This answer is applicable to the US.  Similar rules may hold in some other countries as well.   The shares in an open-ended (non-exchange-traded) mutual fund are not traded on stock exchanges and the ""market"" does not determine the share price the way it does for shares in companies as brokers make offers to buy and sell stock shares. The price of one share of  the mutual fund (usually called Net Asset Value (NAV) per share) is usually calculated at the close of business, and is, as the name implies, the net worth of all the shares in companies that the fund owns plus cash on hand etc divided by the number of mutual fund shares outstanding. The NAV per share of a mutual fund might or might not increase in anticipation of the distribution to occur, but the NAV per share very definitely falls on  the day that the distribution is declared. If you choose to re-invest your distribution in the same fund, then you will own more shares at a lower NAV per share but the total value of your investment will not change at all.  If you had 100 shares currently priced at $10 and  the fund declares a distribution of $2 per share, you will  be reinvesting $200 to buy more shares but the fund will be selling you additional shares at $8 per share (and of course, the 100 shares you hold will be priced at $8 per share too.  So, you will have 100 previous shares worth only $800 now + 25 new shares worth $200 for a total of 125 shares at $8 = $1000 total investment, just as before. If you take the distribution in cash, then you still hold the 100 shares but they are worth only $800 now, and the fund will send you the $200 as cash. Either way, there is no change in your net worth. However, (assuming that the fund is is not in a tax-advantaged account), that $200 is taxable income to you regardless of whether you reinvest it or take it as cash. The fund will tell you what part of that $200 is dividend income (as well as what part is Qualified Dividend income),  what part is short-term capital gains, and what part is long-term capital gains; you declare the income in the appropriate categories on your tax return, and are taxed accordingly. So, what advantage is there in re-investing? Well, your basis in those shares has increased and so if and when you sell the shares, you will owe less tax. If you had bought the original 100 shares at $10 and sell the 125 shares a few years later at $11 and collect $1375, you owe (long-term capital gains) tax on  just $1375-$1200 =$175  (which can also be calculated as $1 gain on each of the original 100 shares = $100 plus $3 gain on the 25 new shares = $175). In the past, some people would forget the intermediate transactions and think that they had invested $1000 initially and gotten $1375 back for a gain of $375 and pay taxes on $375 instead. This is less likely to occur now since mutual funds are now required to report more information on the sale to the shareseller than they used to in the past. So, should you buy shares in a mutual fund right now? Most mutual fund companies publish preliminary estimates in November and December of what distributions each fund will be making by the end of the year. They also usually advise against purchasing new shares during this period because one ends up ""buying a dividend"".  If, for example, you bought those 100 shares at $10 on the Friday after Thanksgiving and the fund distributes that $2 per share  on December 15, you still have $1000 on December 15, but now owe taxes on $200 that you would not have had to pay if you had postponed buying those shares till after the distribution was paid. Nitpickers: for simplicity of exposition, I have not gone into the detailed chronology of when the fund goes ex-dividend, when the distribution is recorded,  and when cash is paid out, etc., but merely treated all these events as happening simultaneously."

"Except the list of exceptions seems to be growing and growing.   You can only go bankrupt once, and certain loans are exempt from bankruptcy anyway.  Want to level the playing field?  Make CEO's responsible too for ""certain debts"" like payroll."

"At no point is it ever a good idea to ""stop making payments to show them [you] mean business"". When you signed up for the credit card account, you agreed to pay what you charged, and any applicable interested accrued on the accounts. You are legally responsible for that debt, and you can be sued, if they are so inclined. Many times, settlement agencies are employed because a risk assessment operator (or whatever they're called at your cc company) calculated that they are currently financially better off settling for a reduced balance than attempting to chase you for the full amount. As soon as the terms of your refinance hits your credit history, that changes. To reiterate and make it clear: This is a very dangerous approach to breaking credit card debt, and I would not advise that anybody proceed with it. EDIT: If you offer 50% of the balance in a lump sum payment, they decline, and you continue with non-payment, they have reason to believe that you are financially capable of making payments, and are much more likely to seek legal action."

Its a good question but the answer is not at all obvious if one considers and understands the media.  The fact that the electronic media of which the 'internet' makes up less than than a single percentage has thus far allowed morons like the RIAA play with it is nothing more than a tolerance.    Governmental overview as a side note is amusing in that it illustrates the degree of ignorance displayed by our policy makers.  They dont seem to understand that communication is a philosophy and the port 80 web sphere is one path upon thousands.   They can't control what even they think they understand... and they understand nothing.  We control the routers. We control the tables. We control the traffic. We control all the black magic that these morons don't understand and that's all of it.  We can't be stopped.


