"Tell them you will not loan them any more money until their existing debts are paid off. This is closer to how the real world works and it won't come across as vengeful or like your changing your initial ""contract"". If they protest, lovingly tell them that your money is not their money, and that an interest free loan from their father is a privilege, not a right. As far as charging interest on your loans, go for it! Charge them 5% or something small. Just don't do it on the existing loans or that will come across as changing your initial ""contract"" again, and perhaps once they've proven themselves to be reliable borrowers they can once again earn the privilege to have an interest free loan. The book ""The Millionaire Next Door"" has really good thoughts on this in its section on Economic Outpatient Care."


Chaos theory is two essays combined as a book. It's short.  You could probably read the whole thing in under 2 hours.  Also [here is a print version](http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Libertarian/Machinery_of_Freedom/MofF_Chapter_29.html) of David Friedman's theory.  I do have a longer, more detailed explanation, but it's in video form (about an hour).


I can think of a several reasons:


A somewhat provocative (but not unserious) proposal: Rent, don't buy a house to live in. In 2007/8, the thing that got many people in deep trouble is their mortgage. It's not a productive investment but a speculative bet on what was in fact a bubble and a class of assets that is notoriously slow to recover after a slump. Before thinking about your savings or buying into silly ideas about gold, you should realise that as a middle class worker, the biggest risk after a crisis is losing your job. Renting your accommodation means being able to downgrade or move very quickly and not being forced to sell a house at the worse possible time. If you really do need to liquidate some of your investments at a bad time, having a more diversified portfolio means that you are not losing everything to meet some short-term obligations. Assuming you're in the US, this means forgoing some nice tax advantages that might be too tempting to resist (I'm not so I am basing this on what I read on this site) but, bubbles aside, there is nothing that makes real estate a particularly good investment as such, especially if you also live in the house you're buying. You might very well come out on top but you expose yourself to several risks and are less prepared to face a crisis.


"You could debate the ""why""s of tax policy endlessly. There are lots of things in tax law that I think are bad ideas, and probably a few here and there that I think are good ideas. I am well aware that there are things that I think are good ideas that others think are bad ideas and vice versa.  To your specific point: I suppose you could say that having a place to live is a necessity. But most people do not live in the absolute minimum necessary to give them a place to sleep and protection from the weather. You could survive with a one-room apartment with a bed on one side and a toilet and some minimal cooking facilities on the other. Most people have considerably more than that. At some point that's luxury and not necessity. And if you want to push it, you COULD live in a cardboard box under a bridge, you don't NEED a house or apartment to survive. Personally I think it's absurd that as a home-owner I get a deduction for my mortgage interest, while if someone were to rent an identical house with a monthly rental equal to exactly the same amount that I am paying on my mortgage, he would receive no deduction. The stated goal of that one was to encourage home ownership. But people who own homes are generally richer than those who rent, so the net result is that the poor are paying higher taxes to help subsidize the homes of the rich. And then the rich congratulate themselves on how they are giving these tax breaks to help make housing more affordable for poor people. To reiterate @keshlam, tax laws only makes sense when understood politically. Yes, some people have fine ideas about what is fair and just. Others simply want tax breaks that benefit their business or people with tough financial situations that just happen by chance to resemble their own. Many of the people with noble ideas have little concept of what the implications of the policies they push are. Many of the ideas that some people view as worthy and noble, others view as frivolous, counter-productive, or even evil. Then you mash all these competing groups and interest together and see what comes out."


This is literally the worst article ever.  First dividends are not guaranteed, and the higher the yield the higher the risk for a dividend paying stock. When buying a stock that pays dividends make sure they have the cash flows to cover it long term.  Utility stocks are interest rate sensitive. If we head into a period of high interest rates, utility stocks are going to underperform, if not get killed.  Exchange traded funds can be extremely risky, and some have much higher fees than mutual funds.  Variable Annuities should never be purchased unless you have exhausted all other tax deferred strategies, and then probably still to be avoided because of high fees.  Money markets and CDs aren't really investments. They're a cash alternatives that May not keep up with inflation.


"> it’ll be a matter of time before we go public, and we’re borrowing money to pay our shareholders, and new people are investing. And there’s also created debt, and we have to pay back that debt,” said Linehan, the manager in Tilton.  Sounds like they are getting ready to use Starve the Beast tactics. ""Oh my! We have all of this debt. We're are going to have to make some cuts! People will lose jobs otherwise!"""


Listen, I didn't say I had black friends, said I had off-color friends.  But, I do have a couple black friends although not as many as brown and yellow ones.  I really don't make note of the fucking colors though, I could care less. It matters who they are, not their color. Why are you so racist? Look past the colors. Look past CNN Fake News. Look past the hate. Don't be a hater!  The big question here is, why do you have so much hate in you? Let's talk about that. Maybe you can be more forthcoming about that.


In my mind, when looking at a five year period you have a number of options. You didn't specify where you are based, which admittedly makes it harder, to give you good advice. If you are looking for an investment that can achieve large gains, equities are impossible to ignore. By investing in an index fund or other diverse asset forms (such as mutual funds), your risk is relatively minimal. However there has historically been five year periods where you would lose/flatline your money. If this was to be the case you would likely be better off waiting more than five years to buy a house, which would be frustrating. When markets rebound, they often do it hard. If you are in a major economy, taking something like the top 100 of your stock market is a safe bet, although admittedly you would have made terrible returns if you invested in the Polish markets. While they often achieve lower returns than equity investments, they are generally considered safer - especially government issued bonds. If you were willing to sacrifice returns for safety, you must always consider them.  This is an interesting new addition, and I can't comment on the state of it in the United States, however in Europe we have a number of platforms which do this. In the UK, for example you can achieve ~7.3% returns YoY using sites like Funding Circle. If you invest in a diverse range of businesses, you have minimal risk from and individual company not paying. Elsewhere in Europe (although not appropriate for me as everything I do is denominated in Sterling), you can secure 12% in places like Georgia, Poland, and Estonia. This is a very good rate and the platforms seem reputable, and 'guarantee' their loans. However unlike funding circle, they are for consumer loans. The risk profile in my mind is similar to that of equities, but it is hard to say. Whatever you do, you need to do your homework, and ensure that you can handle the level of risk offered by the investments you make. I haven't included things like Savings accounts in here, as the rates aren't worth bothering with.


"Wealth trickles up, they tend to concentrate only on a few entities. This is the nature of competition and the free market, there will be 90% losers and 10% winners who produce 90% of the world's demand. It's human nature, we tend to only buy from ""the few trusted-by-many"" producers, the ""superstar"" so-to-speak, or the ""unicorns"" as wall-street investors would like to call them.  Taxing the rich to give to the poor, those money go back to the rich! It will not do much after the initial euphoria of ""Oh hey, I have more money! Now I can buy more stuffs"" from the poor. Might give politicians some vote, but after a while, we'll be right back where we were ""should we tax the rich more ?"""


