I think living in a city where you can't take care of yourself. Has led many people to become unable of ever taking care of themselves. I personally would be happy with a few acres of land a house and some solar. But what makes me happy doesn't make other's happy. So I wont even try to force my opinion of what is good in life on them. The only thing stopping me from living my dream and being left alone is you and your taxes. Which no matter how self sufficient I am and how little I need or want the rest of society. I will always be a slave to paying those taxes so your life can be easier and my life can be harder. Take from those who want to share your dream and leave the rest of us alone.  You don't think about that, though, do you?   Edit...[What do you want?](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGHfaYY_1jk)


Yes many people operate accounts in usa from outside usa. You need a brokerage account opened in the name of your sister and then her username and password. Remember that brokerages may check the location of login and may ask security questions before login. So when your sister opens her account , please get the security questions. Also note that usa markets open ( 7.00 pm or 8.00 pm IST depending on daylight savings in usa). So this means when they close at 4:00 pm ET, it will be 1:30 or 2:30 am in India. This means it will affect your sleeping hours if you intend to day trade. Also understand that there are some day trading restrictions and balances associate. Normally brokerages need 25,000 $ for you to be a day trader. Finally CFA is not a qualification to be a trader and desire to become a trader doesn't make one a trader. TO give an analogy , just because you want to be a cricketer doesn't make you one. It needs a lot of practice and discipline.Also since in bangladesh , you will always convert the usa amount to bangladeshi currency and think of profits and losses in those terms. This might actually be bad.


This is a massive simplification of what they do. Having low latency is a prerequisite, but the very fastest HFT desks (i.e. those with the fastest links) are often not the most profitable. The reason they need lower and lower latency is simply to avoid the *other* HFT desks having an advantage. Same for co-location. HFT existed long before co-location and the drive for ultra low latency, and they were making money. If it were as simple as faster = winner, there would only be **one** HFT desk in the world, with the fastest connection to every exchange, and they would be printing money. It doesn't work that way.


"You can spend the money quite quickly. The problem is that if there is something wrong with the check, the bank will ask you for the money back. If the check is from a trusted source (a trusted friend, a business with good reputation etc.) that's fine. If the money is from an untrusted source, make sure that having to pay back the money doesn't get you into trouble. Since most people are honest, this is fine for a small amount, but if it's more than you can afford to pay back, don't spend it.  A simple scam is that people send you checks, ""by mistake"" the check is for the wrong amount, say $910 instead of $190, and they ask you to send the difference back. So you put $910 into your account, send them $720, and six weeks later your bank asks for their $910 back. If someone pays you too much on a check and asks you to pay them the difference, you know it is a scam."


I think people are conflating two orthogonal sets of terms. Unsecured/secured and good/bad are not synonyms. Debt may be secured or unsecured. If I take a loan against a car or house it is typically secured, so the object is collateral against the loan. Bad debt in financial terms is a loan that is not expected to be recovered. A bank might write off a loan or a portion of a loan as bad debt if the borrower goes bankrupt or into administration for example. Both secured and unsecured loans may be considered bad debt. I think the context in which the question is being asked is how to distinguish between sensible and inadvisable borrowing. An extreme example of inadvisable borrowing would be to buy a PC on a store card. PCs devalue very quickly and a store card may charge 30% APR, so paying the minimum off each month would mean paying  more than twice the sticker price for a product that is now worth less than half the original borrowed amount. On the other hand, a 3% mortgage when borrowing less than 60% of the value of a property is a good bet from a lender's perspective, and would be a good debt to have (not as good as no debt, but better thhan a high APR one).


you're a moron.  Under Republican President Dwight Eisenhower, the top marginal rate was 95%.  A progressive income tax like this is justified on two grounds: the wealthy have benefitted most from our system, and they are the best able to pay.  With the revenue under the tax code in the 1950's, Eisenhower was able to afford a huge infrastructure project, building the U.S. interstate highway system.  the wealthy assholes and their Republican crooks in Congress have destroyed the progressive income tax and thereby sharply reduced federal government revenues and federal government ability to pay for anything.  The progressive income tax, as it existed under Republican President Dwight Eisenhower, should be restored to allow America to become great again.


">Much of the evidence in support of a skills gap could be explained by employers who are no longer willing to train their employees or raise salaries, and instead want to be able to hire people with exactly the right skills–and on the cheap.  I saw this play out at my previous job. Literally no one got COLA raises, executive management got 10's of thousands of dollars in retention bonuses each year. They would only hire staff that fit the exact roles they were looking for, for the least amount of money through temp agencies... then bitch about the workers behind their backs because they weren't miracle workers doing 200% of what was asked of them. It created a very negative environment that got downright perverse when my boss would claim we're a ""family""."


CDS is the spread you pay in order to get protection in the event of a bond defaulting. I.e., eliminating your credit risk. Contrast this with ASW/OAS/Z-spread/Spread-to-bench which looks at the excess risk of a bond over the benchmark curve/yield. It's essentially looking at the same idea but derived differently.      Theoretically they move in the same direction but divergence can be an opportunity. Look up CDS basis.


"> But You can't call it capitalism currently when the government makes laws that's kills competition  in my post i am specifically referring to ""unbridled capitalism"" -- otherwise known as crony capitalism -- this is what all other forms of capitalism will grow into if you don't keep close controls over free enterprise.   the US is a crony capitalist society - one where very few people (the  leaders of big businesses and the elite) get to call the shots. the corrupt FDA that we have is the consequence of unchecked capitalism.   it slippery slope began in the mid 70's with the powell memorandum ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_F._Powell_Jr.#Powell_Memorandum ), which put an end to the prosperity-for-all of the 50's and 60's and replaced it with prosperity-for-the-rich that we have today.  the laws that our current government makes are a direct result of the evolution of capitalism.   other western countries are eroding slower, but will soon enough decompose into the shithole that we have in america, such as : (i) the federal reserve and a financial system privately owned by a handful of bankers, (ii) the military industrial complex which now sucks nearly half of all our federal taxes to maintain, (iii) the medical cabal which limits competition and charges anything it wants to, (iv) a highly privatized education system that now enslaves our youth to a lifetime of repayments, (v) a privatized prison and border security system which makes profits from picking on the poor, etc, etc, etc"


"So you are paying taxes on your contributions regardless, the timing   is just different. I am failing to see why would a person get an IRA, instead of just   putting the same amount of money into a mutual fund (like Vanguard) or   something like that. What am I missing? You are failing to consider the time value of money. Getting $1 now is more valuable to you than a promise to get $1 in a year, even though the nominal amount is the same. With a certain amount of principal now, you can invest it and it will (likely) grow into a bigger amount of money (principal + earnings) at a later time, and we can consider the two to have approximately equivalent value (the principal now has the same value as the principal + earnings later). With pre-tax money in Traditional IRA, the principal + earnings are taxed once at the time of withdrawal. Assuming the same flat rate of tax at contribution and withdrawal, this is equivalent to Roth IRA, where the principal is taxed at the time of contribution, because the principal now has the same value as the principal + earnings later, so the same rate of tax on the two have the same value of tax, even though when you look at nominal amounts, it might seem you are paying a lot less tax with Roth IRA (since the earnings are never ""taxed""). With actual numbers, if we take a $1000 pre-tax contribution to Traditional IRA, it grows at 5% for 10 years, and a 25% flat rate tax, we are left with $1000 * 1.05^10 * 0.75 = $1221.67. With the same $1000 pre-tax contribution (so after 25% tax it's a $750 after-tax contribution) to a Roth IRA, growing at the same 5% for 10 years, and no tax at withdrawal, we are left with $1000 * 0.75 * 1.05^10 = $1221.67. You can see they are equivalent even though the nominal amount of tax is different (the lower amount of tax paid now is equivalent to the bigger amount of tax later). With a taxable investment which you will not buy and sell until you take it out, you contribute with after-tax money, and when you take it out, the ""earnings"" portion is subject to capital-gains tax. But remember that the principal + earnings later is equivalent to the principal now, which is already all taxed once, and if we tax the ""earnings"" portion later, that is effectively taxing a portion of the money again. Another way to look at it is the contribution is just like the Roth IRA, but the withdrawal is worse because you have to pay capital-gains tax instead of no tax. You can take the same numbers as for the Roth IRA, $1000 * 0.75 * 1.05^10 = $1221.67, but where the $1221.67 - $750 = $471.67 is ""earnings"" and is taxed again at, say, a 15% capital-gains rate, so you lose another $70.75 in tax and are left with $1150.92. You would need a capital-gains tax rate of 0% to match the advantage of the pre-tax Traditional IRA or Roth IRA. After-tax money in Traditional IRA has a similar problem -- the contribution is after tax, but after it grows into principal + earnings, the ""earnings"" part is taxed again, except it is worse than the capital-gains case because it is taxed as regular income. Like above, you can take the same numbers as for the Roth IRA, $1000 * 0.75 * 1.05^10 = $1221.67, but where the $471.67 ""earnings"" is taxed again at 25%, so you lose another $117.92 in tax and are left with $1103.75. So although the nominal amount of tax paid is the same as for pre-tax money in Traditional IRA, it ends up being a lot worse. (Everything I said above about pre-tax money in Traditional IRA, after-tax money in Traditional IRA, and Roth IRA, also applies to pre-tax money in Traditional 401(k), after-tax money in Traditional 401(k), and Roth 401(k), respectively.) Regarding the question you raise in the title of your question, why someone would get contribute to a Traditional IRA if they already have a 401(k), the answer is, mostly, they wouldn't. First, note that if you merely have a 401(k) account but neither you nor your employer contributes to it during the year, then that doesn't prevent you from deducting Traditional IRA contributions for that year, so basically you can contribute to one or the other; so if you only want to contribute below the IRA contribution limit, and don't need the bigger 401(k) contribution limit, and the IRA's investment options are more attractive to you than your 401(k)'s, then it might make sense for you to contribute to only Traditional IRA. If you or your employer is already contributing to your 401(k) during the year, then you cannot deduct your Traditional IRA contributions unless your income is very low, and if your income is really that low, you are in such a low tax bracket that Roth IRA may be more advantageous for you. If you make a Traditional IRA contribution but cannot deduct it, it is a non-deductible Traditional IRA contribution, i.e. it becomes after-tax money in a Traditional IRA, which as I showed in the section above has much worse tax situation in the long run because its earnings are pre-tax and thus taxed again. However, there is one good use for non-deductible Traditional IRA contributions, and that is as one step in a ""backdoor Roth IRA contribution"". Basically, there is an income limit for being able to make Roth IRA contributions, but there is no income limit for being able to make Traditional IRA contributions or for being able to convert money from Traditional IRA to Roth IRA. So what you can do is make a (non-deductible) Traditional IRA contribution, and then immediately convert it to Roth IRA, and if you did not previously have any pre-tax money in Traditional IRAs, this achieves the same as a regular Roth IRA contribution, with the same tax treatment, but you can do it at any income level."