Question: What is the fastest way to retire, using passive income on real estate

It is worth noting first that Real Estate is by no means passive income.  The amount of effort and cost involved (maintenance, legal, advertising, insurance, finding the properties, ect.) can be staggering and require a good amount of specialized knowledge to do well. The amount you would have to pay a management company to do the work for you especially with only a few properties can wipe out much of the income while you keep the risk. However, keshlam's answer still applies pretty well in this case but with a lot more variability.  One million dollars worth of property should get you there on average less if you do much of the work yourself.  However, real estate because it is so local and done in ~100k chunks is a lot more variable than passive stocks and bonds, for instance, as you can get really lucky or really unlucky with location, the local economy, natural disasters, tenants... Taking out loans to get you to the million worth of property faster but can add a lot more risk to the process.   Including the risk you wouldn't have any money on retirement.  Investing in Real Estate can be a faster way to retirement than some, but it is more risky than many and definitely not passive.

On most proxy statements (all I have ever received) you have the ability to abstain from voting.  Just go down the list and check Abstain then return the form.  You will effectively be forfeiting your right to vote. EDIT: According to this, after January 1, 2010 abstaining and trashing the voting materials are the same thing.  Prior to January 1, 2010 your broker could vote however they wanted on your behalf if you chose not to vote yourself.  The one caveat is this seems to only apply to the NYSE (unless I am reading it wrong).  So not sure about stocks listed on the NASDAQ.

Check with Lawyer and CA who deals with international laws. It maybe illegal in Saudi Arabia. From India tax point of view, any credits into NRE account is not taxable. However credits to friends/family will be treated as GIFT and friends/family will be liable to pay a gift tax if such transfer are more than Rs 50,000/- per year. Although FEMA does not prohibit explicitly such arrangement, these look like round about way of moving money and can be investigated.

heh well your aging faster than I, im not even 40 and this shit is making me feel old.  the world is being blinded by bankers and elitists and all people can think about is cats.  We have the opportunity to be in contact and perform great things, and some of us do, but then theres the front page of reddit in October of 2012 which is full of cats and meme's.  I dont watch tv, im very selective in viewing.  And i do understand the internet mentality, i have been a part of it since it began.  From 0day to lolcats.  I will laugh when some of these kids today dont get the jobs they want because they are online forever drunk, half naked, throwing up, giving the finger to people, lying in gutters, etc.    The internet will be real funny in another ten years, when all the people today have internet hangover like it was a bad party that wont go away.

Some folks are speculating that they did this to propagate the Amazon Go technology, which I don't think WFM customers would like very much (shopping at Whole Foods is a social experience). Others have even speculated it's a deal to acquire more real estate. Seems to me like they just took over the grocery-delivery space. And they'll probably crush it. There's a Whole Foods about five blocks from my house, but when I'm drunk and having a party I'd rather not get in the car to pick up more charcuterie or wine. Would be dope if I could get a quick delivery whose extra costs were covered by my prime membership.

Volume and prices are affected together by how folks feel about the stock; there is no direct relationship between them. There are no simple analysis techniques that work.  Some would argue strongly that there are few complex analysis techniques that work either, and that for anyone but full-time professionals. And there isn't clear evidence that the full-time professionals do sufficiently better than index funds to justify their fees. For most folks, the best bet is to diversify, using low-overhead index funds, and simply ride with the market rather than trying to beat it.

If it became a choice of reading books versus finding internships in the industry I would choose the latter.   If it is supplemental material to the internship I think that the ones you have listed are fine. Reading a book about an ever changing industry really isn't going to get you ahead. Experience is. That being said topics related to liquidity, repo transactions, and risk management to be key if you are entering the financial industry.  For prop trading there aren't going to be too many people writing about a how to manual on the industry because then they have more competition with their experience. IMO That is why you need to work with these people and acquire the knowledge firsthand.  Trading is not something you can read about you need to do it. Especially when you are competing with people who have done it their whole lives.

But an axiomatic approach only works in a deterministic environment, it does not work in a probabilistic environment. By your own arguments, because humans have free will so economics cannot be equated with a deterministic branch like physics. At this point now you are just contradicting yourself over and over.   And it depends entirely on how accurate the axioms are. If observations do not match equation outcomes, then while the mathematics of the equation might be sound, the obvious conclusion is that the axioms themselves are faulty.