"Bernie sources: http://www.npr.org/2016/02/12/466465333/sanders-favors-a-speculation-tax-on-big-wall-street-firms-what-is-that http://www.marketwatch.com/story/what-would-bernie-sanders-wall-st-tax-look-like-2016-02-14 http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/apr/04/bernie-s/bernie-sanders-says-wall-street-tax-would-pay-his-/  > Heading out to open land to make your society in your image would definitely prove your point, as long as it works.  And do that how? Buy my own island? Sea-stead and hope the US military doesn't just drop a seal team on my head?  >We just have plenty of evidence that no government is less so.  No, we really have evidence that structure is better than nothing. I'm not advocating for no structure. Businesses/Charities/Organizations/Etc. obviously work better when they are well structured.  To answer your Enron example, no corporation would have enough power to actually do something like that if they didn't have at least partial backing by the government.   You know the drill, big business buy politicians (""contributions""), politicians write big business laws (Anti-competitive to push small guys out). Then when big business needs additional help, politicians come in to save the day (bailouts).  The market would be extremely more competitive if for example the Dodd frank act which to my understanding the repeal just recently passed the house went away. It has been choking community banks, just like Glass-Stegal did. It essentially only allowed the big banks to compete, surprise they did some stupid things (Great Recession) But if you don't think they didn't already know that they those bailouts were coming if needed, you are fooling yourself.  These messages are almost getting to the point of TLDR.  I want to simplify our debate a bit.  The crux of my whole belief is this: The only way for a government to spend their citizens money in a better way than the citizens could would be if the government knew the utility of every single citizen. It is absolutely impossible to do that. The only people that truly know their own utility from something is them self.   From here on I would like to debate the headlines like what I wrote above and not necessarily bullet points. We can every now and then but I find that we then start working on tangents of tangents of tangents and can get a little messy.  However, I do not want to leave the current stones unturned with your response.  I would say that if it was privatized, you are not going to have scope creep, at least not to the same extent. Say we have the LA militia that is wanting to help protect their ports, they want to help develop a new boat that is fast and can help maneuver around big ships quickly, like a better version of the new Mark Patrol boat.  That money is their money directly, or the peoples money who they've asked to voluntarily give their money up to help protect their area.  If they screw up and start asking for above necessary stuff or pick a developer who wastes their money, etc. They are going to lose ""business"", they will stop getting donations, lose profit, etc.  However, the government doesn't have that. Why? Because their revenue/donations aren't voluntary. There really isn't accountability, especially in bureaucracy.   To the exchange/stock problem: I would say that exchanges are private businesses too. They should have full reign on whether they allow trades. If they believe that there is an unnecessary selloff because of a fake tweet saying that President has been shot, they can stop that. If fact, it would be in there best interest to do so because it could limit unnecessary investor losses.  It is unfortunate that the whole world is covered with governments. I wish there was another Western Hemisphere to populate and try new ways with.  However, I would say that there is a clear shift away from government is society.  A few examples, the driverless car. Elderly people and people who are disabled will be able to rely on the government less for transportation. Additionally, assuming everyone will eventually have a driverless car, there will be much less demand for traffic cops/ambulances/etc.  Cryptocurrency/Noncash: As there are now more and more businesses that stop accepting cash (mainly starting with change), there will naturally be less robbers, because there is no money to steal (you could make the argument that there will be an increase in cyber theft, which I agree but not on a 1:1 ratio of the decrease in physical robberies), this decrease will help also lessen the demand for police officers.  Package delivery: If it wasn't for the post office monopolizing their ability to deliver letters and using mailboxes, they would have gone broke a long time ago. Imagine Amazon, DHL, UPS, Fedex, etc all competing to deliver you letter. I'm assuming that it would be less than the cost of a current stamp and with a lot more assurance that it will actually get to its destination.  Those are just a few examples"


No, you can also become more senior within the firm. It's not a board (of directors), it's just committees. Junior people (analyst/associates) screen deals and present it to senior people (VPs, directors) and if they think the deal should go ahead then even more senior people (MD/partners) will look at it and make the final decision. But such processes obviously depend on the firm...


"I don't think you're missing anything on the math side as far as the payments.  Likewise, it may seem everyone's driving a nicer car, but I'm going to predict that's based on area and a few other factors (for instance, my used car feels like riches in a college town).  The behavior of why people would pay money, especially with high interest debt, for something is a little different. To explain the behavior behind people who purchase luxury cars: for some people, a car is a purchase that they value, similar to a person valuing the clothes they wear, the house they live in, or the equipment they buy and either borrowing or paying full price on an expensive car is worth it to them.  We can call it a status symbol dismissively and criticize the financial waste without realizing, ""Wait, this is something they value"" like a rare book collector likes rare books (would a rare book collector pass on borrowing money if it meant a once-in-a-lifetime rare book purchase opportunity?). Have you ever felt, ""Wow this is cool/awesome/amazing"" with something?  Basically, that's how many of them feel toward these cars.  As much as I'd love to say they're only doing it for status (because I'm not a car person), that's actually somewhat de-humanizing and the more I've met people like this, the more I've realized this is their ""thing"" and to them it's totally worth it (even with all the debt).  I have no doubt that there's a percentage of them who truly may be misled - maybe they don't realize the full cost of borrowing money or leasing.  Still, for those who don't care the full cost, that's because it's their thing.  We can all agree that it's still not wise to do financially (borrow on a luxury vehicle), and it won't change that some people will do it."


However, it is always better to hire professionals for promotional video production. They are well versed with techniques, angles, and other know-how of excellent video creation. They are apt in creating videos that completely engage the audience. You can use these videos for your business promotion on various social media sites like YouTube, and others.


If the implication is that she destroyed Yahoo, I have written in this piece that she has saved Yahoo from the inevitable painful death. Search and online advertisement business is a monopolistic business dominated by google (https://goo.gl/MTEvFp). Yahoo never had a real chance in the market to survive on its own. Marissa did an excellent job at Yahoo to stabilize the business and shift it away from Jerry Yang's misguided investments and bets (https://goo.gl/ufmYsw). I am certain that Marissa will make a great CEO for Uber, and help Uber survive the current severe head-winds the company is facing.


To focus on your question.. pay it off then trade in. The reason is because say you just have 14k laying around and buy a car for 14k, you must pay 14k plus tax. If you are in one of the states that allows the tax break, then trading the 14k valued vehicle in for a 14k vehicle will nullify your sales tax. As per your question, if you traded the car in at 7k, you would then owe 7k plus tax. You only have 7k..so how would you pay for the tax and why would you want to? Pay off the car and you'll have 14k of tax free off any car.


The loan agent surely knows that having a combination of loans greater than the value of the property (less some margin) is illegal, but also impossible.  Your first mortgage, mechanic's liens, tax liens, and so forth are a matter of public record.  In most states the records can be viewed online, by anyone, for free. The title search prerequisite for getting the second mortgage looks beyond the low hanging fruit for things like aborigines claims for parcels of land that include your property.  The loan agent is trying to sell you a home equity line of credit. Almost everyone gets one after building up some equity.  There's often no closing cost and it's not necessary to ever use it.  Keep it for emergencies.


Once you've made a good-faith effort to straighten the situation out you've done all you can do. Cash the check.


"Spain is one of the most socialists states in Europe. I know because I live here. You are totally correct that the former owners broke it, what you are not right about is that they were private. Caja Madrid was a special partnership between the local governments and some private parties. All the ""cajas"" in Spain were set up that way and all had government representatives in their boards.  EDIT: I just checked and turns out Caja Madrid, which represents 50% of Bankia, was 100% owned by the Madrid local government. The rest of the 50% of Bankia was formed with other ""cajas"" which were partly or completely owned by their local governments as well.  Also is worth noting that the spanish private banks are also in trouble and have survived only because of the liquidity provided by the ECB, but they are not even close to the level of bankruption that the ""cajas"" have achieved."


With set targets and work analysis of each team member, there's no room for ambiguity or assumptions. Work needs to be regularly submitted for review and excuses won't work if you have already placed a clear picture in team meetings. Ignoring problems (both personal and professional) will only intensify them so find the root cause and move ahead. As a team leader remain motivated and set an inspiring example for the rest of the team to follow suit.  Find commercial office space for rent, meeting room space for rent , conference rooms on rent. Many options available for training spaces, co-working spaces and shared office spaces in Mumbai, Hyderabad, Pune, Bengaluru, Gurgaon, Noida & Chennai


Perth Ceiling Fixers is the best possible destination for you if you are searching the internet for a highly reliable Perth-based ceiling repair service. Get in touch with us today and avail exciting offers by calling us. Check out our website to know more about our services.


"An annuity makes sense in a few different scenarios: In general, they are not the best deal around (and are often ripoffs), and will almost certainly be a bad deal if pitched by a tax preparer, insurance salesman, etc.  Keep in mind that any ""guarantees"" offered are guarantees made by an insurance company. The only backing up of that claim in the event of a company failing is protection from your state's Guaranty Association. (ie. not the Feds)"


I guess most banks will not have an issue with that arrangement. The bank take collateral in the house for the amount your girlfriend needs to borrow, from her part of the house. Most likely the bank will accept the house' value as what you pay for it, assuming you pay fair market value - otherwise they will contact a valuation company to put a value of your new house. If they feel that her share of the house (50%) can cover her loan, they will definitely agree with the deal. You being a foreigner will, probably, have little to say in the matter, as long as you do not need to borrow money for your share of the house.