If it were me, I'd pour my entire savings into paying down the mortgage. I'd also get a HELOC and a personal LOC to use as my emergency fund if I didn't have one already. I personally don't like paying interest on loans when I have cash in the bank to cover it.


"You can technically initiate an ACH transaction (debit or credit) with just the routing number and the account number. As a consumer - most banks will not allow you doing this without some sort of verification of authority. But if you have a direct ACH access (like many billers do) - you can do that and nothing will stop you. You can also print checks with the account/routing info on them and use them. That said - these actions are illegal and reversible. People who do this are usually making ""sting"" operations where they deposit forged checks and withdraw the money in cash quickly, before the check bounces back as a fake. The loss is then on the bank that allowed them depositing the checks (that's why new accounts usually have much longer holds on deposits than older established ones)."


"Check out the ""rewards checking"" accounts listed on this thread at fatwallet finance forums. You could easily get 3.5% - 4% right now if you are willing to do the rewards checking dance. If not, you should look into the 1-2% accounts at the top. I use Alliant CU and their website is nice (and they give you your credit score every six months)."


"This is great for whole foods because they started struggling recently. Their margins were thinning and competition is getting bigger.    Bezos wanted a good introduction to the industry for his "" just walk out "" technology and whole foods has the perfect demographic to adopt to that change than anyone really."


Maybe, I'm confused too...but I would have to disagree, the numbers wouldn't be the same.  Also, they are not the same thing.  * NOA = Operating assets - Operating Liabilities * IC = Equity + Debt  Example: Company has $1000 Equity, $1000 Debt, $2000 Assets  * Company's NOA is $1000 * Company's IC is $2000


"Like as if the USA does not have more enemies and more dangerous enemies (NK and Iran with nuclear weapons, both say publicly ""death to America"").  In any case, Obama was the best president-sales-person of American weapons and kept the USA in more wars and constantly in wars than any other president."


I’m actually curious why you think this is great as a marketer. I was under the impression that ads do better when people don’t know they’re an ad. Although I don’t understand how people don’t realize most of what they see on popular accounts is paid advertising.


"Not really. There was a hiring freeze and most agencies are limited to replacement hiring only, but there hasn't been any massive reduction in force. To the extent he did ""fire people,"" they were political appointees ordinarily replaced with the new administration. While most of those positions haven't been filled by a new appointee, this just means that someone is temporarily performing that job in an ""acting"" role."


All of us require exact same time loan products. Cash is actually limited nowadays. Employment market and also the overall economy most importantly will be featuring people countless economical battles. Simply no consider this numerous among us are applying same exact daytime finances to aid via the remaining portion of the thirty days ahead of the future salaryday happens. ame daytime finances are made to assist people to who also you do not have the administrative centre to their rear , nor have got various other types of credit rating.


As a tourist, you will definitely find New York to be one of the best places to visit during the summers as well as winters. Through our company website which you can save lots of money by selecting the cheap hotels and other transport. Hotels in New York are the most important thing to know about at the time when you are really willing to visit New York City. With TravelGuysOnline travelers may face not anyone difficulty in searching and selecting Cheap accommodation in New York City.


If you're willing to pay a fee, you can probably just get a commercial appraiser to give you a valuation.  In Australia I think it's around $100-200.


Paying yourself first involves getting some part of your income somewhat out of reach, with the intent that you don't spend it during the month.  It could be a retirement account, a savings account, or something similar. It's in contrast to saving whatever is left over at the end of the month: paying yourself last. The intent is to renormalize spending levels down, effectively living on a smaller income and saving or investing the difference.  The lower spending levels will become normal, and it won't feel quite as much like a belt-tightening exercise.


"What disconnect? And I'm not even kidding here - where is it? Do you really think that arbitrage that is a pittance compared to long term trading somehow distorts the process that some people claim is actually socially beneficial? Given that there's really no evidence of it causing misallocation or mispricing, what is the problem? That some dumbass day trader (who is, by the way, trying to make money in exactly the same way as the HFT people - he's just worse at it) got screwed over by some not-quite-as-dumbass people working at Goldman Sachs?  And why would you think that HFT (or any other advancement) is somehow related to such a thing; we've had ""speculation"" and foul play of various types for hundreds of years. What is it that is fundamentally different this time that wasn't there in, for example, the 80s?"