Question: How to calculate car insurance quote

First you should understand the basics of how insurance companies make money: In a simple scenario, assume 1,000 have car insurance. Assume that on average, 100 people have accidents per year, and that each accident costs $10,000. So, we can expect total costs to be $1,000,000 per year. Some of those costs will be paid by the drivers, who have some sort of 'deductible'. That is - the insurance company will only cover costs after the driver has themself paid some initial amount [something like, the first $1,000 of repairs is paid by the driver]. So now the insurance company expects to have to pay out $900,000 in total claims this year. If they want to pay those claims (and also pay their administrative costs, and earn a profit), they might want to have $1,250,000 in revenue. Across 1,000 people, that would be $1,250 / year in insurance premiums. Of course, the big question for the insurance company is: how much will they really need to pay out in insurance claims each year? The better they can predict that number, the more profitable they can be [because they can charge a much more accurate amount, which can earn them new customers and gives them insurance {pun} that each new customer is actually profitable to them on average]. So the insurance company spends a lot of time and money trying to predict your likelihood of a car accident. They use a lot of metrics to do this. Some might be statistical hogwash that they charge you because they feel they can [if every insurance company charges you extra for driving a 2-door instead of a 4-door, then they all will], and some might be based in reality. So they attempt to correlate all of the items in your list, to see if any of those items indicates that you should be charged more (or less) for your insurance. This is equal parts art and science, and a lot of it comes down to how they market themselves. ie: if an insurance company gives a discount for being in college, is that because college drivers are better drivers, or is it because they want to increase the number of young customers they have, so they can keep those customers for life? Therefore how each metric factors into your calculation will be based on the company using it. It would basically be impossible to 'come up with' the same answer as the insurance company by having the information you provided, because of how heavily dependant that answer is on statistics + marketing. As for how your state matters - some states may have different accident rates, and different payout systems. For example - is Hawaii driving more dangerous because of all the tourists driving rented cars faster than they should? Is New York less expensive to insure because better public health care means less cost is borne by the insurance company in the event of an accident [I have no idea if either of these things are the case, they are purely for hypothetical discussion purposes].  In short, make sure you get quotes from multiple providers, and understand that it isn't just the cost that changes. Check changes in coverage and deductibles as well [ie: if one company charges you $100 / month when everyone else charges $200 / month - make sure that the cheaper company doesn't limit its coverage in ways that matter to you].

This sounds like a TV ad. Many, many people were not as lucky as you. Do you think the millions of Americans who want to see Ocare trashed are morons and making it up because of muh politics?? Honestly, answer me that

Sorry to call you out on this, but your numbers are definitely off. If someone takes you seriously you'll be misleading them and I'd like to avoid that. Maybe you had this conversation with your friends many years ago when salaries were lower?  The big consulting firms all have set base salary and signing bonus for all entry level positions in the US. Everyone in the starting class out of undergrand has the same starting salary (across all geographic regions). Depending on the firm and your performance, you then receive a year end bonus (or no bonus at all). For MBB, you can expect close to a 6 figure salary in your first year. With an MBA, you're closer to $200k with bonus.  Source: I work for a top consulting firm, but here are some hard figures: http://managementconsulted.com/consulting-jobs/2012-management-consulting-salaries-undergraduate-post-mba/#

"There are likely to be two approaches: An autodialer of any description would be more than capable of sending an SMS or initiating a direct telephone call with any set of telephone numbers.  Such autodialiers can run off a personal computer via VoIP or some such third-party.  As to getting the numbers, it can be either from a purchased list (if they're serious about this and are obeying any call opt-out lists) or simply a number range dialed sequentially, whether they work or not. In a more serious operation, any returns are fed directly to a call centre where real human beings then initiate direct contact.  Otherwise it is simply a fishing expedition and any valid numbers can then be sold to other agencies as a screened list (and, therefore, more valuable). From an SMS perspective, anyone can purchase a vendor-level SMS Gateway subscription (of which there are loads of vendors - and note the number that allow ""web-to-SMS"") which permits you to receive and respond to any SMS received. This is always about the ""law of large numbers"".  If they can get in the hundreds of thousands of valid numbers and a small number respond then they can make money.  Like any spam, because a few are gullible, the rest of us are targets too. Update: A few searches for ""software auto sms"" and similar results in a fair number of prospects.  As I don't wish this to become too much of a ""how-to"" I'm not going to link."

Want to know why your cable bill is so high? Blame the four letter sports network. About $20 of your non tax/fee cable charges go straight to those assholes and then by way to the three letter professional sports outfits and by way of them your local bling wearing pro athlete who promptly blow it.  Ditch the coaxial.