This fortune article is referenced in his either 2003 or 2004 annual report in which he does say that the market will not likely return much in the future and generally talks numbers. I am also a value investor, such that I can be in this environment and believe there is a bit of value in knowing where you think the market is headed but the real value is in underwriting each deal. In long, I agree with you


But there's a difference freelancing for your craft and managing people to so similar tasks.  Sometimes you just want the flexibility of working for yourself and you enjoy mastering the craft.   Not everyone's end game is more money.   If marketing and sales are not your strengths, yet you still have a steady stream of future clients, or can pick some up when you need to...why over complicate things?  When I first started out many moons ago, there was a contract programmer working at one of my first jobs.  He worked 6-9 months a year, and then traveled and relaxed the rest.  The summer I met him he was going to complete visiting every National Park in the US; sounds like a nice goal to me :)


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://aeon.co/essays/how-did-usury-stop-being-a-sin-and-become-respectable-finance) reduced by 96%. (I'm a bot) ***** > So just when and how did most bankers stop seeing their work in moral terms?  > In his Divine Comedy of the 14th century, the Italian poet Dante Alighieri put the usurers in the seventh circle of Hell; in the case of Reginaldo Scrovegni, one Paduan banker singled out by Dante, his son ended up commissioning a chapel painted with frescoes by Giotto to expiate the family&#039;s sin.  > So what would the Scholastics make of modern finance? Would they admire how efficiently a family&#039;s savings can find productive uses? Or would they decry how developing countries pay more to borrow than rich ones? Would they marvel at our banks&#039; international reach? Or would they condemn how poor people pay for banking services such as checking accounts that rich people get for free?   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6mhfiw/how_did_usury_stop_being_a_sin_and_become/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~164022 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*: **bank**^#1 **interest**^#2 **money**^#3 **usury**^#4 **people**^#5"


What makes you think Samsung is going to topple Apple? The way things are going I'd say Xiaomi is more likely (still wouldn't bet on it). Samsung's market share looks nice but their product is a commodity, Apple's isn't.


My cousins bought a gas station, their lives have been shitty ever since. However they dont have a convenience store which is where all the money is at apparently. The father bought it for 600k, land and all. Supposively he thought it was worth over a mil due to the land valuation. The business operations standpoint is that they make minimum wage.


Does anybody here have experience with company songs?  I just can't relate to this article.  I have no particular loyalty to my employer - but nor do I bear them ill will.  They compensate me fairly for doing work that I mostly enjoy.  I can't imagine being asked to sing a company song.  When I work extra hours, I do it for the love my craft, not for the love of my company.  Also, as a salaried employee, it is my job to complete certain tasks.  I understand that this may occasionally entail night or weekend work.  However, if this happens too frequently, it is my responsibility to escalate to my management so that my tasks can be prioritized.  Consistent and unending night and weekend work is just a recipe for burning people out and reducing overall long-term productivity.


Those are some of the least useful regulations. Kills legitimate market making function in less liquid transactions.  The whole of the regulatory framework should have been leverage, capital and liquidity testing for too big to fail banks. The rest of the rules are overkill and compliance jobs bills. Unless your a compliance professional working in these fields you won't even notice.


Swimming clubs exist.   Treat it as a start up business and it's easier to figure out.   Once you know about what people are willing to pay to join you know about how much you can spend.   Our family business invites tenants to use a private pool located at one of our properties. We maintain the facility and have appropriate signs posted and a balloon insurance policy specifically for the pool. In 1975 the pool cost 25,000 to install and we spend about $5000-$6000 to operate and heat it each season.   The downside is that there is likely a lot less support for the idea than you think. You're going to have to limit access to it with a membership and that's going to be a pain to figure out because it will almost certainly require an employee or a very expensive electronic access control.  You can't really open it up to the entire community without some sort of contract or no one has an incentive to pay. Every time a home sells in the community you either lose a customer or gain a headache if you don't have some sort of deed restriction or membership fee.


Having some trouble in accessing the internet from certain areas of your home such as pool side area? To fix this issue, buy a Linksys extender from the market and the problem is resolved. Linksys Extender setup is easy if you setup through installation CD.


I suppose if it's been raining, I'd swap my tires for some nice CX tires, but really.. my road tires can handle a bit of mud. I mostly don't go near them in the rain (only a couple of months of the year around here) because they're on top of big hills and I don't trust my skills descending the roads to/from them in the rain/on wet pavement.


"Assuming you are paying into and eligible to collect regular Employment Insurance benefits for the job in question, I don't see how owning a side business would, by itself, affect your ability to participate in the workshare program.  Many people own dormant businesses ($0 revenue / $0 income), or businesses with insignificant net income (e.g. a small table at the flea market, or a fledgling web-site with up-front costs and no ad revenue, yet ;-) I think what matters is if your side business generated income substantial enough to put you over a certain threshold. Then you may be required to repay a portion of the EI benefits received through the workshare program.  On this issue, I found the following article informative: How to make work-sharing work for you, from the Globe & Mail's Report on Business site.  Here's a relevant quote: ""[...] If you work elsewhere during   the agreement, and earn more than an   amount equal to 40% of your weekly   benefit rate, that amount shall be   deducted from your work sharing   benefits payable that week. [...]"" The definitive source for information on the workshare program is the Service Canada web site.  In particular, see the Work-Sharing Applicant Guide, which discusses eligibility criteria.  Section IV confirms the Globe article's statement above: ""[...] Earnings received in any week   by a Work-Sharing participant, from   sources other than Work-Sharing   employment, that are in excess of an   amount equal to 40% or $75 (whichever   is greater) of the participant's   weekly benefit rate, shall be deducted   from the Work-Sharing benefits payable   in that week. [...]"" Finally, here's one more interesting article that discusses the workshare program: Canada: Employment Law @ Gowlings - March 30, 2009."


What exactly does the balance sheet of a software company tell you? The majority of meaningful assets are inside your employees' heads.   You can't capitalize R&D and depreciate it, it's a straight flow through to the income statement. And you can't put human capital on a balance sheet.  Software firms generally carry little to no debt and their cap structure is almost all equity. What are you going to put up for collateral when your product is bits and bytes?


shitlawjobs.com gives a sobering look into current entry-level salaries in law positions. I recently got shat on on here for saying $12/hr is too much to pay Subway employees, but some of these legal positions don't pay any better.


If it's anything IG that's likely an annualized figure. I previously sold CP over short term windows at 1% annualized. Else, it would generate a high long term gain, but you need to weigh a variety of factors versus gains, particularly if you're investing any meaningful sum of money. I'm not a bond trader.   Unless it's some kind of payday loan...


From Indian context, there are a number of factors that are influencing the economic condition and the exchange rate, interest rate etc. are reflection of the situation. I shall try and answer the question through the above Indian example. India is running a budget deficit of 4 odd % for last 6-7 years, which means that gov.in is spending more than their revenue collection, this money is not in the system, so the govt. has to print the money, either the direct 4% or the interest it has to pay on the money it borrows to cover the 4% (don't confuse this with US printing post 2008). After printing, the supply of INR is more compared to USD in the market (INR is current A/C convertible), value of INR w.r.t. USD falls (in simplistic terms). There is another impact of this printing, it increases the money supply in domestic market leading to inflation and overall price rise. To contain this price rise, Reserve Bank of India (RBI) increases the interest rates and increases Compulsory Reserve Ratio (CRR), thus trying to pull/lock-up money, so that overall money supply decreases, but there is a limit to which RBI can do this as overall growth rate keeps falling as money is more expensive to borrow to invest. The above (in simplistic term) how this is working. However, there are many factors in economy and the above should be treated as it is intended to, a simplistic view only.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/13/business/economy/labor-market-wages.html) reduced by 78%. (I'm a bot) ***** > We also do a lot of insurance restoration work like hail damage claims, and in those cases the insurance provider determines what they pay for labor and we work with it.  > At the end of the day, if I were to say, &quot;We&#039;re a great company; we pay people double the prevailing wage, pay our insurance and taxes, buy the best materials for your house, and we give back to our community, but that means we&#039;re going to charge you double for your roof,&quot; I&#039;m sure people aren&#039;t going to say: &quot;Oh, that&#039;s so great they pay their employees $35 an hour. Let&#039;s write them a check for twice as much as their competitor because it makes us feel good!&quot; They&#039;re going to do what&#039;s best for their bank account and their budget.  > That&#039;s why for us the H-2B program is a win-win: We get great workers whom we pay well above the minimum wage, and they are low-risk temporary immigrants who come here to do the job and go home to their families at the end of the season.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6nqns3/if_workers_are_scarce_is_it_the_work_or_the_wages/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~168421 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*: **pay**^#1 **wage**^#2 **work**^#3 **want**^#4 **people**^#5"


In all honesty, if they truly need the funding, they didn’t have a choice unless they could get one of their strategics to pony up more money. It’s either raise capital from PE or IPO at that point. They’re not going to get a third strategic in the door, especially at that valuation.