"This may be a bit advanced now, but once you start really working and get a place, I think this will apply more... Do I set up a bank account now? Yes. There is no reason not to. As an adult you will be using this much more than you think.  Assuming you have a little money, you can walk in to any bank almost any day of the week and set up an account with them in very little time. Note that they may require you to be 18 if your parents won't be with you on the account. Otherwise, just ask any bank representative to help you do this. Just to be clear, if you can get a credit union account over a typical bank account, this is a great idea. Credit unions provide exactly the same financial services as a normal bank, but typically have variety of advantages over banks.   Bank Account Parts Bank accounts typically have two parts, a checking account and a savings account. Your checking account typically is what you use for most day-to-day transactions and your savings account is generally used for, well, saving money.  Having a bank account often gives you the following advantages: They give you an ability to store money without having large amounts of cash on hand. Once you start working regularly, you'll find you won't want to keep ~$600+ cash every two weeks in your wallet or apartment. They help you pay bills. When you set up your bank account, you will likely be able to get a Visa debit card which will process like a regular credit card but simply deduct funds from your checking account. You can use this card online to pay utilities (i.e. electricity and water), general bills (e.g. your cell phone and cable), purchase items (ex. at Amazon) or use it in stores to pay in lieu of cash.  Be aware -- some banks will give you an ATM-only card before they send you the Visa debit card in the mail. This ATM-only card can only be used at ATMs as it's name implies.  Similarly, if you can invest about ~$200 to build your credit, you can often get a deposit secured credit card attached to your account (basically a credit card where the bank keeps your money in case you can't pay your bill). If you treat this card with responsibility, you can eventually transition to an unsecured credit card. They save you hassles when cashing your check. If you don't have a bank where you can cash your check (e.g. you don't have an account), you will likely be charged check cashing fees (usually by places such as grocery stores or payday loan chains, or even other banks). Furthermore, if your check is over a certain amount, some places may refuse to cash your check period and a bank may be your only option. They give you a way to receive money electronically. The most common example of this is direct deposit. Many employers will send your money directly to your bank account instead of requiring you to cash a check. If they are prompt, this money gets to you faster and saves you trouble (on payday, you'll just receive a pay stub detailing your wages and the amount deposited rather than a check).  Also, since you asked about taxes, you should know that when you do eventually file with the IRS, they have an option to receive your tax refund electronically as well (e.g. direct deposit into your bank account) and that can literally save you months in some cases depending on when you file your return and how many paper checks they have to process. Does it cost money to setup? It depends. Some banks have special offers, some don't. Most places will set up an account for free, but may require a minimum deposit to open the account (typically $50-$100). The Visa debit card mentioned above generally comes free. If you want a secured credit card as above, you will want about an additional $200 (so $250 - $300 total). Note that this is absolutely NOT required. You can exclusively use the Visa debit card above if you wish. Bank Account Fees Any fees charged when you have a bank account are usually minor anymore. Regardless, the bank will hand you a whole bunch of paperwork (mostly in legalese) detailing exactly how your account works. That said, the bank person helping set things up will cover what you need to know about keeping the account in plain English. The most common types of fee associated with a bank account are monthly maintenance fees and overdraft fees, but these aren't always necessarily charged. Likewise, there may be some other fees associated with the account but these vary from bank to bank.  Monthly Maintenance Fees To give some examples... Overdraft Fees Overdraft fees are typically charged when you attempt to spend more money than you have in your bank account and the bank has to cover these charges. Overdraft fees typically apply to using paper checks (which it is unlikely you will be using), but not always.  That said, it is very unlikely you will be charged overdraft fees for three reasons: Many banks have done away with these fees in lieu of other ways of generating revenue.    Banks that still charge these fees usually have ""overdraft protection"" options for a little more money a month, effectively negating the possibility you will be charged these fees.  The ability to deduct an amount of money from your checking account is now typically checked electronically before the payment is authorized. That is, using a Visa debit card, the card balance is checked immediately, and even when using paper check, most retailers have check scanning machines that do roughly the same thing. On a personal note, the bank that I have allows my account to be deducted below my checking account balance only if the payment is requested electronically (e.g. someone who has my card information charges me for a monthly service). In this case, the funds are simply listed in the negative and deducted from any amount I deposit till the proper amount is repaid (e.g. if I'm at -$25 dollars due to a charge when my account balance was $0 and then I deposit $100, my available balance will then be $75, not $100). Finally, per the comment by @Thebluefish, while I minimize the likelihood you will be charged overdraft fees, it is good to check into the exact circumstances under which you might be charged unexpectedly by your bank. Read the documentation they give you carefully, including any mailed updates, and you'll reduce the chance of receiving a nasty surprise. For reference, here are some of the fees charged by Bank of America. What about taxes? When you begin working, an employer will usually have you fill out a tax form such as a W-4 Employee's Withholding Allowance Certificate so that your employer can withhold the correct federal income tax from your wages. If they don't, then it is your responsibility to calculate and file your own income taxes (if you are self-employed, an independent contractor or paid under the table).  If your employer is reputable, they will send you additional information (generally in February) you need to properly file your taxes prior to April 15th (the IRS tax deadline for most people). This additional information will likely be some variation of a W-2 Wage and Tax Statement or possibly a Form 1099-MISC.  Do I have to worry about money in my bank account? Unless you have a significant amount in your bank savings account earning interest (see ""Should I save for the future?"" below), you won't have to pay any sort of tax on money in your bank account. If you do earn enough taxable interest, the bank will send you the proper forms to file your taxes. How do I file taxes? While it won't apply till next year, you will likely be able to fill out a Form 1040EZ Income Tax Return for Single and Joint Filers With No Dependents, as long as you don't have any kids in the meantime. ;-) You will either mail in the paper form (available at your local IRS office, post office, public library, etc.) or file electronically. There will be a lot of information on how to do this when the time comes, so don't worry about details just yet.  Assuming your all paid up on your taxes (very likely unless you get a good paying job and take a lot of deductions throughout the year on your W-4), you'll probably get money back from the IRS when you file your tax return. As I mentioned above, if you have a bank account, you can opt to have your refund money returned electronically and get it much sooner than if you didn't have a bank account (again, possibly saving you literal months of waiting). Should I save for my future? If so, how much? Any good articles? Yes, you should save for the future, and start as soon as possible. It's outside the scope of this answer, but listen to your Economics professor talk about compound interest. In short, the later you start saving, the less money you have when you retire.  Not that it makes much difference now, but you have to think that over 45 years of working (age 20-65), you likely have to have enough money for another 20+ years of not working (65-85+). So if you want $25,000 a year for retirement, you need to make ~$50,000 - $75,000 a year between your job and any financial instruments you have (savings account, stocks, bonds, CDs, mutual funds, IRAs, job retirement benefits, etc.) Where you should stick money your money is a complicated question which you can investigate at length as you get older. Personally, though, I would recommend some combination of IRA (Individual Retirement Account), long term mutual funds, and some sort of savings bonds. There is a metric ton of information regarding financial planning, but you can always read something like Investing For Dummies or you can try the Motley Fool's How To Invest (online and highly recommended). But I'm Only 17... So what should you do now? Budget. Sounds dumb, but just look at your basic expenses and total them all up (rent, utilities, phone, cable, food, gas, other costs) and divide by two. Out of each paycheck, this is how much money you need to save not to go into debt.  Try to save a little each month. $50 - $100 a month is a good starting amount if you can swing it. You can always try to save more later. Invest early. You may not get great returns, but you don't need much money to start investing. Often you can get started with as little as $20 - $100. You'll have to do research but it is possible. Put money in your savings account. Checking accounts do not typically earn interest but money in savings accounts often do (that is, the bank will actually add money to your savings assuming you leave it in there long enough). Unfortunately, this rate of interest is only about 3.5% on average, which for most people means they don't get rich off it. You have to have a significant amount of money ($5,000+) to see even modest improvements in your savings account balance each month. But still, you may eventually get there. Get into the habit of putting money places that make you money in the long run. Don't go into debt. Don't get payday loans, pawn items, or abuse credit cards. Besides wrecking your credit, even a small amount of debt ($500+) can be very hard to break out of if you don't have a great paying job and can even make you homeless (no rent means no apartment).  Remember, be financially responsible -- but assuming your parents aren't totally tight with money, don't be afraid to ask for cash when you really need it. This is a much better option than borrowing from some place that charges outrageous interest or making your payments late. Have an emergency account. As already mentioned in another excellent answer, you need to have money to ""smooth things out"" when you encounter unexpected events (your employer has trouble with your check, you have to pay for some sort of repair bill, you use more gas in your car in a month than normal, etc.) Anywhere from $200 - $2000+ should do it, but ideally you should have at least enough to cover a month of basic expenses. Build good credit. Avoid the temptation to get a lot of credit cards, even if stores and banks are dying to give them to you. You really only need one to build good credit (preferably a secured one from your bank, as mentioned above). Never charge more than you can pay off in a single month. Charging, then paying that amount off before the due date on your next statement, will help your credit immensely. Likewise, pay attention to your rent, utilities and monthly services (cell phone, cable, etc.). Even though these seem like options you can put off (""Oh my electric bill is only $40? I'll pay that next month..."") late payments on all of these can negatively affect your credit score, which you will need later to get good loans and buy a house.  Get health insurance. Now that the Affordable Care Act (ACA a.k.a Obamacare) has been enacted, it is now simpler to get health insurance, and it is actually required you have some. Hopefully, your employer will offer health coverage, you can find reasonably priced coverage on your own, or you live in a state with a health exchange. Even if you can't otherwise get/afford insurance, you may qualify for some sort of state coverage depending on income. If you don't have some sort of health insurance (private or otherwise), the IRS can potentially fine you when you file your taxes. Not to be too scary, but the fine as currently proposed is jumping up to about $700 for individuals in 2016 or so. So... even if you don't grab health insurance (which you absolutely should), you need to save about $60 a month, even if just for the fine.  This answer turned out a bit longer than intended, but hopefully it will help you a little bit. Welcome to the wonderful world of adult financial responsibility. :-)"


"The easiest and least expensive way of doing this, similar to the answer from Randy Coulman, is to write a check and deposit it into the Canadian Institution. Since this transfer is between accounts you own the easiest thing to do is to do a deposit by mail. Contact your current institution on where you would need to mail your deposit to. You can then write yourself a check on the US bank and mail it to the Canadian bank; be sure to write ""For Deposit Only"" along with your account number (and Branch Number for Canada) on the back. This is the slowest, but cheapest method. An alternative option is to use Wire Transfers, but they can be very costly (you'll usually incur a fee when sending and when receiving). I only recommend them when you need the money in the account fast (they are usually settled within an hour)."


Try looking up PeCan Pie paragraphs, it’s a new system we have for writing long answers in the UK at A Level, I highly recommend you get used to it as it can save a lot of time and score a large amount of marks with little writing.


">Basically interest rates are near 0 and the banks are very risk adverse right now, so they sit on reserves instead of lending them out.  There is a very significant reason (actually a couple) that the banks are ""sitting on reserves"":  1. The large banks have HUGE derivative exposure and HUGE potential losses (and anyone who denies that has apparently been hiding under a rock and missed the news of JPMorganChase) -- while the reserves held are not enough to cover ALL of those potential derivative losses (nor do they have to), the bankers are uncertain of what their REAL exposure is, and so they want to (and indeed are probably being told to) hold onto enough to prevent a catastrophic ""insolvency"" situation.  2. The Fed is paying interest on excess reserves (likewise, this is no secret). This serves a two-fold purpose of making the banks *appear* to be solvent (even in the face of potentially HUGE derivative exposure); and secondarily it is a way to ""gift"" the banks with money -- known as ""recapitalizing"" them.  What Krugman is engaging in is simple misdirection. Now whether this is because he actually believes his own bullshit, or whether he is being intellectually dishonest... is anyone's guess. (Hanlon's razor would tell us it is the former, rather than the latter; but that isn't really dispositive in a single case and is rather a general principle. Occam's razor doesn't tell us anything in regard to this, since either is a fairly simple and straight-forward explanation; and given the history of ""economists"" as being professional apologists & apparatchiks in service of the financial & government establishment, the latter is at least as likely as the former.)"


I've seen Target stores with some strange layouts in buildings that they didn't build themselves, and those stores have succeeded, so I wouldn't necessarily blame the reuse of existing buildings, in and of itself, as a factor.  My local Target is a former Montgomery Ward store, and has a somewhat unorthodox bi-level layout because of this, especially when compared to two bi-level stores that Target built themselves in nearby towns.  But all three stores are successful.  Target's problem with buying out the Zellers leases was that they had too large of a store footprint before they were ready to service it.  If they had started small with one or two locations and then built up gradually, they would have probably been fine, working the bugs out on a few stores vs. 100+ stores.  A Zellers acquisition could have happened later on.


The product descriptions for FFA swaps and options can be found here:  http://www.lchclearnet.com/freight/ffas/products.asp The index (e.g. the BFA) is based on the settlement prices of the P2, P2A, and C4 contracts and the panamax TC routes.  As such it's just a performance index and replicates the returns you'd get from holding a portfolio of the constituents. I think from the clearing descriptions everything should be clear.  The wording in the link on the Baltic Exchange website is a bit nebulous.  I think they mean standardised instead of specified.  Because that's what sets the FFABA apart from OTC agreements or OTC spot markets. Edit: For more information on financial instruments in general see the Handbook of Financial Instuments.  I haven't got the latest edition but I doubt he will mention FFAs, CFSAs, or anything that's specific to maritime markets but after all they're just plain forward agreements over a not-so-common underlying.