First let's define some terms. Your accrued benefit is a monthly benefit payable at your normal retirement age (usually 65). It is usually a life-only benefit but may have a number of years guaranteed or may have a survivor piece. It is defined by a plan formula (ie, it is a defined benefit). A lump sum is how much that accrued benefit is worth right now. Lump sums are based on applicable interest rates and mortality tables specified by the IRS (interest rates are released monthly, mortality annually). Your plan can either use the same interest rates for a whole year, or they can use new ones each month. Affecting your lump sum is whether your accrued benefit is payable now (immediately, you are age 65), or later (deferred, you are now age 30). For example, instead of being paid an annuity assume you are paid just one payment of $1,000 on your 65th birthday. The lump sum of that for a 65 year old would be $1,000 since there would be no interest discount, and no chance of dying before payment. For a 30 year old, at 4% interest the lump sum would be about $237 (including mortality discount). At age 36 the lump sum is $246. So the lump sum will get bigger just because you get older. Very important is the interest discount. At age 30 in the example, 2% interest would produce a $467 lump sum. And at 6% $122. The bigger the rate, the smaller the lump sum because interest helps an amount now grow bigger in the future. To complicate things, since 2008 the IRS bases lump sums on 3 different interest rates. The monthy annuity payments made within 5 years of the lump sum date use the 1st rate, past 5 and within 20 years use the 2nd rate, and past that use the 3rd rate. Since you are age 30, all of your monthly annuity payments would be made after 20 years, so that makes it simple since we'll only have to look at the 3rd rate. When you reach age 45 the 2nd rate will kick in. Here is the table of interest rates published by the IRS: http://www.irs.gov/Retirement-Plans/Minimum-Present-Value-Segment-Rates You'll find your rates above on the 2013 line for Aug-12. That means your lump sum is being made in 2013 and it is being based on the month August 2012. Most likely your plan will use the same rates for its entire plan year. But what is your plan year? If it is the calendar year, then you would have a 5 month lookback for the rates. But if is a September to August plan year with a 1 month lookback, the rates would have changed between August and September. Your August lump sum would be based on 4.52%, your September on would be based on 5.58% (see the All line for Aug-13). For comparison, a 30 year old with a $100 annuity payable at age 65 would have a lump sum value of $3,011 at 4.52%, but a lump sum value of $1,931 at 5.58%. The change in your accrued benefit by month will obviously have some impact on the lump sum value, but not as much as the change in interest rates if there is one. The amount they actually contribute to the plan has nothing to do with the value of the lump sum though.

"Yes. The US Mint has a deal where you can buy dollar coins for face value, free shipping and can charge them to your card. They come in small boxes of 10 x $25 rolls of coins. I'm sure your landlord will be happy to accept cash for the rent.  Upon further reflection you spelled it ""cheque"" which means these coins are not legal tender for you. You might want to add your country to the tags.  Note: This 'deal' is no longer available. It was (mis)used to get points/miles on credit cards, and the coins deposited at the bank. There's now a premium to buy the coins on line."

So you're expecting people to go in debt getting a degree for jobs that don't require an advanced education and will not likely pay enough for them to pay off their student loan debt. That in the words of the author of this article is just plain dumb.


Question: How to protect myself against unauthorized recurring CC charges?

"The bank SHOULD be able to issue you a new card without letting vendors roll over the recurring payments. In fact, I've never had a bank move recurring payments to a new card automatically, or even upon request; they've always told me to contact the vendor and give them my new card number. So go back to the bank, tell them specifically that you have a security issue and you want the new card issued WITHOUT carrying over any recurring charges, and see if they can do it properly. If not: 1) Issue a ""charge back"" every time a bogus charge comes in. This costs the vendor money, and should convince them to stop trying to access your card. It's a hassle because you have to keep contacting the bank about the bad charges, but it won't cost you more than time and a phone call or letter.  (The bank can tell you what their preferred process is for this.) 2) Consider moving to a bank that isn't stupidly over-helpful."

"You are not smart.   The average person works more than 25 years. And because it's an average earnings increase, OF COURSE EVERYONE DOESN'T REACH IT. By the way, the greatest predictor of a person not reaching it is that person getting a liberal arts degree. And since you seem to want to do baseless math, I'll let you go ahead and decide how much the other 10% has to make in order for it to be true.   The point is that if you go to college, particularly to get a more valuable degree, you are making an astoundingly good investment. Are there exceptions? Absolutely. There are always exceptions. That doesn't disprove the facts.   Go look at the actual statistics by major or career. Don't bring this, ""I'll bet"" nonsense into the argument as if it proves anything."

"I believe money market ""funds"" (ie a mutual fund) would pay dividends, and you would get a 1099-DIV. A money market ""account"" however is probably actually a bank account, and you would get a 1099-INT for that. It depends how the broker has set it up. I have one of each with different brokers.  If your ""money market"" statements mention anything about FDIC coverage, it is likely an ""account"" (ie a bank account) and will pay interest, not dividends."

Im not gonna get into the rabit hole about the direction of this country dont have nearly enough time for that lol but i acrually agree with u on alot of what u said actually.     >I have an issue with people using any drug everyday. But most people don't drink and get drunk daily.    Do u find issue with a person having a beer or a couple glasses of wine every other day? Same applies to mj most users arent getting completely blasted everyday and i have sources to prove it if youre interested.   >But to reply to what you said, things like alcohol have rules. You can't drink everywhere, you can't drink and drive, etc... There needs to be some rules for MJ.  Not trying to be rude but you havent even  done your research on mj laws in your own state. Prop 64 is almost identical to drinking laws so you're absolutely incorrect here   >I'm completely okay with medicinal use, but most people don't use it in that way.   Youre right but my point was alcohol is perfectly legal and offers no medicinal value isn't that a bit ridiculous?   With all due respect man you dont seem like an unintelligent person but you are greatly misinformed about alot of this stuff. I think youre a bit hung up politcal divides conservative vs liberal. You'd greatly benefit from educating yourself on the matter of mj. There's a reason why many conservatives also support mj legalzation including myself. Id be willing to send u some credible information if you're interested.