This often occurs because of misrepresentation of the corporation income. Most of the income in the US is payed at or a little below the 35% rate... But when the figure is calculated non-US income is counted alongside US income.  For some reason, in the US it makes sense for corporations to pay income taxes in the countries they actually made the income in AND the US. Mind you... Only USA and Eritrea have this sort of backwards thinking.  So yeah... If they make $100 worldwide income, out of which $50 is US income, and the company reports $15 in US taxes, they get represented as paying 15% effective tax rate when in reality they payed 30% on US taxes for their US income.


And you have yet to explain how it would matter how they use the benefits they are entitled to.   If they didn't spend any of the money they were given it would stay on their card.  If they bought food and didn't eat it, it would sit on their shelves.  What if they bought food and let someone who was hungry eat it at their house?    Are these people abusing the system as well?    What you don't seem to understand is ITS THEIR ENTITLEMENT.  They can do with it as they please, it would be smart to use it to eat food but guess what some people have drug problems and or likely a mental issue.  Apparently in your worldview poor people don't get to have freedom?  These people would get it either way if they spent it on food or drugs.  Not to mention we are talking about a very small percentage of people and an even smaller pittance of money.    We have THOUSANDS of tanks we paid hundreds of millions of dollars for each just sitting in the fucking desert that replaced the already working tanks we already had that we do not need.  Yet here you are concerned about some person at the lowest rank of society trading 15 dollars on a snap card for cigarettes.


"Your retirement plan shouldn't necessarily be dictated by your perceived employment risks. If you're feeling insecure about your short-term job longevity and mid-career prospects, you will likely benefit from a thoughtful and robust emergency fund plan. Your retirement plan is really designed to fund your life after work, so the usual advice to contribute as much as you can as early as you can applies either way. While a well-funded retirement portfolio will help you feel generally more secure in the long run (and worst case can be used earlier), a good emergency fund will do more to address your near-term concerns. Both retirement and emergency fund planning are fundamental to a comprehensive personal finance plan. This post on StackExchange has some basic info about your retirement options. Given your spare income, you should be able to fully fund an IRA and your 401K every year with some left over. Check the fees in your 401K to determine if you really want to fully fund the 401K past employer matching. There are several good answers and info about that here. Low-cost mutual funds are a good choice for starting your IRA. There is a lot of different advice about emergency funds (check here) ranging from x months salary in savings to detailed planning for each of your expenses. Regardless of which method you chose, it is important to think about your personal risk tolerance and create a plan that addresses your personal needs. It's difficult to live life and perform well at work if you're always worried about your situation. A good emergency plan should go a long way toward calming those fears. Your concern about reaching mid-life and becoming obsolete or unable to keep up in your career may be premature. Of course your mind, body, and your abilities will change over the years, but it is very difficult to predict where you will be, what you will be doing, and whether your experience will offset any potential decrease in your ability to keep up. It's good to think ahead and consider the ""what-ifs"", but keep in mind that those scenarios are not preordained. There isn't anything special about being 40 that will force you into a different line of work if you don't want to switch."


Well, don't turn the exception into the rule. Not everyone can make it into college, or make college work, or afford it. Not everyone can work 45 hours a week while going to school full time. For some people thats too much. Maybe they have kids. Maybe they have sick family members they care for, maybe they don't live on a bus route.


"Google ""forex broker"" and find one of the thousands that allows you to trade on Gold futures.  Then use one of them to short Gold... just watch your leverage. I would certainly wait before you're shorting gold.  Why tie up capital in a bubble that you think will burst in the next few years.  Wait for the price to increase and monitor for actual signs of the bubble bursting.  Right now with the Euro possibly collapsing shorting gold probably isn't your best bet."


Except this problem wasn't caused by Fanny or Fredie.  That's just a conservative spin on the issue.  It was caused by CDOs and CDSs, which would have happened no matter what.  Fanny and Freddie exacerbated the issue, perhaps, but didn't cause the entirety of the problem.


In the event of an audit, you AND your friends need to have already reported the cash the same way in previous tax filings. Even differences between legitimate sources can result in civil and criminal sanctions from the IRS, let alone questionable, dubious and illegal sources.


Defined Benefit Plans: Defined benefit plans are disappearing because of their high cost to the companies that provide them.  When an employee retires, the company must pay his pension for the rest of his life, even longer if the pension includes a survivor option.  Thus the company's financial burden grows as more employees retire.   By law, they must provide a fund that has sufficient resources to pay all present and future pensions.  Low interest rates, such as we have now, place a greater burden on the amount that must be in these funds.   For these reasons, most companies, including large ones like IBM and Lockheed Martin, have discontinued their pension plans and provide only defined contribution plans.   Defined Contribution Plans: These require the company to only make contributions while the employee is working.  Once the employee retires, the company's responsibility ends.  Usually these plans employ a 401K type savings plan for which the employee contributes and the companies matches some or all of that contribution.  Comparison: Although a fully company paid pension plan is the best, it is now almost unavailable.  The defined contribution plan, if it includes company matching, can be a viable alternative if the investments are chosen wisely and perform as expected.  Of course, this is not guaranteed but is probably the best option that most working people have at this time.


"Japan doesn't ""need money"", it is a currency supplier in a floating exchange rate system.  It can make as much as it needs with the press of a key, and it has been.  It's also been constantly defying the expectations of inflation reactionaries, despite its huge deficit."


You are being extremely aggressive and I don't understand why, I've been pretty level headed. I agreed with the central point that the rate is too high, but I also think all loopholes and tax breaks should be removed. I also agree that chasing profits made in other countries is silly and is obviously a major contributor in the issue of inversion.  I just simply disagree that our largest companies are paying the highest taxes in the world, when the data I've seen clearly shows that other countries with lower rates are still collecting more. If our rate is the highest, but we still collect less than the average, tell me how these large corporations are being effectively taxed at the highest rate in the developed world? What am I missing?


Five Star audio visual provide equipments for hotels, resorts. The five star audio visual technologies provide the training and certification program for all staff. If you search a partner who is passionate about your success then see our technology and grow your business with them.


It depends on the broker. The one I use (Fidelity) will allow me to buy then sell or sell then buy within 3 days even though the cash isn't settled from the first transaction. But they won't let me buy then sell then buy again with unsettled cash. Of course not waiting for cash to settle makes you vulnerable to a good faith violation.


Just a few observations within the Black-Scholes framework: Next, you can now use the Black-Scholes framework (stock price is a Geometric Brownian Motion, no transaction costs, single interest rate, etc. etc.) and numerical methods (such as a PDE solver) to price American style options numerically, but not with a simple closed form formula (though there are closed-form approximations).


I personally am from Canada and use my local bank to trade stocks. Contact your local bank and they will tell you how to do it, since rules depend on country of residency. If you are not close to a bank, e-mail the major bank in the country of your residence.


Thank you for the quick reply. My main firm pretty much sets us up as individual practices with limited support as far as customer service. The clients are ours to take care of. There is not a formal small account policy I am aware of, though I will confirm this next week.   I am considering delegating a current assistant, who is training to be a rep, to take care of these clients under my close supervision. It might be good experience for him and a way I can still profit.   I wouldn't want to lose these clients because a) they might mature or bring referrals, and b) there are individuals in need of at least some insurance to protect their families.


you are on the right track. 7/66 will be legally necessary (most likely), and CFP is pretty much a professional necessity at this point. insurance license isn't a bad idea, but i would need to know the full scope of services offered to give you more info.  as far as resources go, watch bloomberg in the morning and a bit before you hit the hay for futures and international movement. their website is pretty solid to check on throughout the day, too. beyond that, it's kind of all preference as to what sources you use. i'd recommend staying away from very obviously biased outlets. but there will be professional sources that are availed to you once you're up and running - your dad might have some subscriptions he can give to you. i check on the Atlantic, fivethirtyeight, and the economist regularly for context, as well.  on a personal note, i would encourage you to really weigh your options before committing to taking on the practice. i am a professional (hold 7/63/66/9/10 and CFP) and can tell you that, in my opinion, it is very exhausting and largely unrewarding working with clients.  i won't go into a pessimistic diatribe here, as i don't want to discourage you from doing something you want. but be really sure - unless you're an analyst, this sort of work experience does not lend itself to changing careers or type of work you do.