IMO almost any sensible decision is better than parking money in a retirement account, when you are young. Some better choices: 1) Invest in yourself, your skills, your education. Grad school is one option within that. 2) Start a small business, build a customer base. 3) Travel, adventure, see the world. Meet and talk to lots of different people. Note that all my advice revolves around investing in YOURSELF, growing your skills and/or your experiences. This is worth FAR more to you than a few percent a year. Take big risks when you are young. You will need maybe $1m+ (valued at today's money) to retire comfortably. How will you get there? Most people can only achieve that by taking bigger risks, and investing in themselves.


Boy that's an over-simplification of Marxist theory if I ever heard one.  You think that the past 150 years of Marxist thinking amounts to the idea that economies trade in effort?  Whew.  Read the texts you're talking about before talking about them.


#2 is really important.    Western tourists hate getting assaulted by a bunch of shouting people who are all trying to get their attention and sell them something.  It's really stressful.   You just need to be calm, quiet, smile, make eye contact, and speak in normal English to get attention.  Some distinctive/visible clothes/hat/trademark accessory could be helpful just to make you stand out a bit and be memorable.         I would get a tshirt printed with the front explaining your services/prices to major destinations and the back with important info that can be read while driving.


"Because more people bought it than sold it. That's really all one can say. You look for news stories related to the event, but you don't really know that's what drove people to buy or sell. We're still trying to figure out the cause of the recent flash crash, for example. For the most part, I feel journalism trying to describe why the markets moved is destined to fail.  It's very complicated. Stocks can fall on above average earnings reports, and rise on dismal annual reports. I've heard a suggestion before that people ""buy on the rumor, sell on the news"". Which is just this side of insider trading."


I would go to the bank and ask for another card and U will sleep like a baby :)


"The economics in this are pretty, let's just say weird/off.  US looks richer because of borrowing money therefore it's currency appreciates in relation to other countries? I don't see the logic in this one.   The outsourcing jobs overseas phenomenon is a long term one. Firms don't do it cyclically with recessions. Recessions might force the hand of some firms to outsource but I don't see businesses suddenly bringing those jobs back en mass when a boom occurs. It also ignores the fact that when firms outsource, they can provide goods at a cheaper rate domestically thereby bringing down some costs. The decrease in costs might even make it cheaper for businesses to operate thereby allowing enough savings to hire more people. Who knows, the whole effect is somewhat ambiguous. To simply select the worst possible scenario and explain only that is pretty obvious bias.  ""... When Uncle Sam can no longer pay it's bills"" The video says it like it's a certainty. Somehow he knows for a fact that the US will default soon yet the Investment Banks with teams of analysts don't."


If you selected a mortgage that allows additional payments to be credited against the principal rather than as early payment of normal installments, them yes, doing so will reduce the actual cost of the loan. You may have to explicitly instruct the bank to use the money this way each time, if prepay is their default assumption. Check with your lender, and/or read the terms of your mortgage, to find out if this is allowed and how to do it. If your mortgage doesn't allow additional payments against the principal, you may want to consider refinancing into a mortgage which does, or into a mortgage with shorter term and higher monthly payments, to obtain the same lower cost (modulo closing costs on the new mortgage; run the numbers.)


In no ways. Both will be reported to the members on their K1 in the respective categories (or if it is a single member LLC - directly to the individual tax return). The capital gains will flow to your personal Schedule D, and the business loss to your personal Schedule C. On your individual tax return you can deduct up to 3K of capital losses from any other income. Business loss is included in the income if it is active business, for passive businesses (like rental) there are limitations.


"It sounds like you're massively under-selling yourself.  You presumably have a degree to get into the PhD program, and you now have work experience as well.  But you're applying for jobs in fast food restaurants. You may struggle to get a job because they will expect you to only be there a few weeks until you find a ""proper"" job."


If its FOB then they will advise you an address to collect from. Once you collect all costs are your responsibility. The easiest way to cost it to find a shipping agent who is experienced in shipping from China and they will now the normal processes and prices for the city you are buying from.  They will also advise on import duties, customs clearance and delivery costs to your door. They are the experts to ask about importing from China with regards to shipping.


No, what I'm saying is that the extant regulations have created such massive overheads to compliance that *only* big businesses can operate in that market because of the expenses required to be compliant. Eliminating that overhead would reduce expenses and make it possible for a greater diversity of firms to exist, reducing the *average size of any individual firm*, and increasing stability through diversity.


So what are the underlying causes of these changes? I find it hard to believe it's just inclement weather.   Iraq was the home of the first civilization but hasn't done much since. But it does seem like every region has had its heyday except Africa where it reigned supreme.   So is it Europeans willingness to adopt new military technology that lead to their success conquering, developing a dominant culture and society?


"Also here's a source for the $3.7 trillion number.      http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-08/u-s-municipal-bond-market-28-larger-than-estimated-federal-reserve-says.html    It's not 'incorrect data'.        EDIT:  Furthermore, in order to know the ""extent"" of the crime (your own admission) we NEED to know the size of the entire market otherwise you can't have any perspective or determine extent.  So there's no reason it shouldn't be mentioned in the article."


I'm not business-savvy, but that seems like a very good idea. My wife works for a not-for-profit company, yet the CEO still makes $8,000,000 a year, *not* counting bonuses. I think in a for-profit, the CEO could easily afford to pay more employees to fill the gap made by decreasing the free labor he's used to.


...which just proves my point. Why go to McDonalds when I can serve them up in minutes, have leftovers, and the whole meal costs less than what McDonalds is charging? It would be different if McDonalds had a teleporter to beam that burger to my doorstep within seconds...but they don't. By the time I drive there, pick up an order, and drive back, I could've made my own meal for less.


"Priced in just means that the speaker thinks the current price has already taken that factor into account. For example, the difference in price right before and right after a dividend is released often differ exactly by that dividend -- the fact that the dividend would function as a ""relate"" on the purchase price was priced into the earlier quote, and its absence for another year was priced into the later quote. The ten can be applied to any expected or likely event, if you really think the price reflects that opportunity of risk. It just means that this factor, in the speaker's opinion, doesn't create an opportunity one can take advantage of."


>First of all QE is an increase of money supply but using non conventional measures(there might be exceptions) some examples of this measures are changing interest rates or TLTRO.  Ok, but how is this different from printing money? I mean the money supply goes up in both cases, right? Shouldn´t this cause massive inflation?  >As to why this hasnt transitioned into more inflation, which in the end has but years after, has been a question that people have asked a lot. One of the reasons for this is the transmission mechanism not working properly, which implies that despite the fact banks have received money, they havent been able to move it to the real economy hence not increasing prices.  I have read that all QE has done is basically make the prices of assets such as housing, stocks, art and whatnot skyrocket. As if all the extra money has gone to a very few, specific areas while not touching the rest of the economy.  Is this something you agree with? Thanks for your reply, btw!


Using a different cost basis than your broker's reporting is NOT a problem. You need to keep your own records to account for this difference. Among the other many legitimate reasons to adjust your cost basis, the most popular is when you have two brokerage accounts and sell an asset in one then buy in another. This is called a Wash Sale and is not a taxable event for you. However from the perspective of each broker with their limited information you are making a transaction with tax implications and their reported 1099 will show as such. Links:  https://www.firstinvestors.com/docs/pdf/news/tax-qa-2012.pdf


At the current rates, stated in the question, I would push additional funds towards your Stafford loans as their higher interest rates will incur interest charges almost 3 times faster than your private loans. With my loans I have not seen much information regarding private loans jumping the interest rate close to the 6.8% any time in the coming years (if others have insight to this I look forward to the comments).  Due to the private loans being variable there is an element of risk to their rates increasing. Another way to look at it may be to prorate your amount of extra payments according to their interest rate.  $1,000 x 0.068 /(0.068 + 0.025) = $731.18 Toward your Stafford Loans $1,000 x 0.025 /(0.068 + 0.025) = $268.82 Toward your Private Loans


Thanks medikit, your answer is 100% correct. Bank of America was forced to accept TARP funds because the US Govt did not want there to be a split between banks who took TARP and those who didn't. Bank of America did NOT need the money, hence they were really unhappy with the strings it came attached with. Rumor has it that they also wanted out of the Countrywide deal after looking at the books, but they were forced by Treasury not to pull out of the deal (a pull-out would signal that things are really bad). The govt offered some deal sweeteners, deal went ahead, then the govt spent the next few years suing Bank of America due to loans originated by Countrywide prior to the acquisition. The CEO ended up having to resign based on the shitshow that was that deal.


">Armed fire investigator.  Ah, so you are NEITHER ""police"" nor ""fire"".  Do you write your reports and testify in court with the same kind of disingenuous statements and misleading claims?  >So only the most dangerous jobs should have a voice in their own safety?  Unless I am mistaken, you CHOSE your profession, correct?  I mean you weren't ""assigned"" to it by some central politburo."