This is called an in-plan Roth conversion and is discussed by the IRS here. If your 401(k) has a Roth option then it likely also has a provision to convert pre-tax dollars, but you'll have to check with the administrator to be sure. They could also potentially limit the type of money that can be converted. But most likely you should be able to convert any amount you want, and since it's all pre-tax (your contributions, employer matching, and earnings), it doesn't really matter which money is converted because it's all equivalent. One caveat is you won't able to convert any employer matching that hasn't fully vested.

"SOS is Secretary of State. SOS number is the number the Secretary of State office assigned to your entity. You can find it on the LLC application form that you submitted (assuming you kept the copy of your application returned to you), or by searching for your entity on the SOS site here (the first column, ""entity number"", is what you're looking for)."

“For example,” says the report, “75-year solvency could be achieved by raising taxes or reducing benefits for new recipients by about one-fifth if we started today. However, if policy makers wait until 2034, payroll taxes would have to be increased by nearly one third and it would be impossible to achieve solvency solely from reducing benefits for new beneficiaries.”    Social Security was enacted in 1935. Medicare was enacted in 1965. Life expectancy at those times was 61 and 70, respectively. Today, average life expectancy is 80.   Pushing the receipt age for these benefits makes the most sense and results in a two-fold savings, 1) benefits put into the system through additional payroll deduction and, 2) benefits are not taken out of the system.

">I'm curious to know if you or any of your relatives have ever been declared as being mentally ill or having a psychological disorder.   There ARE (but only a handful) some valid ""mental illnesses"" -- but by and large the DSM is filled with little more than ""social scams"".  And as far as anecdotes, I have known quite a few people who have been ""diagnosed"" with a wide variety of so called ""disorders"" -- most of them are quite happy to accept the label, as it can then be used as a justification for their behavior and/or for claiming benefits and malingering. (No one ever said that psychology wasn't a ""useful"" fraud -- a lot of people believe and think it to be quite ""useful"" -- just as a lot of other people think astrology is.)  >If most of psychology is all BS, then that just makes everyone else stupid for spending all of their money to get ""treated."" And, really if we are that stupid (stupid enough to believe such a huge lie) I would then agree with the (25% of americans suffer from mental illness) statement because you have to be pretty stupid to be told such a huge lie and not figure it out.   And... whoever claimed that the majority of the human population were anything *but* easily duped idiots?  I certainly never have.  >Another thing: if it is so easy to tell that psychology is a scam, then why is there (in general) cross-field(scholars from physics, biology, history, language, medicine, etc) acceptance of psychology as a science?   Chiefly because the majority of people in those other sciences (even the hard sciences) are rather dumb and easily duped themselves (most are mediocrities who have only ""rote"" knowledge of their own fields) -- and just as with religions, psychology/psychiatry offers a eclectic mixture of theoretical bases that they accept or reject on an ad hoc anecdotal basis, mostly without even any superficial investigation much less anything more thorough. (And in the cases where someone HAS investigated the claims/theories, the are often very easily debunked -- Cf John Ioannidis' work.)  Add in that many drugs & substances (which pre-existed psychology & psychiatry) ARE in fact effective in changing thoughts and behaviors (duh! that's like saying water is ""wet"") -- and which have become the main ""tool"" (and then via a pragmatic extrapolation used to create a ""causal"" theoretical basis -- the whole ""brain chemical imbalance"" malarkey -- even though there is no objective evidence to validate the theory {beyond the affect of the drugs which cannot be independent evidence, since that would be tautological -- like saying the reason water is ""wet"" is because of it's ""wetness properties""})."


Question: Am I exposed to currency risk when I invest in shares of a foreign company that are listed domestically?

"Yes, you're still exposed to currency risk when you purchase the stock on company B's exchange. I'm assuming you're buying the shares on B's stock exchange through an ADR, GDR, or similar instrument. The risk occurs as a result of the process through which the ADR is created. In its simplest form, the process works like this: I'll illustrate this with an example. I've separated the conversion rate into the exchange rate and a generic ""ADR conversion rate"" which includes all other factors the bank takes into account when deciding how many ADR shares to sell. The fact that the units line up is a nice check to make sure the calculation is logically correct. My example starts with these assumptions: I made up the generic ADR conversion rate; it will remain constant throughout this example. This is the simplified version of the calculation of the ADR share price from the European share price:  Let's assume that the euro appreciates against the US dollar, and is now worth 1.4 USD (this is a major appreciation, but it makes a good example):  The currency appreciation alone raised the share price of the ADR, even though the price of the share on the European exchange was unchanged. Now let's look at what happens if the euro appreciates further to 1.5 USD/EUR, but the company's share price on the European exchange falls:  Even though the euro appreciated, the decline in the share price on the European exchange offset the currency risk in this case, leaving the ADR's share price on the US exchange unchanged. Finally, what happens if the euro experiences a major depreciation and the company's share price decreases significantly in the European market? This is a realistic situation that has occurred several times during the European sovereign debt crisis.   Assuming this occurred immediately after the first example, European shareholders in the company experienced a (43.50 - 50) / 50 = -13% return, but American holders of the ADR experienced a (15.95 - 21.5093) / 21.5093 = -25.9% return. The currency shock was the primary cause of this magnified loss.  Another point to keep in mind is that the foreign company itself may be exposed to currency risk if it conducts a lot of business in market with different currencies. Ideally the company has hedged against this, but if you invest in a foreign company through an ADR (or a GDR or another similar instrument), you may take on whatever risk the company hasn't hedged in addition to the currency risk that's present in the ADR/GDR conversion process. Here are a few articles that discuss currency risk specifically in the context of ADR's: (1), (2). Nestle, a Swiss company that is traded on US exchanges through an ADR, even addresses this issue in their FAQ for investors. There are other risks associated with instruments like ADR's and cross-listed companies, but normally arbitrageurs will remove these discontinuities quickly. Especially for cross-listed companies, this should keep the prices of highly liquid securities relatively synchronized."