"I blame that ""no concealed carry"" sign on the outside of the building. We live in a crazy world, and I won't patronize a business that suppresses my right to self defense. I'm probably a small percentage of why BWW is failing, but it's notable that there are others like me who also refuse to voluntarily visit a GFZ. GFZ's don't work. So I don't go to them. I'm not missing anything I can't get elsewhere."


stocks represent ownership in a company. their price can go up or down depending on how much profit the company makes (or is expected to make).  stocks owners are sometimes paid money by the company if the company has extra cash.  these payments are called dividends. bonds represent a debt that a company owes.  when you buy a bond, then the company owes that debt to you.  typically, the company will pay a small amount of money on a regular basis to the bond owner, then a large lump some at some point in the future. assuming the company does not file bankrupcy, and you keep the bond until it becomes worthless, then you know exactly how much money you will get from buying a bond. because bonds have a fixed payout (assuming no bankrupcy), they tend to have lower average returns.  on the other hand, while stocks have a higher average return, some stocks never return any money. in the usa, stocks and bonds can be purchased through a brokerage account. examples are etrade, tradeking, or robinhood.com.   before purchasing stocks or bonds, you should probably learn a great deal more about other investment concepts such as: diversification, volatility, interest rates, inflation risk, capital gains taxes, (in the usa: ira's, 401k's, the mortgage interest deduction).  at the very least, you will need to decide if you want to buy stocks inside an ira or in a regular brokerage account. you will also probably want to buy a low-expense ration etf (e.g. an index fund etf) unless you feel confident in some other choice.


"Houses tend to appreciate more than condos. Houses are also more expensive. So it's a choice. You mention your girlfriend will be buying it with you. Take the time now to decide what will happen if you split up and put it in writing. Are you splitting the downpayment and mortgage 50/50? If not things can get complicated. Also consider home improvement costs, etc. If you think she is ""the one"" and you'll end up starting a family together, look at the location, nearby schools, etc. Sure, it may sound too early to be thinking about these things, but if you get a head start on finding a nice house you could save a lot of money and build a lot of equity with some smart decisions today."


Just like they are cracking down gold and other stores of value? I'm unsure how you think that Bitcoin falls outside of regulations that apply to all wealth and stores of value. It's not like you are allowed to buy drugs or not pay taxes as long as you don't use US dollars.  The fact that Bitcoin and all other crypto currency are not controlled by any single entity, government, or business that can control the rules at thier will is a pretty big deal. I would think the obvious freedom from a single corruptable entity seems pretty useful to me.  Obviously the volitility and high transaction fees makes it a pretty questionable store of value - for now - considering the newness of Bitcoin - it's not really that surprising. At least those fees are based on the market and not just the whim of Visa.


You haven't mentioned the country. As a general premise, you own them money and the fact that the account was closed has no bearing on the fact that you own them money. My suggestion would be pay them off.


If I were donating money to a charity, i.e. an organization set up to help others, I would simply send them the money and ask that my name not be used in publicity. That would mean that the person(s) actually benefiting from my donation didn't know who I was. The charity would know, but they don't themselves benefit.


If the child can take over the life insurance when they wish to get a mortgage or have their own children, there may be a case for buying insurance for the child in the event that your child's health is not good enough for them to get cover at that time. However I don’t think this type of insurance is worth having.


"For the same reason that people bet on different teams. Some think the Tigers will win, others thing the Yankees will win. They wager $5 on it. One of them wins, the other loses. In a short, one person bets that the stock goes down, the other bets that the stock goes up (or hold). You're basically saying ""I think this stock is going to hold it's value or go up. If I thought it would go down, like you do, I would sell it myself right now. Instead, I'll let you have it for a while because when I get it back I think I'll come out on top."""


"I work at a mid market investment bank and while we don't usually use required rates of return (when we do it's typically in ranges based on previous experience in the market e.g. PE firms will look at IRR of 25%+ on mezz deals etc...) I can offer some insight into how you can think about it.   ""Required rate of return"" is a fairly arbitrary concept and literally is whatever you define it to be. Typically, the required rate of return is a function of risk i.e. the higher the riskiness of a project, the higher the return must be to compensate you for taking on that risk (this view is as per Markowitz's modern portfolio theory). This is easier said than done however as ""risk"" is tricky to define (The general, though somewhat outdated, rule is that risk = variability of returns).  To your questions:  1. How is rate of return determined: In my field of work (fairly niche) required rate of returns aren't usually an exact science and are typically based on i) financial leverage in the business ii) operating risk (seasonality, management team strength etc...) iii) type of security (e.g. for debt deals, what is the investment secured by)  2. Am I correct in thinking a firm will just choose a rate of return that they are already receiving? No, you are not correct, UNLESS the risk profile of the investment opportunity matches your current business. E.g. if you're a shoe manufacturer earning 15% on your capital and are looking to acquire another manufacturer in the same business with the same risk profile, then you can use your current rate of return as the requirement. If for e.g. you're a shoe manufacturer contemplating opening a new fully automated plant which will cost half your current net worth but allow you to triple your production, you will need to use a different (higher) required rate of return to compensate your firm for the additional risk it's taking on. E.g. if your shiny new plant only gets you a 15% return, you might as well deploy your capital in your current business at a much lower risk and earn the same amount of money.   Disclaimer: I have simplified. Significantly."


Why shouldn't I just keep my money in the savings account and earn the same amount (both accounts have the same APY in this case)? I will assume that you are transferring money from your savings account into a Traditional IRA and deducting the contribution from your income.  While you may think that the money that is being transferred is yours already -- it is sitting in your savings account, for Pete's sake! -- you are deducting that amount in getting to your taxable income, and so you are effectively contributing it from current income and not paying taxes on the amount contributed. So, consider the same amount of money sitting in your savings account versus the same amount of money sitting in your Traditional IRA account. While you will earn the same amount of interest in both accounts, you will have  to pay taxes each year on the interest earned in the savings account. You might  choose, as most people do, to not take money out of the savings account to pay theses taxes but just pay them from ready cash/checking account/current income etc., or these taxes might just reduce the refund that you will getting from the IRS and your State income tax authority, but in either case, you have paid taxes on the interest earned in your non-IRA savings account, and of course, long ago, you also paid taxes on the original amount in the non-IRA savings account.  So, if you take any money out of the non-IRA savings account, you don't pay any taxes on the amount withdrawn except possibly for the interest earned from January 1 till the date of withdrawal (which you are paying from ready cash). On the other hand, consider the Traditional IRA. The original deposit was not taxed in the sense that you got a deduction (reduced tax or increased refund) when you made the contribution. The annual interest earned was not taxed each year either.  So when you make a qualified withdrawal (after age 59.5 or by meeting one of the other exceptions allowing withdrawal before age 59.5), you are taking money on which you have not paid any taxes at all, and the IRS wants its cut.  The money withdrawn is taxable income to you. Furthermore, the money withdrawn is not eligible for any kind of favorable treatment such as having it count as qualified dividends or as long-term capital gains even if your IRA was invested in stocks and the money in the account is all qualified dividends or long-term capital gains.  If you make an unqualified withdrawal, you owe a penalty (technically named an excise tax) in addition to income tax on the amount withdrawn. If you are investing in a Roth IRA, you will not be getting a deduction when you make the contribution, and qualified withdrawals are  completely tax-free, and so the answer is completely different from the above.


Bad workers are non-union as well, there will always be lazy people. Unions are most needed for minimum wage workers, they traditionally fought for the workers in the worst conditions. Unions only make up about 7% of the work force today and are at a fairly weak position compared with the past. Their highest concentration was actually during one of the United States' large periods of economic growth back in the 1950s.