"> Boeing's union workers are overcompensated.  Compared to who? Some hypothetical unemployed North Carolinian? By that metric, we're all ""overcompensated."" I guarantee you that there's someone, somewhere (probably many someones in many somewheres) that would be happy to do your job for a lot less money. Does that mean that all publicly traded companies have a duty to demand tax incentives to not move to North Carolina, or Poland, or Cambodia? I may sound hyperbolic about this, but I'm completely serious in that question. Calling someone overcompensated means that the prevailing wage in the competitive labor market for the same quality of work is lower, not just assuming that someone would be willing to do it if you offered them $40k and a wrench.  The fact is, Boeing has not been able to produce any compelling data about ""overcompensated"" workers ([the NLRB just ruled that it has failed in doing so with it's engineering union and has ordered it to back up their claim](http://www.kplu.org/post/nlrb-judge-boeing-failed-bargain-good-faith-speea)), so all you've got is a baseless assertion behind this whole argument.  Moreover, the idea that Boeing ""needs to reduce wages in order to remain competitive"" is baseless as well. That's easy to say and strikes an intuitive chord with the public, but there's no evidence that Boeing ""needs"" to do this. They may want to do it, but they could save the same amount of money in countless other ways (stopping making stupid decisions to outsource large components around the world would be a great way to save money, for starters). Reducing wages is a desire, not a need."


NapiGator SEO is NYC's Premium SEO Agency. Our enterprise grade SEO services have helped hundreds of small businesses from across the globe to grow their sales, traffic, and rankings. Unlike others companies who palm off your essential work to juniors to save costs, we firmly believe that your work should be delivered by a true expert, not an intern with no business knowledge. This is why we proudly stand behind our 'Experts Only' Policy, where only team members with over 10 years of experience work for clients campaigns. For more information on how we can grow your business exponentially, call us today.


"Private Selection isn't even Kroger's ""brand that has the cheap price."" They are a midrange product, costing only slightly less than mainstream national brands while being of comparable or even better quality.  Kroger even offers multiple store brands in some product categories... for example, in pasta sauces you will see (in increasing order of cost) Kroger brand, Private Selection, and Simple Truth Organic. N.B. the Private Selection marinara is really good!"


Questions regarding loans, refinancing, mortgages, credit cards, investing and anything else that may be related to personal finance should be directed towards the subreddit r/personalfinance. We have provided the link to that subreddit below.   [---->  Over there on the sidebar.](http://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance/) Jus' say'in.


The idea is it concurrently drives prices down, due to labour costs. Society will have to be generally less materialistic, and those in production will probably require different taxation to keep capital and labour fairly even, but yes, it's going to happen one way or another,


"There are multiple problems with your claim. Firstly, in some places Uber and Lyft *are* regulated. In California, they are regulated as [Transportation Network Companies](http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/Enforcement/TNC/TNC_Licenses_Issued.htm). Secondly, I don't think this particular practice (calling in fake rides) is something that is prohibited by regulations, or at least enforced, for existing industries like taxis and livery cars. I have heard anecdotes that taxi companies routinely do the same thing, and that this is why taxis often don't show up if you call and request one. I think your attribution of this practice to ""unregulated capitalism"" is misguided."


No. Busts are very infrequent, and if an equity were illiquid enough to be affected, the bust cost would be enormous. For a liquid equity, the amount of busted volume is insignificant except during a flash crash or flash spike.  Then it would be reasonable to redownload.


I can't think of any more negatives apart from what you mentioned, but the positives might include higher cost base for when you sell the place (this only applies in Australia if it is an investment property) thus having to pay less tax on the capital gains, and being able to borrowing extra funds which may help with your cashflow (especially if you keep the extra funds in an 100% offset account so your interest payable is not increased until you really need the extra funds).


Ranch area on the market in Tx can provide the landscape requirements of nearly any monitoring preference. From jungles and grassy flatlands to marshlands or the mountain ranges, whatever you’re looking for, you’ll look for the best setting with [Land for Sale in Texas](http://texashuntingland.com/).


And dolts like you are the reason that they HAVE to keep repeating how terrible of a job he is doing. Because for some idiotic reason, you /r/the_Donald retards can't seem to wrap your teeny little brains around the fact that he has done nothing but lie and bullshit and point hit stubby little fingers at others, making the absolute worst decision possible at every turn.


Ultimately the question is more about your personality and level of discipline than about money.   The rational thing to do is hang on to your cash, invest it somewhere else, and pay off the 0% loan as late as possible without incurring penalties or interest.  Logically it's a no-brainer.  Problem is, we're humans, so there's a risk you'll slip up somewhere along the way and not pay off the loan in time.  How much do you trust yourself?


Found a [newer source.](http://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Inside-The-Worlds-Most-Sophisticated-Refining-Industry.html) but it backs up your position pretty well.   However, >The U.S. would send its ultra-light crude oil from shale formations up to Canada and Canadian producers would blend that ultra-light oil with heavy crude from Canada’s Oil Sands  That was a good read. Thanks for calling me out, it's been a few years since I've been in the field (South Texas Eagleford almost exclusively). Cheers.


First off, I would question why do you need a LI policy?  While you may be single are you supporting anyone?  If not, and you have some money saved to cover a funeral; or, your next of kin would be able to pay for final expenses then you probably don't have a need.   In, general, LI is a bad investment vehicle.  I do not know hardly anything about the Indian personal finance picture, but here in the US, agents tout LI as a wonderful investment.  This can be translated as they make large commissions on such products. Here in the US one is far better off buying a term product, and investing money elsewhere.  I image it is similar in India. Next time if you want to help a friend, listen to his sales presentation, give some feedback, and hand him some cash.  It is a lot cheaper in the long run.


Think about contributing to both a Traditional IRA and a Roth IRA if you have the funds. In theory, you could receive the lowest tax rates by depositing money into a regular IRA during years of democratic rule, depositing money into a Roth during years of Republic rule, and then withdrawing from the Roth during democratic rule and the tradition during Republican rule. Then you would be depositing with lower tax rates and withdrawing with lower tax rates. Granted this method would involve some speculation.


Braeburn is no more a hedge fund than any other off-shore entities corporations create to manage taxes creatively. All of the major corporate entities in the world do the same thing. Apple isn't even very good at it comparatively.


>They especially The Atlantic does investigative journalism. Vice on the other hand does investigative journalism on the level of Buzzfeed.   The Atlantic is a magazine publisher. They publish curated content. They do not produce that content.  Buzzfeed was started as a viral lab to track viral content, then it developed into a internet media production house. That's why they try to produce viral content, but have a general reputation for creating clickbait. The most legitimate part of its reporting is that it actually pays reporters to go to things like the Whitehouse Press junkets. Its revenue is about ~$150M a year.  Vice is a broadcast company worth over $4B. Its revenues exceed $1B a year, particularly due to its lucrative deal with HBO. The fact that HBO charges premium prices for access to this content should be enough to distinguish it from outlets like Buzzfeed (which is completely free and open to access). Vice is a producer of content and not just a publisher/broadcaster of information. You've falsely equated them in quality to buzzfeed, perhaps by correlating that they are both recent upstarts.  >I mean this linked piece is shallow to say the least.   Correct. I'm very skeptical of anyone reporting on a report that they, themselves, co-wrote, while touting co-founding an advocacy organization as somehow being a qualifier/credential. I would normally consider this to be paid content, although it is unclear if the writer paid for Vice to publish it. The quality of the image editing was also very poor. Of course, I doubt this content would ever make it into the more premium Vice communication channels, specifically I doubt this content would be covered in any capacity on HBO. That's why I said, at some point, that the quality of its reporting is inconsistent and sometimes quite dubious.  >Why you think Vice does quality work is beyond me. The only possible reason is you are their main demographic.   It's not because it appeals to me. As someone well-versed in media politics, I ensure that my media diet is diverse and broadly sourced. The reason that I think some of their work is good is because I actually read it and think some of it is actually credible and worthy of my time. It's very clear that you do not find Vice news credible, so you want to act like your perceptions are equal in value and accuracy with my perceptions of it. The problem with your logic is that I actually am exposed to its content while you self-select not to expose yourself to it. I like some of it, because I find that some of it has a reasonable basis underlying the claim and I can't get the news anywhere else. So, you think our perceptions are equally accurate although mutually exclusive (i.e. we disagree with each other) or you think your perceptions are more accurate than mine (most likely due to a confirmation bias), but the reality is that my perceptions are broadly based considerations based on a much larger sampling of their content while your perceptions amount to an opinion derived from a first impression glance.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-03/putin-is-now-mr-middle-east-a-job-no-one-ever-succeeds-at) reduced by 92%. (I'm a bot) ***** > &quot;Putin has succeeded in making Russia a factor in the Middle East. That&#039;s why you see a constant stream of Middle Eastern visitors going to Moscow.""  > Russia has succeeded in keeping open channels of communication to all sides, from Iran to Saudi Arabia and the Palestinian radical Islamist group Hamas to Israel, said Ayham Kamel, Middle East and North Africa director at Eurasia Group.  > While economics are a limiting factor for Russia, Putin also enjoys several advantages over American presidents, according to Paul Salem, vice president of the Middle East Institute in Washington.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/745wta/while_the_us_investigates_the_israelis_and_turks/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~221615 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*: **Russia**^#1 **Middle**^#2 **Syria**^#3 **Putin**^#4 **East**^#5"


"I'll add 2 observations regarding current answers.  Jack nailed it - a 401(k) match beats all. But choose the right flavor account.  You are currently in the 15% bracket (i.e. your marginal tax rate, the rate paid on the last taxed $100, and next taxed $100.) You should focus on Roth. Roth 401(k) (and if any company match, that goes into a traditional pretax 401(k). But if they permit conversions to the Roth side, do it) You have a long time before retirement to earn your way into the next tax bracket, 25%. As your income rises, use the deductible IRA/ 401(k) to take out money pretax that would otherwise be taxed at 25%.  One day, you'll be so far into the 25% bracket, you'll benefit by 100%   traditional. But why waste the opportunity to deposit to Roth money   that's taxed at just 15%? To clarify the above, this is the single rate table for 2015:  For this discussion, I am talking taxable income, the line on the tax return designating this number. If that line is $37,450 or less, you are in the 15% bracket and I recommend Roth. Say it's $40,000. In hindsight on should put $2,550 in a pretax account (Traditional 401(k) or IRA) to bring it down to the $37,450. In other words, try to keep the 15% bracket full, but not push into 25%.  Last, after enough raises, say you at $60,000 taxable. That, to me is ""far into the 25% bracket."" $20,000 or 1/3 of income into the 401(k) and IRA and you're still in the 25% bracket. One can plan to a point, and then use the IRA flavors to get it dead on in April of the following year.  To Ben's point regarding paying off the Student Loan faster - A $33K income for a single person, about to have the new expense of rent, is not a huge income. I'll concede that there's a sleep factor, the long tern benefit of being debt free, and won't argue the long term market return vs the rate on the loan. But here we have the probability that OP is not investing at all. It may take $2000/yr to his 401(k) capture the match (my 401 had a dollar for dollar match up to first 6% of income). This $45K, after killing the card, may be his only source for the extra money to replace what he deposits to his 401(k). And also serve as his emergency fund along the way."