What's crazy is that you hear a lot (comparatively so) about energy buyers and sellers, but not about the actual distributors. Its like being the stooge for the middle man. You think you are going to make good money, but its nothing compared to the big guy.

"People just don't think about the dangers of Direct Debit- just Internet search to easily find out about the huge amount of people that have had problems, companies taking too much, the wrong time etc, making them go overdrawn and into fees (£30 for every bounced DD)& interest etc. Yes the DD guarantee IS useless, if you complain to your bank they almost invariably tell you to take it up with the company issuing the DD. Or if the bank even DOES (after much begging) get the money restored for you, did you know that the company can simply REINSTATE the DD amount and you'll have to go to your bank to get it reversed AGAIN. Banks have even admitted to distressed customers ""DD originators have every right to reinstate DD amounts if they believe they have an outstanding unpaid debt!!!!"" (And there was me thinking the money in my account was mine and what gets paid out is under my control- no longer true once you sign a DD mandate!) The astounding thing is that once anyone has got your sort code & AC no they can put it on eg any charity donation newspaper form and set up a DD- the bank doesn't check the signature or anything at all once the details are transmitted electronically to them by the charity's bank. (I learned this from someone who used to write DD software for banks). Please check out this very telling article http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7174760.stm The onus is on YOU to notice the payment you didn't authorise! That's how wide open the system is that the all powerful commercial banks have unleished on us permitted by our supplicant and negligent governments.  Moral of the story: Don't EVER give your AC details on DD mandates to ANY company you need to pay, use standing orders (which YOU have total control over) to pay them or electronic banking (where you ring your bank every time you get a bill) to transfer the money, or pay by cheque the bill at your bank branch or at a PO or by post. Carefully guard your AC numbers and watch your statements like a hawk every month.  One final point how do I manage to avoid DD (where I live in the UK) without being penalised? Answer: 1) My UK gas & elec ACs are with Scottish & Southern energy EQUIPOWER tariff which charges everyone the same low tariff HOWEVER they pay. 2) My landline phone- I ditched BT as soon as they started penalising and changed to Post Office homephone exactly the same service, copper telephone line & exchange equipment & IN ALL ASPECTS (line rental & free periods) CHEAPER than BT & no extra charge at all for paying by cheque at any post office- EVERY bill.3) Council Tax & Inland Revenue charge nothing extra for paying by cheue either at your bank, the PO or by post. 4) I don't bother with Gym membership- I just WALK a lot!, 4) I take the risk and don't bother with AA or home insurance as I am an engineer and able to forecast and carry out all my own home repairs and build in stiff burglary prevention measures, locks alarms etc.  Stop doing what you're told people- think about the possible downsides later when the commercial companies suggest to you ways of doing things that benefit them. Telling you the upsides but not the less obvious serious downsides."

DeFuniak Springs Bradshaw`s Painting are very professional and efficient and did a great job making sure every detail of the paint job was done to our satisfaction. I would recommend them to anyone who needs some painting work done on their home or business.

From a slightly different perspective, in my experience of buying a house you will find some unexpected costs due repairs that need to be made which were overlooked during the home inspection etc. You will need some financial cushion to fall back onto for these unexpected costs so for that reason alone I'd try to pay off as much of the credit card debt as I can.

"If you and your family have decided to stay in the home while the project is ""on"", the first thing that you should arrange is the privacy.However, if you have decided to relocate to some other house for this renovation process, it is important that you pay attention towards the security aspect of your home."

I don't think that you'll notice a difference in the NAV in a fund with fees that are low as the Vanguard Total Stock Market Fund. Their management fees are incorporated into the NAV, but keep in mind that the fund has a total of $144 billion in assets, with $66 billion in the investor class. The actual fees represent a tiny fraction of the NAV, and may only show up at all on the day they assess the fees. With Vanguard total stock market, you notice the fee difference in the distributions. In the example of Vanguard Total Stock Market, there are institutional-class shares (like VITPX with a minimum investment of $200M) with still lower costs -- as low as 0.0250% vs. 0.18% for the investor class. You will notice a different NAV and distributions for that fund, but there may be other reasons for the variation that I'm not familar with, as I'm not an institutional investor.