> Also, the link at the top isn't the same as the one at the bottom.  You're right. The link at the bottom points to the actual article seen at Medium, first posted at Reddit, which does point to the original original at reddit. Both those posts were written by the same redditor u/tapesit who was just seen three days ago.  Paging u/TapesIt -- is that you on Medium, or has some scoundrel absconded with your posts? (If so, we should probably ask the mods to remove this post and/or ban the Medium user @SoldOutSupplier)


There are a LOT of variables at play here, so with the info you've provided we can't give you an exact answer.  Generally speaking, employee options at a startup are valued by a 409a valuation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_Revenue_Code_section_409A) once a year or more often.  But it's entirely possible that the company split, or took a round of funding that reduced their valuation, or any other number of things.   We'd need a good bit more information (which you may or may not have) to really answer the question.


It could be a delay because of the Automated Clearinghouse (ACH) process. At least that's the explanation on this thread at the PayPal forums, and on Prosper.com.


"I understand economics quite well. This whole idea that the market will correct itself is bullshit. The government didn't come up with rules like you can't discriminate against people for the fun of it, but under some free market theory you would expect that one to solve itself. Well, it didn't.  Have you ever answered the phones for cab company on New Year's Eve? No? Well I have, five years in a row. I can take 80 phone calls in an hour. I've told people it'll be four hours for a cab because that's how long it would take and they say ""Send it."" It's shitty because I can't refuse the call legally and there's no way in hell they're going to be there when the cab finally gets dispatched. Driver's on the street constantly contend with waiting for someone to come out and a bidding war starting to hire them. I've heard $80 offered as a tip to take a group before, although $20 seems to be more the standard bribe.  There's no economic behavior to serve shitty neighborhoods. The riders don't tip and the driver is at an increased risk of being robbed and violently attacked. Why do cab companies serve them? Because the city legally requires it and in reality there are at least some decent people whose only option is to take a cab.  So, congratulations, you took the same microeconomics class that I did and all the theory dictates that this should all work itself out. You get to throw around sayings like ""ceteris parabus,"" but things are never ""all things being equal"". The difference is I also spent a number of years going to the school of hard knocks and learned from reality how things actually work."


This really doesn't mean anything. Netflix has made some incredibly risky moves that a larger acquisition would have never allowed them to do. Netflix would not be the same service we know today if it was acquired by blockbuster.


S&P/TSX 60 VIX (CAD) is an equation and as the implied volatility of two close to the money TSX 60 options change, the output changes. This is why the intra-day price fluctuates on a graph like a traded product.  Although VIXC can't be traded, it can still be used as an important signal for traders. The excerpt is from slide 12, more information can be found here. https://www.m-x.ca/f_publications_en/vixc_presentation_en.pdf Futures (stage 2) Options, ETFs, OTC Products (stage 3) have not been implemented.


I had a pretty good experience with Lending Tree, although they are a mortgage broker, not a lender themselves.


">I tried to like /r/Anarchism, but the mentality portrayed there is that of a statist who is pissed that they aren't the dictator, and are willing to use violence and theft to achieve their goals.   Try asking /r/DebateACommunist, then.  Despite the name, almost nobody there is any kind of statist. Everyone's either anarchist left or proprietarian right.  But of course, this is the ultimate in neofeudal ""anarcho""-capitalist claptrap.  ""Anarchists?  THOSE STATISTS!"""


"First, you need to figure out what your objectives for the money are.  Mostly, this boils down to how soon you are going to need the money.  If you are, as you say, very busy and you don't need the money until retirement, I'd suggest putting your money in a single target date fund, such as the BlackRock LifePath fund.  You figure out when you are going to retire, and put your money in that fund.  The fund will then pick a mix of stocks, bonds, and other investments, adjusting the risk for your time horizon. Maybe your objectives are different, and you want to become an trader.  You value being able to say at a BBQ, ""oh, I bought AAPL at $20"", or ""I think small caps are over valued"".  I'd suggest you take your $50,000, and structure it so you invest $5,000 a year over 10 years.  Nothing teaches you about investing like making or losing a bit of money in the market.  If you put it all in at once, you risk losing it all - well before you've learned many valuable lessons which only the market can teach you. I'd suggest you study the Efficient-market hypothesis before studying specific markets or strategies."


"Wait a minute, this is a huge clickbait statistic.  From the article:   >  Total overdraft fees totaled $33.3 billion in 2016, just shy of the $33.8 billion financial institutions collected in credit-card interchange fees  They're comparing the _total_ sum of overdraft fees to the _total sum_ of interchange fees.    While interchange fees have gone up over time, all the statistic in the story tells us is more people are using credit cards for transactions than ""before"".    Merchants also have a huge choice in what sort of fees they pay, the processor they use (it's a surprisingly large market), and the rates vary by processor, type of merchant, risk to the merchant, type of business, type of card, and so on.  As a note, the ""type of card"" is not just ""visa"" or ""amex"", but different cards from different issuers can have different interchange fees.  That airline rewards card has a higher fee than that ""rebuild your credit"" secured (read: backed by a deposit) card.    In short, this is a nonsense article that provides no useful comparison."


Mt Gox was an exchange that went belly up because of financial and strategic mismanagement. It was also a valuable lesson for many people: if you don't control your private key, you don't control your bitcoin.  Scams running bitcoin (or any other cryptocurrency for that matter) are vastly underrepresented in the grand scheme of things concerning money. US Dollars, Euros, Yen, World of Warcraft Gold - it is all being used to manipulate people into spending tokens of worth for worthless tokens. This is not inherent to bitcoin, and you are misrepresenting it if you think it is.  Cryptocurrencies are in their infancy still, and many of the current adopters are being scammed by so called ICO's. This is, however, a natural process, and will even out again as ICO's get a bad rep, and only those with a good business case get valued. We saw the same thing during the dot com bubble.


"Have you read the comments? ""Who cares these places have bad service anyway"", ""Well I know where I won't be eating anymore"", ""This should be a dose of reality for Obama voters"". And the list goes on. I don't mind discussing the business side of politics, but that's not what has been going on."


I think you need a lesson on Banking 101.   > I mean siphoning funds assuming that you're going to be running a HFT shop or prop trading or using models to predict when something is most profitable, which is beneficial to your wallet but not really to society.  I am confused, maybe your logic will clarify this concept for me. Say, I have invested in a mutual fund which has done really well and I have made returns of over 120% in 15yrs. Is this considered stealing as well?? According to you it would be. Maybe others were more patriotic and invested their savings in Treasury bonds which probably earned them say 28% in the past 12 years. How is this different from someone working as prop shop trader (You should generalize it as a trader not just quants). Sometimes they take losses other times they make profits. Most just manage to make a living. If not they find another career (Which I think a cynical man like you ought to be doing too). If you truly understand the industry structure and believe in it, you will realize it's just another profession. If you're truly disgusted by this profession, maybe ask yourself why does society tolerate over priced attorneys, over priced doctors, high end real estate, expensive designer clothing stores.. many other examples to cite here. To bring things closer to your life in perspective, the $10 t-shirt you're wearing was probably prepared by  people like my cousins in India who work for wages of $110 a month. Should I call you a thief for stealing from her?


"Being long the S&P Index ETF you can expect to make money. The index itself will never ""crash"" because the individual stocks in it are simply removed when they begin performing badly. This is not to say that the S&P Index won't lose 80% of its value in an instant (or over a few trading sessions if circuit breakers are considered), but even in the 2008 correction, the S&P still traded far above book value. With this in mind, you have to realize, that despite common sentiment, the indexes are hardly representative of ""the market"". They are just a derivative, and as you might be aware, derivatives can enable financial tricks far removed from reality. Regarding index funds, if a small group of people decide that 401k's are performing badly, then they will simply rebalance the components of the indexes with companies that are doing well. The headline will be ""S&P makes ANOTHER record high today"" So although panic selling can disrupt the order book, especially during periods of illiquidity, with the current structure ""the stock market"" being based off of three composite indexes, can never crash, because there will always exist a company that is not exposed to broad market fluctuations and will be performing better by fundamentals and share price. Similarly, you collect dividends from the index ETFs. You can also sell covered calls on your holdings. The CBOE has a chart through the 2008 crisis showing your theoretical profit and loss if you sold calls 2 standard deviations out of the money, at every monthly interval. If you are going to be holding an index ETF for a long time, then you shouldn't be concerned about its share price at all, since the returns would be pretty abysmal either way, but it should suffice for hedging inflation."