With the corruption that goes on in these countries (China, Thailand, Etc), it's difficult for (US-UK) companies to comply with anti-corruption laws and still do business there. These countries demand bribes for permits, use of land etc. and if you don't pay expect to wait for these necessary things indefinetly...


that could be said about anyone of a million companies in america. thats when the executives track records become relevant. so far so good for musk. no doubt they are venturing into unknown territory but thats half the fun. to be honest with the current state of things a pioneer of this sort deserves america's support.


Maybe you should read the *whole* thread before replying?  From [the story I linked above:](http://www.computerweekly.com/news/2240150767/Facebook-shareholders-sue-over-misleading-IPO)  >It has emerged that only a select group of insiders were aware that Facebook was forecast to earn tens of millions of dollars less than had been publicly stated.  You can announce news, or you can withhold it as corporate proprietary information. What you most definitely *cannot* do is just tell a few friends.


'Rent to own' is not a precise, single agreement. It can be whatever the seller and you agree to. It's a unique seller that would agree to this. Keep in mind, most sellers are needing to get their money in full to buy their next house. You might find an investor willing to work with you, but only for an inflated price, interest rate, or both.  The ideal seller would be underwater (owing more than the value of the home) but needing to move. In which case, they are hoping to find someone to buy them some time to get situated in their new house before moving forward with you and the bank to arrange a sale.  At its simplest, you might pay a premium on your rent to fix the price, giving you the option to buy during a particular period at that price.  It can be a much higher premium where you are renting and paying extra until you hit 20%, at which point you agree to finance the balance either with a bank loan or through the seller.  Buying a home you will live in is a personal decision. With no numbers offered, it's not like we can tell you if it's a wise purchase.


Phone 3 years old, very unlikely to upgrade -- few reasons to.  Will likely go Android next time around because I hate lightning jack with a passion.  I don't think Apple is in trouble yet... but there will come a time when most people will see their existing phones as good enough and that will undercut the upgrade cycle many of these companies rely on.


Despite my previous claim to not respond to crank messages, no, you are also spectacularly ignorant of the basics about how inflation is calculated.  The Department of Labor Statistics has an army of people going into retail each month to evaluate comparables.  Heads of lettuce, gallons of milk and twinkies are not, in fact, 4x smaller than they were in 2007 and even if they were, DLS corrects for it.


As long as you, or rather, your wife, qualifies for a deposit, the source doesn't matter. As an example, if my child makes more than $5500, and I'd like to help her with her IRA, I can gift her the money for the deposit. The actual funds don't need to be from her income.


Pretty insightful post. Never thought that it was this simple after all. I had spent a good deal of my time looking for someone to explain this subject clearly and you’re the only one that ever did that. Keep it up.


I would recommend using growth/value/income/bond based asset allocation because your goal is to find asset classes that have different performance trends (when 1 is up, the other is down and vice-versa).    If you chose Domestic, US stocks and diversified between Med Cap and Large Cap stocks, they would not exactly mirror each other, but they would roughly rise and fall at the same time, preventing you from taking full advantage of diversification, increasing risk and lowering returns.


SurePay is not designed to send money from one person to himself.  It is designed to transfer money from one person to someone else. What SurePay does, is allow you to link an account to a name/email/phone number.  Then, when someone else, who's also linked an account to a name/email/phone number, selects your name/email/phone number to send money to, the money is transferred.  This doesn't buy you anything when transferring money to another of your own accounts.  I won't say it's impossible to use SurePay to do so, but it's definitely not designed to do so, and may not be permitted.   If you could use it for that purpose, you would have to separately register your two accounts, using a separate email for each, and then use the first email to send to the second email; each will have been tied to a different account, so you'll know which is which. My suggestion would be to follow Wells Fargo's instructions here: Can I transfer funds to or from my accounts at another institution? You can transfer money between your Wells Fargo checking and savings accounts and accounts you may have at other U.S. financial institutions. Wells Fargo gives you greater flexibility, convenience, and control to transfer funds where and when you need it. Sign on to Wells Fargo Online and click the Transfers tab to learn more about transferring funds to your account at another financial institution. As that should give you the official answer, at least.


">""I have decided that your legal enterprise should not be allowed to make money"" is terrible!  That's not what's happening. They're simply saying that their private company service won't be the one to enable that money making.  You can't claim this is government retribution just because it's a big company or a ""government-sized"" action.   >If you are in favour of this then you should be in favour of the phone company, the electricity company, and gas company to deny service to anyone who's ever been accused of being a paedophile.  PayPal is not a utility. You're making incorrect comparisons."


If the 6 credits per semester working part time schedule includes no loans, consider this.  Yes, it may take you twice as long to finish, BUT, you'll have a lot of working experience, AND zero student loans when you're done. Compare this to someone who graduates in four years and has 20k in student loans.  If they set up a 20 year repayment for the loans, they'll still have 16-18k left to pay and 4 years of job experience.   You'll have 8 years of half time job experience and zero debt.  The key would be to find a job in your area of interest.  More ideal would be one that pays for classes as a benefit.  Then you might increase your class load and decrease the total time to graduate, AND have relevant job experience when you graduate.


You don't say what kinds of mutual funds, or what bonds. You don't say how old you are. You seem to have enough cushion to strike out on your own comfortably.  This is good. Compared with Vanguard's management fees, the fees you're paying are pretty high. The bottom line of what to invest in rests with you.  If you outsource it, it's still your money.  The managers get paid whether you make money or not. You have lots of other options: real estate from a distressed seller, commodities, currencies, websites, or other things where you have a knowledge advantage. For the time being, though, if you're concerned about your main income stream, I wouldn't get terribly risky with your money.  Cash is just peachy in that case.


"If you think your cash will buy fewer goods in the future due to inflation, are there goods you will want or need in the future that you can purchase now? I think the cost of storage would need to be less than the inflation in price for this to make sense. If you used commodity trading there may not actually be a storage cost but likely some fees involved that would need to be weighed against the expected inflation. Basically if ""things"" are going to cost more in the future, making your cash worth less, can you convert cash into ""things"" before prices escalate?"


"As taken from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_number, ""The original purpose of this number was to track individuals' accounts within the Social Security program."" It later became a requirement for claimed dependants for federal taxes and you are required to have one before the age of one."


>> Combined spending during his administration grew by 3.5 trillion, not including the tax cuts (~1.5 trillion) and the afghanistan / iraq wars (~2 trillion combined).  > That wouldn't make a huge difference because you're counting the costs of 8 full years  Not a huge difference?  3.5 + 1.5 + 2 = 7 trillion dollars.  That sounds huge to me.


They were manipulating the system. That's distinct from 'cheating'.  Target could've shut this down and didn't - in fact, they knew it was happening (even this article admits that) and yet extended the promotion. They may have not understood what was happening but more likely they let it go, saw what happened and will modify their future strategy accordingly.  The overall cost was probably not that high - they most likely got more promotion and word-of-mouth than they would've got with an equivalent advertising cost. For every person who goes to the effort of making $5000 there's going to be 5000 who don't, go for the $10 and turn out more profitable and more likely to shop at Target in the future.


> growth doesnt come from people hiding in safe havens. it comes when investors take risk.  And investors don't take risks when they find it difficult to calculate, like when policies are continually changing, when regulations grow by the day, when the cost of doing business (such as employee health care) are unknown.  This is pretty much exactly what fiscal conservatives are saying is wrong with our current U.S. administration and economic climate.


"This is a hard question to answer.  Government debt and mortgages are loosely related.  Banks typically use yields on government bonds to determine mortgage interest rates.  The banks must be able to get higher rates from the mortgage otherwise they would buy government bonds. Your question mentions default so I'm assuming a country has reneged on its promise to pay either the principal or interest on government bonds. The main thing to consider is ""Who does not get their money?"".  In other words, who does the government decide not to pay.  This is the important part.  The government will have some money so they could pay some bond holders.  They must decide who to shaft. For example, let's look at who holds Greek government debt.  Around 70% of Greek government debt is held outside Greece.  See table below.  The Greek government could decide to default only on the debt to foreign holders.  In that case the banks in France and Switzerland would take the loss on their bonds.  This could cause severe problems in France and Switzerland depending on the percentage of Greek bonds that make up the banks' assets.  Greek banks would still face losses, however, since the price of their Greek bond holdings would drop sharply when the government defaults.  Interestingly, the losses for the Greek banks may be smaller than the losses faced by the French and Swiss banks.  This is usually the favored option chosen by government since the French and Swiss don't vote in Greece. Yields on Greek government bonds would rise dramatically.  If your Greek mortgage is an adjustable rate mortgage then you could see some big adjustments upward.  If you live in France or Switzerland then the bank that owns your mortgage may go under if Greece defaults.  During liquidation the bank will sell their assets which includes mortgages and you will probably not notice any difference in your mortgage. As I stated earlier: this is a hard question to answer since the two financial instruments involved (bonds and mortgages) are similar but may or may not be related."