David Schechtmann provide the best services are set this week for a US soldier from Tennessee who was unaccounted for after being killed by German troops during World War II.Media outlets reports a funeral for Pfc. Reece Gass will be held Saturday at Doughty-Stevens Funeral Home in Greeneville. He’ll be buried with full military honors at a cemetery in Cross Anchor.


Question: Can't the account information on my checks be easily used for fraud?

Yes, and there are almost no checks (no pun intended) on people pulling money from your account using a routing number. It is an EXTREMELY insecure system. If you want a real Halloween scare, read this article: Easy Check Fraud Technique Draws Scrutiny. Unfortunately you just have to live with it. If you are curious why this loophole is allowed to continue, consider how hard it is to close it without undermining the convenience of checks. Short of you going to the bank with each person you write a check to and showing ID to validate the transaction, I don't see how you could continue to use a negotiable instrument like this without such a security hole.  The ultimate answer is going to have to be replacing checks with other means of payment.

No one put regulations in place before they were needed. Let's not be a fucking moron. Corporations were abusing shit and when the government got sick Of their shit they put regulations in place. They didn't just decide to say 'stop building a house if you see a turtle so we can move it' if contractors were not killing endangered turtles. You're just ignorant as fuck. And by the way, were already going to hit below 2005 emission levels in the next few years due to free market.

Yes I know, thats why I actually used google.   >> In the United States, the overall cancer death rate has declined since the early 1990s. The most recent SEER Cancer Statistics Review, updated in September 2016, shows that cancer death rates decreased by:  >>1.8% per year among men from 2004 to 2013 >>1.4% per year among women from 2004 to 2013 >>1.4% per year among children ages 0–19 from 2009 to 2013 >>Although death rates for many individual cancer types have also declined, rates for a few cancers have stabilized or even increased.  >>As the overall cancer death rate has declined, the number of cancer survivors has increased. These trends show that progress is being made against the disease, but much work remains. Although rates of smoking, a major cause of cancer, have declined, the U.S. population is aging, and cancer rates increase with age. Obesity, another risk factor for cancer, is also increasing.  https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/understanding/statistics

Read the article, the Tesla model S 60 has a 75kwh battery the same as a 75, they were sold as a cheaper car with an upgrade option at any time, this only upgraded all 60s to 75s temporarily to escape from the hurricane, any owner of a 60 knows they can activate this at any time by paying up to the 75 price. They are not extending into the higher and lower charge capacity than the recommended ban

It has got to do with the irrationality of humans.  The so called long term investor is in it for the long term, they are not worried about market fluctuations nor timing the market. But yet they will aim to try to get a bargain when they buy in.  It is contradictory in a way. Think about it; if I buy a stock and it drops by 30% I am not worried because I am in it for the long term, but I am worried about getting 1% off when I buy it.  They usually tend to buy when the stock starts falling. However, what they don’t realise is when a stock starts falling there is no telling when it will stop. So even if they get a bargain for that day, it is usually quickly wiped out a few days later. Instead, of waiting for the price to find support and start recovering, they are eager to buy what they think is a bargain. I think this type of long term investing is very risky, and the main reason is because the investor has no plan. They just try to buy so called bargain stocks and hold them until they need the money (usually in retirement). But what happens if the stock price is lower when they want to retire than when they bought it? I hope no long term investor was trying to retire in 2008. If they simply had a plan to indicate when they would buy and under what conditions they would sell, and have a risk management plan in place, then maybe they could reduce their risk somewhat and conserve their capital. A good article to read on this is What's Wrong With Long-Term Investing.

Bill’s Lemonade was first sold at county fairs and festivals by a guy named Bill and his wife. From the very start they used a unique process which they perfected, combining select ingredients and a handmade touch to create the best fresh lemonade.

"**2017 Shayrat missile strike**  The 2017 Shayrat missile strike took place on the morning of 7 April 2017, and involved the launch of 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles by the United States from the Mediterranean Sea into Syria, aimed at the Shayrat Airbase controlled by the Syrian government. The strike was executed under responsibility of U.S. President Donald Trump, as a direct response to the Khan Shaykhun chemical attack that occurred on 4 April.  The strike was the first unilateral military action by the United States targeting Ba'athist Syrian government forces during the Syrian Civil War. Trump stated shortly thereafter, ""It is in this vital national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons.""  The Syrian Air Force launched airstrikes against the rebels from the base only hours after the American attack.  ***  ^[ [^PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=kittens_from_space) ^| [^Exclude ^me](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiTextBot&message=Excludeme&subject=Excludeme) ^| [^Exclude ^from ^subreddit](https://np.reddit.com/r/finance/about/banned) ^| [^FAQ ^/ ^Information](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiTextBot/wiki/index) ^| [^Source](https://github.com/kittenswolf/WikiTextBot) ^| [^Donate](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiTextBot/wiki/donate)   ^] ^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.28"


Question: Definition of gross income (Arizona state tax filing requirements)

Disclaimer: I am not a tax professional. Please don't rely on this answer in lieu of professional advice. If your sole source of Arizona income is your commercial property, use the number on line 17 of your federal form 1040. This number is derived from your federal Schedule E. If you have multiple properties (or other business income from S corporations or LLCs), use only the Schedule E amount pertaining to the AZ property.