Marijuana should be decriminalized. It would stop giving insurance companies loopholes to deny claims, and would let the government hire better cybersecurity experts. Digital forensics agencies have been complaining for years that they can't fill positions fast enough because so many applicants don't want to comply with their marijuana policies.


"I think the answer to this question depends on how much you trust yourself. Most people are wonderful at deceiving themselves. I'd personally not trust myself; I'll use Liam's points for the pitfalls some people get into. You can pay off your loans with summer internships and retain the initial cash you had for additional activities that make college enjoyable, i.e - Fraternity/ Sorority, clubs, dinners, and social nights.  This is actually the risk I've seen many people do. They'll blow their money in one semester under the assumption that 'they'll just earn more in Summer and keep it for expenses or the future."" Another benefit to taking these loans would assist in building credit, No Credit (in the USA) is actually a good standing. Many sensible banks or credit unions will happily give people with No Credit a loan. This makes intuitive sense if you think about it. Imagine two people with the same income. One owes money regularly to multiple sources and the other has no debt obligations. Which one are you loaning money to? Simplifying things a lot: Great Credit is best, followed by No Credit, then Good Credit, and then Bad Credit. The advantage of Great Credit over No Credit is simply that some institutions in some sectors don't have the policies in place to process No Credit people (No Credit people plan to not apply for credit often, for self-explanatory reasons, so this is a mote point)."


My point was not especially reliant on your personal experience; the point was that for many people it's not as simple a matter as just sucking it up and hiring a lawyer.  It's great that you had the know-how and the funds to defend yourself when you were sued, but for many entrepreneurs this post could not be more relevant.  I don't see a need to scorn an already distressed couple, regardless of what anyone thinks they should or shouldn't have done. Why not post about something that could help them out? After reading their story I can't see what else could be done other than what he is already suggesting. Any ideas?


"OK boss, I'll play along.  First of all, which original comment did I edit? Here's a tip, you can see which comments have been editted because they have little *'s beside them. I'd think you'd know that given that you're a mod here.  Secondly, once you're done looking for it and can't find it, cause I didn't edit any of them, explain to me how in my original comment, pointing out a difference between ""making money"" and ""turning a profit"" displays my ignorance of the distinction between revenue and profit."


Conference on ‘Achieving Better Parenting for our Children’ November 29, 2011 ‘Parenting towards Resilience’ was the main theme discussed during a conference held recently, organised by Agenzija Sedqa in collaboration with the Office of the Children’s Commissioner. Ms. Sina Bugeja, Chief Executive Officer, Foundation for Social Welfare Services during her opening address explained that Parenting towards Resilience, was the main theme chosen by the Foundation to [...]


A lot of countries with harsher rules and higher taxes have lots of big companies that makes massive profits. I have no sympathy for this man. Compete or die. Obama wont change much that he already hasn't. This is just a guy that in the past has bragged about his ability to affect the florida vote trying to affect it again. Slimy bastard.


Raise wages by 20%, and cut the work force by 25%.  Drive suppliers from expensive countries if production, like China, and to lower cost options like Vietnam to cut costs by another 1-2%.    None if this is hard or complicated.  Your job: don't end up relying on this sort of job to provide for yourself.  Stay in school, kids.  And, pay for school in cash, which you can earn by working for $12 per hour at Target before you go making babies and what not.  If you can manage to control yourself for a few years.


That's another model doomed to failure. Truth is people do care about their privacy. They don't seem to right now because they don't really understand how completely it's being invaded. But give it time, there's going to be a privacy rebellion on the internet, and all these companies who have built their revenue models around stealing people's personal information are going to be f***ed.


An iPhone was only $600 at launch and it was the same type of deal.  It's the latest tech and it's exclusive for the foreseeable future.  That makes it a status symbol in many circles.  On the other side of the coin it gives the perception of environmentally friendly which is a social thing in itself.


Clark Howard talked about a Consumer Reports' test on the subject.    Here is his summary: Consumer Reports has taken a close   look at the store brand vs. name brand   question in the magazine's October   2010 issue. The verdict? Store brands   offered taste that was better than or   equal to name brands in many food and   non-food categories.  In general, store brands tend to save   you about 30 percent on average over   their national brand counterparts.  In comparing Heinz tomato ketchup to   Target's Market Pantry private label,   Consumer Reports preferred the latter.   In another example, Wal-Mart's Great   Value potato chips got the edge over   Lay's, according to the publication.  However, Consumer Reports suggests   that you skip the store brand and go   for the national brand when it comes   to mayonnaise, french fries, butter,   tuna and peas.  Clark's rule when it comes to store   brands is to give them a try just   once. If you like it, you save up to   30 percent each time you go shopping   going forward. If you don't like it,   you only lose money once. Many stores   even offer a money-back guarantee for   their products.  So remember, the potential savings can   be so great that there's always a   compelling reason to sample the store   brand. And here is the full article from Consumer Reports.


Yes it is (legal). There is of course no law requiring any business you walk in to break your money. What made you think there would be? Being a bank in the US (and in other countries) has some legal consequences, but none of them relates to 'having to do business with anyone that walks in', neither 'having to break bills for people' (not even for established customers). Yes, it was historically commonplace for most banks to do all money-breaking for free, but that does not establish any obligation to do it. Maybe the FED is required to do that, but that won't help you if you don't live near either.


"really, so half of them (being born in 1993 or later) are over the age of 30?  Are you mentally retarded or being treated for a brain tumor?  no jackass, according to the census parameters (millennials = born 1993) render your post idiotic.  ""The population of 18- to 34-year-olds is a cohort, which is a group of people that share a common demographic experience or characteristic (in this case, age). [...]  There is no official start and end date for when millennials were born.""  But the cognoscenti and research cells primary responsible for collating (collecting), sorting this data all operate on the following objective delimiters:  ""[...]The birth year of the youngest ranges from ***---> 1993 <---*** ~~to 2010.~~"" And these are the consumers I was referring to, you know the other half you refer to in your flawed, but brief post."


I tried direct indexing the S&P500 myself and it was a lot of work. Lots of buys and sells to rebalance, tons of time in spreadsheets running calculations/monitoring etc, dealing with stocks being added or removed from the index, adding money (inflows). Etc. All of the work is the main reason I stopped. I came to realize the 0.05% I pay Vanguard is a great deal.


>Huh? Agriculture is down to single digits as part of the GDP. What does that have to do with a gold standard and monetary policy?  I was being sarcastic.   >But as soon as the USA left the gold exchange standard, total factor productivity began to dramatically stagnate.  Correlation doesn't equal causation. Remember that this is also the same time that European, Japanese, and Soviet economies were picking back up after WW2. Global production picked up and there was more international competition.   >Because our massive debt is doing so well for us? In the beginning it looks nice because there is very little pain and is practically unnoticible, but as we see current events playing out in the US and to a greater extent Europe which isnt as tightly knit economically as the US, fiat currency has huge problems.  The EU cannot print money in the same way the USA can. If anything the Euro is a cautionary tale about currency's with too stringent printing limitations. Along with tying together a set of countries at vastly different levels of economic development.   The USA is not anywhere near the point of no return, and seeing as we can finance our debt at ridiculously low rates compared to the rest of the world, it would be much simpler to do that, than try and restructure the entire monetary system of the USA.  >Established over what? the last 40 years? We are at about 80-90 years now.   >Thats hardly enough time to call practical fact when the gold standard existed for hundreds and thousands of years.  The gold standard has not been in use for hundreds of thousands of years. Nor was it the only currency previous to fiat.  >I am not sure why you think that the USA is in such a great position. The american dream is faultering if you're just starting out in life. Just ask any number of recent college grads who are increasingly living with parents, not getting married and can't find jobs.  I don't think asking my local college grad is a good way of determining the USA's macro-economic situation. You're absolutely right that there is a major major disparity of wealth problem. But the gold standard isn't the reason for that. Unemployment Insurance and Welfare are also comically small portions of the budget. If you wanna talk about cutting spending, Defense and Medicare are where it's at. And you don't even have to hurt old people or soldiers to fix them.


>then what's to stop people from building a twitter clone?   technically software patents but I doubt there's one that applies to something the likes of twitter. There are alternatives already but they just haven't gained momentum yet because the need isnt there. However, I can only hope that if twitter does start filtering, censoring, 'disappearing posts', blocking trends from showing up, ect - it will only be a matter of time before it becomes the next google wave or my space.