"You bring up some very high level stuff, each of which can be the subject of a life's work.  For taxes, I first read J.K. Lasser's Your Income Tax. I actually read it cover to cover instead of using it as a reference guide. I hit topics that I'd otherwise have never looked up on purpose. Once you familiarize yourself with the current tax code, keeping up on changes to the code goes pretty well.  As far as investing goes, William Bernstein has two titles, “The Four Pillars of Investing” and “The Intelligent Asset Allocator”. Others have liked “Personal Finance for Dummies” by Eric Tyson. These are great introductory books, the classic is “Security Analysis” by Graham & Dodd. Warren Buffet was a student of Benjamin Graham and he did fine applying these principals.  For retirement, The Number by Lee Eisenberg was a good read. I consider retirement an extension of the investing education, only the money flow is reversed, withdrawals, no new deposits. Of course this is an oversimplification.  In my own reading list, I include books such as “Extraordinary Popular Delusions & the Madness of Crowds” by Charles MacKay and “The Great Crash 1929″ by John Kenneth Galbraith. Understanding how these bubbles happen is critical to a complete education. I'm convinced that when it comes to investing if I can teach my daughter to understand the concept of Risk and Reward and to understand there are certain common alerts to such bubbles, the simplest of which is the term ""this time is different"" as though a hundred years of market dynamics can change in a matter of a few years.  Last, there are books like ""Stop Acting Rich"" by Dr Thomas Stanley. Not quite investing, per se, but a good read to get an idea of how we have a distorted view of certain signs of wealth.  Keep reading, no harm in taking books out of the library and returning if the first chapter or two disappoints."


Why do people take out life insurance on their children? They do so largely because it's being sold to them.  The insurance companies generally push them on the basis that if you have to pay for a funeral and burial, the cost would devastate a family's finances.  In some rare instances that might actually be true, but not generally. Should I take out a policy on my child? Generally no.  When they sell you a policy they have to dance around a catch-22 - if you have enough money to afford the 'cheap' life insurance, then you have enough money to pay for a funeral and burial that's probably not going to happen.  If you don't have enough money to pay those expenses in the rare case that a child does die, then you really can't afford the insurance, even if it's only 'pennies a day for peace of mind.' And why would schools send these home to parents, year-after-year?  The schools are paid a commission.  It is not much more than a fundraiser for them, just like school pictures. Am I missing something? Yes, in fact, you could be making money hand over fist if you were willing to prey on parental insecurities.  Just set up a stand outside the hospital and get parents who are just about to deliver to sign up for your amazing insurance plan in case the tragic occurs.


If you want to look at it in terms of the public markets, turnarounds in PE are essentially levered value investments. It is likely that you aren't going to change the business much, but are actually just buying an out-of-favor business and waiting on the industry to bounce back.  Hmm, that sucks. Not nearly as cool as what I was thinking PE was about =/


"that would imply that a 30Y US Treasury bond only yields 2.78%, which is nonsensically low. Those are annualized yields.  It would be more precise to say that ""a 30Y US Treasury bond yields 2.78% per year (annualized) over 30 years"", but that terminology is implied in bond markets. So if you invest $1,000 in a 30-year T-bond, you will earn roughly 2.78% in interest per year. Also note that yield is calculated as if it compounded, meaning that investing in a 30-year T-bind will give you a return that is equivalent to putting it in a savings account that earns 1.39% interest (half of 2.78%) every 6 months and compounds, meaning you earn interest on top of interest. The trade-off for these low yields is you have virtually no default risk.  Unlike a company that could go bankrupt and not pay back the bond, the US Government is virtually certain to pay off these bonds because it can print or borrow more money to pay off the debts. In addition, bonds in general (and especially treasuries) have very low market risk, meaning that their value fluctuates much less that equities, even indicies.  S&P 500 indices may move anywhere between -40% and 50% in any given year, while T-bonds' range of movement is much lower, between -10% and 30% historically)."


"Amazon is a bunch of whiney bitches. They want us to window shop local B&M, and buy their lower priced items. But sellers should make up the differences for them to sell shit cheaply, because ""it's not fair"".   I like amazon, but cry me a river."


Hi all - I'm a UX designer working on a design challenge as part of an interview. I'm looking to learn more about how traders select securities to monitor and how they create alerts to track values of interest.  If you could walk me through the last time you: - Decided on a security you wanted to monitor and set up a system to monitor the security - Which fields (e.g., last price, volume, etc) you were most interested in tracking for that security - If you created alerts for any fields (e.g., price)  - If you did create an alert: what the alert was for, the steps you took to create it, and how the alert notified you of a change  Any information you can provide would be super helpful! Please include your current role and the number of years you have experience trading. Even if you're not currently a trader or relatively new/in school any answers would be helpful!


IMO would have been a solid idea 10-20 years ago, but I'm not sure how they are going to monetize it. I think it's a great value add for the mall, but I can't see users paying each time they use it or for an allotted time. I think the only way it would be successful for the company who makes/operates the booths is if the mall is paying them a fee for having them in their mall, but offer it as a free service for their attendees.   With the number of people physically going to malls decreasing due to online retailers, I don't see this as a forward thinking idea. My view is limited though. I can't say I know shopping habits or trends in China.


"What are you trying to do Exactly?  What is a covariance ""profile""? (Cov Matrix)?   Also lose the jargon.  From my understanding you want the same covariance in the portfolio, however it doesn't work like that as covariance is an observed matrix. It's hard enough to target variance in a portfolio (see GMV) and to target covariance would be even more difficult. You can attempt to use the weights you have right now in terms of exposures, but LEAPS may give you unwanted theta.   Are you long short or long only? if you're long only the interplay between the positions is rather irrelevent, as right now all that matters are the weights."


"It's also designed terribly for a currency. It has wild fluctuations in price, and as of late has been in a massive run up as this bubble has built. Why would anybody use their ""currency"" that they think will be increasing in value dramatically? It's the opposite of people dumping all their cash when they know they have high inflation and they can buy less in a day or week.   Also, as a long-term worldwide currency option, it's moronic. It has a set limit, which isn't high, but it's supposed to be in use worldwide, with billions using it. The people who own a lot early/now will have something that is niche, to essentially like 1% of the major currency, which is an abusrd amount worldwide. It would increase in value, meaning people should hold it, meaning there is less supply while demand increases. This is terrible for a currency."


There is light at the end of the tunnel, but it is at least a decade off, possibly more - and it is going to get far worse before it gets better.  We've got an economic collapse and a depression coming still.  The government has done about as much economic manipulation as it can reasonably do, and those things can't be avoided anymore.  The only thing the government can do is control the timing to a limited extent (though the more they try to put it off, the worse it will be).  Obama can't fix this - neither can Congress anymore.  The time when it was possible to avoid the disaster is past.  We've been doing this to ourselves for more than 50 years and it will soon be time to pay the piper.  All we can do is prepare for it as best we can and try to ride it out.


In the US there's no significant difference between what a business can deduct and what an individual can deduct. However, you can only deduct what is an expense to produce income. Businesses are allowed to write off salaries, but individuals can't   write off what they pay their gardener or maid (at least in the US) If you're a sole proprietor in the business of managing properties - you can definitely deduct payments to gardeners or maids. Business paying for a gardener on a private property not related to producing the income (like CEO's daughter's house) cannot deduct that expense for tax purposes (although it is still recorded in the business accounting books as an expense - with no tax benefit). Businesses are allowed to deduct utility expenses as overhead, individuals cannot Same thing exactly. I can deduct utility expenses for my rental property, but not for my primary residence. Food, shelter, clothing and medical care are fundamental human needs,   but we still pay for them with after-tax money, and pay additional   sales tax. Only interest (and not principal) on a mortgage is   deductible in the US, which is great for people who take out mortgages   (and helps banks get more business, I'm sure), but you're out of luck   if you pay cash for your house, or are renting. Sales taxes are deductible. You can deduct sales taxes you paid during the year if you itemize your deduction. You can chose - you either deduct the sales taxes or the State income taxes, whatever is more beneficial for you. BTW in many states food and medicine are exempt from sales tax. Medical expenses are deductible if they're significant compared to your total income. You can deduct medical expenses in excess of 10% of your AGI. With the ACA kicking in - I don't see how would people even get to that. If your AGI is low you get subsidies for insurance, and the insurance keeps your expenses capped. For self-employed and employed, insurance premiums are pre-tax (i.e.: not even added to your AGI). Principle for mortgage is not deductible because it is not an expense - it is equity. You own an asset, don't you? You do get the standard deduction, even if your itemized (real) deductions are less - business don't get that. You also get an exemption amount (for your basic living needs), which businesses don't get. You can argue about the amounts - but it is there. In some States (like California) renters get tax breaks for renting, depending on the AGI. CA renters credit is phasing out at AGI of about $60K, which is pretty high.