> At $31 billion, GE’s pension shortfall is the biggest among S&P 500 companies and 50 percent greater than any other corporation in the U.S. It’s a deficit that has swelled in recent years as Immelt spent more than $45 billion on share buybacks to win over Wall Street and pacify activists like Nelson Peltz. >  > Part of it has to do with the paltry returns that have plagued pensions across corporate America as ultralow interest rates prevailed in the aftermath of the financial crisis. But perhaps more importantly, GE’s dilemma underscores deeper concerns about modern capitalism’s all-consuming focus on immediate results, which some suggest is short-sighted and could ultimately leave everyone -- including shareholders themselves -- worse off.

For academic stuff, SAS and Stata are amazingly better at cleaning and processing huge amounts of data. I love excel and it can certainly do some very amazing things, but at some point you just need a full on statistical software totally driven by its own programming language.    That software is pretty cheap for academics, but corporate licenses are usually insanely more expensive.   Otherwise I program everything in Python.

Assignment risk. In your example, if someone exercises OTM call, your account could be assigned. In that case, if you do nothing, you could lose more money than there is in the account. The broker won't do it for you because there is more than one way to handle the assignment. For example, you might choose to exercise the long call, or buy a different call and exercise that. Selling the long call may be enough to satisfy any resulting margin call.

Layman with a question: the financial world is commonly depicted and regarded as being incsanely hard-driving. High pressure with very challenging work, and absolutely life-consuming. IRL, I've ever heard a few stories second-hand about things like fairly regular 18 hour work days and such. Finance is certainly a broad field with many facets; but generally how true is this? I have to assume it at the least doesn't quite meet popular perception, because people would have nervous breakdowns...

You can check your score through your discover card account (only credit card)  2 month difference   Nothing has changed. Have gone about regular business with no dramatic increase in spending  I'm 21 and I'm almost exactly a year into my first card

They are already indirectly paying these expenses.  They should be built into your rates. The amount per job or per hour needs to cover what would have been your salary, plus the what would have been sick, vacation, holidays, health insurance, life insurance, disability, education, overhead for office expenses, cost of accountants...and all taxes. In many companies the general rule of thumb is that they need to charge a customer 2x the employees salary to cover all this plus make a profit. If this is a side job some of these benefits will come from your main job. Some self employed get some of these benefits from their spouse.  The company has said we give you money for the work you perform, but you need to cover everything else including paying all taxes. Depending on where you live you might have to send money in more often then once a year. They are also telling you that they will be reporting the money they give you to the government so they can claim it as a business expense. So you better make sure you report it as income.

No, don't bother.  You need to decide what you are saving for, and how much risk you are prepared to take. It would make sense if you wanted the money only in x years, and couldn't afford to lose say 20% or more if the stock market crashed the day before you needed the cash.  Typically if you are about to retire and buy an annuity, you want to protect your capital.  This isn't you. At 28, you might be saving for a wedding, a deposit on a house, possibly for school fees, or for eventual retirement.  It doesn't sound like you need to get back exactly 24k in July 2022. Keep the 6 months expenses in accounts that you can withdraw from at short notice.  Some of this in a current account, some might be in a savings account that doesn't pay interest if you make withdrawals. After that, I'd stick most of the rest in stock market tracker funds, but you might go for actively managed funds instead (ask another question and take professional advice, there will presumably be local tax considerations too), and add in most of your monthly savings too.  These should beat the 2.3% over the 5 years, and you can liquidate them easily if you want to buy a house. If there is a recession and a stock market dip, you presumably have the flexibility to hold on to them longer for the economy to recover.  And if you are intending to buy a house, then a recession will probably also involve a fall in house prices, so the loss in your savings will be somewhat balanced by the drop in the purchase price of your house. Of course, the worst case scenario is a severe downturn where you lose your job, are unemployed for a considerable period of time, burn through your emergency fund, and need to sell shares at a considerable loss to meet your expenses.   You might have family or dependents that you can borrow from or would need to support, which would change your tolerance for risk.  Having money locked away for 5 years in this scenario is even worse.  So if you don't want to put all your non-emergency savings into the stock market, you still want to choose something that is accessible at a slightly lower interest rate. But ultimately it sounds like you can afford to lose some of your savings, and the probability is that you will be rewarded with much better returns than 2.3% over 5 years.