"You need to run awareness campaign on Facebook even something like $2/day can have a huge impact on letting people know you exist. Then post frequently, at least 1 daily picture of something for sale in the shop.   Second collect emails at the counter a simple pen and paper list works surprisingly well. Get a free MailChimp email account and email coupons once a week. In the beginning you'll want strong offers as you are building the list don't waste peoples time with lame or no offers, come hard with a huge coupon or they will unsubscribe after the first email. This might cost you some money but don't think of it as selling something for a loss think of it as a marketing expense.  Try Groupon, you are desperate this is where desperate local businesses go. Make a smart offer limit how they can spend it. I would suggest focusing it on the cold brew as that has enough margin.  Partner with local bakeries/coffee roasters/cup cake shops pretty much any one who will have you and give them free shelf space and get them to market to their Facebook/IG/Twitter followers about your location and that they can buy stuff there also. This is huge and you can capitalize your local market.  Finally get over the attitude of ""no one supports local"" people don't owe your mom their business just because she's local she has to compete on price, service, and selection just like anyone else even Amazon. So reevaluate your prices your profit margins and start talking to the customers to see what they want in the store."


Pick a hotel/casino and get the rewards card.  I only go to the Borgata, and I have never left without having a room compd for my next visit. I go a few times a year and have only payed for a room once.  Usually I get a couple hundred in match play, some slot $ and free buffets too, but the free rooms that are actually nice is why I go back.


The breakeven amount isn't at 8 years. You calculated how many years of paying $500 it would take to break even with one year of paying $4000. 8 x 10 years = 80 years. So by paying $500/year it will take you 80 years to have spent the same amount ($40000 total) as you did in 10 years. At this point it may seem obvious what the better choice is. Consider where you'll be after 10 years: In scenario #1 you've spent $5000 ($500*10) and have to continue spending $500/year indefinitely. In scenario #2 you've spent $40000 ($4000*10) and don't have to pay any more, but you currently have $35000 ($40000 - $5000) less than you did in scenario #1. If you had stayed with scenario #1 you could invest that $35000 at a measly 1.43% annual return and cover the $500 payments indefinitely without ever dipping into your remaining $35000. Most likely over the long term you'll do better than 1.43% per year and come out far ahead.


"First off, the jargon you are looking for is a hedge. A hedge is ""an investment position intended to offset potential losses/gains that may be incurred by a companion investment"" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedge_(finance)) The other answers which point out that put options are frequently used as a hedge are correct. However there are other hedging instruments used by financial professionals to mitigate risk.  For example, suppose you would really prefer that Foo Corporation not go bankrupt -- perhaps because they own you money (because you're a bondholder) or perhaps because you own them (because you're a stockholder), or maybe you have some other reason for wanting Foo Corp to do well. To mitigate the risk of loss due to bankruptcy of Foo Corp you can buy a Credit Default Swap (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_default_swap). A CDS is essentially a bet that pays off if Foo Corp goes bankrupt, just as insurance on your house is a bet that pays off if your house burns down.   Finally, don't ever forget that all insurance is not just a bet that the bad thing you're insuring against is going to happen, it is also a bet that the insurer is going to pay you if that happens.  If the insurer goes bankrupt at the same time as the thing you are insuring goes bad, you're potentially in big trouble."


It gives some vague crap about pain, but talks very little about the actual diagnoses, chronic pain is one of those things that seems subjective, but can be very problematic for determining ability. A construction worker with chronic back pain might in theory be able to do a desk job, but if hes an older worker, especially only a high school graduate, he's gonna have a fuck time trying to get a desk job, and is likely unable to meet the standards required for retail, and you can not be just a cashier, all cashiers are now stock/clerk/cashier with lifting minimums and requirements to stand for 4 to 5 hours at a time. In THEORY theres a job he could be doing, in ACTUALITY there isn't. Times of high unemployment create more and more situations like that as people who found some acceptable niche to fit in that accommodated their disability now find it extremely difficult to find that accommodation again. Lacking other options, it now becomes a necessity to get into SSDI since the US has pretty much no real reliable welfare. An SSDI requires you not work, so you can't wean off of it, its a trap, once you're in, you usually don't get out. It's the biggest, most extreme welfare cliff in the way it's designed.


">If you don't like it you can either vote for representatives that will remove these sorts of welfare payments  If you support this position you are a heartless social darwinist.  > or you can supply the workers with better-paying jobs.  Jobs do not just ""happen"" they exist to fill consumer need. You could do some Keynesian government job expansion if you would like to temporarily and artificially create more jobs, but this is only a bandage and is not a desirable nor a permanent solution. In order to do that you have to have real growth in the economy and a government cannot do that on its own. It requires those who have capital to invest it in new ventures."


"The future of digital marketing lies in content creation. We are content marketer specialists. We ""SEO In Utah"" research, create great content, even turn the data into awesome visual representation and finally spread the content across the web by placing them on relevant sites. Our produced content has the tendency to go viral. Interested? Contact our SEO In Utah team at SitesBySara.com or by phone at 385-355-5351. Click here for more details: http://sitesbysara.com/"


> It's much cheaper,      [U.S. coal production and coal-fired electricity generation expected to rise in near term](https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=29872)       >**In 2017 and 2018, as natural gas prices are expected to increase**, coal is expected to regain some share of the electricity generation mix, and coal production is expected to increase slightly. The past decline in coal production has not been uniform across the three major coal-producing regions in the United States.    ***     >its only loss to coal is ease of storage.     and amount.     >the United States has enough natural gas to last about **86 years.**     https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=58&t=8   >coal production since the industrial revolution, recoverable domestic coal reserves at current mining levels would last **222 years.**


"Publication 590a covers this in a fairly specific manner. Page 11, section ""Are You Covered by an Employer Plan?"", specifies: The Form W-2 you receive from your employer has a box   used to indicate whether you were covered for the year.   The “Retirement Plan” box should be checked if you were   covered. So, by default, if that's checked, you're covered.  590 does go into more detail, though. Assuming you're covered under a Defined Contribution plan (a 401k for example): Defined contribution plan. Generally, you are covered   by a defined contribution plan for a tax year if amounts are   contributed or allocated to your account for the plan year   that ends with or within that tax year.  Tax Year: Tax year. Your tax year is the annual accounting period   you use to keep records and report income and expenses   on your income tax return. For almost all people, the tax   year is the calendar year. Further, they cover issues related to an employee leaving Dec. 31 very specifically: A special rule applies to certain plans in which it is not   possible to determine if an amount will be contributed to   your account for a given plan year. If, for a plan year, no   amounts have been allocated to your account that are attributable   to employer contributions, employee contributions,   or forfeitures, by the last day of the plan year, and   contributions are discretionary for the plan year, you are   not covered for the tax year in which the plan year ends. If,   after the plan year ends, the employer makes a contribution   for that plan year, you are covered for the tax year in   which the contribution is made. Example: Example. Mickey was covered by a profit-sharing plan   and left the company on December 31, 2014. The plan   year runs from July 1 to June 30. Under the terms of the   plan, employer contributions do not have to be made, but   if they are made, they are contributed to the plan before   the due date for filing the company's tax return. Such contributions   are allocated as of the last day of the plan year,   and allocations are made to the accounts of individuals   who have any service during the plan year. As of June 30,   2015, no contributions were made that were allocated to   the June 30, 2015, plan year, and no forfeitures had been   allocated within the plan year. In addition, as of that date,   the company was not obligated to make a contribution for   such plan year and it was impossible to determine   whether or not a contribution would be made for the plan   year. On December 31, 2015, the company decided to   contribute to the plan for the plan year ending June 30,   2015. That contribution was made on February 15, 2016.   Mickey is an active participant in the plan for his 2016 tax   year but not for his 2015 tax year. Mickey is in a similar (but different) circumstance, and it's clear from the IRS's treatment of his circumstance that you would be in the same boat (just a year less off) - but be aware given Mickey's situation that it's theoretically possible for them to make another contribution next year, as Mickey had, depending on when their plan year/etc. ends. So - from the IRS's point of view, everything you said the company did is correct.  They paid you in January, contributed to your 401k as a result of that paycheck, and thus you were officially considered covered for 2015."


Regardless, it doesn't indicate any financial stress or credit-related issues.   Just because you are pissed off about the way the financial industry works, doesn't mean the banks are in poor shape. If France and Germany come crashing down, then you may have some evidence to back your point.


Until we get free returns from all online retailers, I am still shopping at malls and physical stores. Some stuff just doesn't fit you and retailers don't offer enough measurements to really do you justice. The most important thing in clothes is fit, and you have to try something on to validate that.


"Vanguard has a Vanguard FTSE Social Index Fund.  Their web page says ""Some individuals choose investments based on social and personal beliefs. For this type of investor, we have offered Vanguard FTSE Social Index Fund since 2000. This low-cost fund seeks to track a benchmark of large- and mid-capitalization stocks that have been screened for certain social, human rights, and environmental criteria. In addition to stock market volatility, one of the fund’s other key risks is that this socially conscious approach may produce returns that diverge from those of the broad market."" It looks like it would meet the qualifications you require, plus Vanguard funds usually have very low fees."


I work at the Lowes in huntersville NC, 10 minutes from the headquarters. The store is known as the corporate store, where they try all the dumb shit first. Can say that they do some dumb shit, but this is straight autistic... and they do pay employees better than any other large retailers, so that's cool I guess


I don't know about keeping different rollover IRAs separate. But I know that there is a reason to keep rollover IRAs separate from other traditional IRAs -- if you want to roll them back into a 401(k) in the future, some 401(k)s only allow funds that were rolled over from a 401(k) originally.