> The new exchange bonds will be getting paid as normal in Argentina. (Unless Argentina changes its mind! In which case it will have home-court advantage in changing the terms of the bonds.) The old exchange bonds, and the old old bonds, won't get paid, exactly, but Argentina will deposit money at the central bank for them, which they can get any time they want to swap into new exchange bonds. Presumably many people will hold on to the old exchange bonds, hoping for some improvement in their lot in life, and eventually that hope will turn into lawsuits, as hope does. So there will be two classes of bondholders suing Argentina, and each other, and not getting paid, and being sad.  This paragraph from OP's article is golden


"The first article you link clearly refers to Warren Buffet and doesn't, in regard to taxes, refer in any way to Berkshire Hathaway. The second article you link is titled, ""Ways Professional Traders Can Save Big At Tax Time."" Berkshire Hathaway is not a firm primarily engaged in trading. It is engaged in investing in companies that it feels offer long-term growth and appreciation. In some cases, their investment is in the entire company; in others, a very large percentage of its total capitalization. Trading, on the other hand, involves buying stocks, bonds, futures, etc. for near-term resale, ideally at a profit. Stock speculation is a risky and complex occupation because the direction of the markets are generally unpredictable and lack transparency.  As has been mentioned above, we are confident that Berkshire Hathaway use every technique at its disposal to reduce its tax burden. I am confident, as well, that they spend considerable effort and expense to be certain that they are never discovered making errors in their tax returns."


Since you are looking at preserving the principal, I would recommend laddered CDs and short term treasuries (TIPs/iBonds)


"I'd change my attitude a bit. ""I'm not very good with saving money, unless I know I need to.""  If you could act as if you absolutely needed to save, but took the subsidized loan and set it aside, you'd have a good start.  As a student, it would be difficult to raise money the way an established working person might. A low interest credit card, a 401(k) loan, Home Equity Loan, etc.  If you feel it would be too tempting to set it aside, don't take it. Your question is fine, but the answer isn't financial, it's behavioral."


> Wouldn't a competitor just offer a similar cream at a cheaper price?  In addition to patents, the FDA is a barrier to entry because of [its long approval process which can take several years](https://www.fda.gov/drugs/resourcesforyou/consumers/ucm143534.htm).  This can give a drug manufacturer years of an artificial monopoly and disincentive other companies to make a competing product since the market could look very different in a couple of years.  So if you want the free market to provide cheaper drugs you are required to eliminate the FDA from the process and accept that it is okay to sell untested drugs to people.


Well, I didn't know those existed. Author might not either.  I'm also not aware of the trading requirements in Europe. Could be different than US.  In any event, I think most who are concerned are (1) doomsayers who've predicted 30 of the last 1 recessions, (2) don't understand the point of leverage and are irrationally scared of it, or (3) understand leverage can be good but think this will be used in a bad way.


I mean, I've made perhaps 2000% on them simply buying low (whenever I remembered bitcoin existed and saw that it was only a few hundred USD) and then selling when the news reminded me again that it existed and was hitting 1k. Which is where I dropped ship this last time too, unfortunately. Also, unfortunately I never bought more than a few coins and didn't go into Ethereum at the beginning of the year, thinking it was dead. Still enough to pay for some vacationing.  Basically everyone I know has had the same experience with them - so 295% seems really low.


By numbers I assume you mean monetary amounts... the article doesn't define the separation that way...  >In one of these countries live members of what Temin calls the “FTE sector” (named for finance, technology, and electronics, the industries which largely support its growth). These are the 20 percent of Americans who enjoy college educations, have good jobs, and sleep soundly knowing that they have not only enough money to meet life’s challenges, but also social networks to bolster their success.


Planned my grocery shopping better.  You can't just wake up on Saturday hungry go to the grocer and buy what looks good. Take the time to clip some coupons and more importantly make a shopping list.


This is supply side nonsense. The primary driver of growth is demand. If demand is growing, then lower taxes will allow the company to meet growing demand faster. However, if demand is stable and currently being met by the company, reducing taxes will only enrich shareholders at the expense of society at large. Unless there is growing demand, a corporation will always choose to allocate profit via tax cuts to shareholders rather than to employees in the form of jobs or raises.


Right.  A banker provides a product/service, whether it be liquidity or something else, for a premium.  The Rothschilds, for example (I'm only familiar with them because I like their wine), are typical examples of some of the first bankers of the modern era-- they provided the ability to exchange currencies at a market value, and it made them one of the wealthiest families of the modern world.  If someone doesn't like banks, then let them walk onto the NYSE and make their own investment decisions.  Which is a terrible idea because it's statistically almost impossible to beat the market.  If you wanted to be able to prove that you are a successful investor you would have to have higher earnings than a market portfolio every day for around 180 years, in order to have a T-statistic of about 2.0.


I think the sales decrease is due in part to fewer children that were born from 2008-2012. The recession, student loans, expensive homes, and lack of middle class jobs, and delayed adulthood has a huge impact on sales. This is the same issue facing gymboree, stride rite etc.


It might be clearer to think of it as price going up when a dividend is expected, since that's money you'll get right back. As the delay before the next dividend payment increases, that becomes less of a factor,


Well, a proper answer needs a few more details: 1) What's your marginal tax bracket? (A CD is just plain silly for someone in a high tax bracket and in a high tax state) 2) What's your state of residence? 3) Do you have a 401k to draw on for a house loan in case of badly timed volatility? 4) What does will the rest of our investment portfolio look like in case of a sudden rise in interest rates? Depending on the answers to those questions, the mix of investments could be anywhere from: Tell me more about bracket/state/other investment mix and I can suggest something.


It's scary how many of these I used. Today.  Most of that is crap, but many of the buzz words have real, quite useful concept behind them. It's the people who think that just using the words is enough who give them the almost curse word status they have.


"My sister had a similar problem and went to an actual lawyer, not a  ""credit repair agency"".  The lawyers settled her debt for a lot less than she owed, and she  also got a bonus: one of the creditors called her repeatedly, even  after her lawyers had told them not to.  The lawyers ended up getting her an extra $40,000. Combined with the  debt settlement, she actually came out ahead.  Of course, her credit score went down, but it recovered in a couple of  years."


You have a few options: Personally, I would cash the check at my broker and buy a mixture of US Government and New York Tax-Exempt securities until I figured out what to do with it.


"Food to your door isn't the problem Amazon is looking to solve.  Food to your door QUICKLY is... One of them.  Replacing UPS, USPS, DHL, FedEx, etc... is the other.  Amazon is going to take ""Howdy neighbor! Going to the store? Can you pick me up some <insert item here> for me? Here's <more money than needed> and keep the change!"" and make it a part of their business.  Amazon will pay you to deliver shit for them. They've been experimenting with it for a while now (Amazon Flex).  On top of that, The article has it all wrong... The financials are just the tip of the iceberg.  The Grocery store business models all rely on two things... getting customers to go to the store and making them stay in the store as long as possible.  Amazon is going to do the exact opposite; try to keep customers AWAY from the store. That will allow Amazon to reduce store traffic enough to automate the store itself.  Edit: one last thing, remember that Amazon is an automation company."


"The ultimate purpose of Case-Schiller is to build contracts that you can use to stop worrying about this, for a price. You or your lender might buy cash settled put options based on the index, and hope that if your home falls in value, the your options become ""in the money"" to make up the shortfall. The major problem that I can see with this is finding people to take the other side of that contract. Renters would be the primary candidates, but Americans are on average so overweight in real estate that there really isn't anyone underexposed to real estate who would benefit from diversification, and the tax advantage will give people far cheaper avenues address this. Viewed in this light, your question has a sort of obvious answer: Case-Schiller is historical data, and you need to know about the future historical data. Case-Schiller can't do it alone, but you can use futures markets to predict it. Problem you'll have is that the market itself will optimize this temporal trade: if there's a market drop anticipated, the market will charge you more for market drop insurance."


>Would it be more convincing if he gave you the correlation coefficient over the relevant period (which I bet would be pretty close to 1 and would convey the same point as the graph).  So would a scaled graph of world population over this period. And population of mosquitos.


"Consider the mind set of Perry and his ilk, best stated by Ann Coulter:  >""God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, 'Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It's yours.'""---Hannity & Colmes, 6/20/01"


It's going to be truly heart breaking when CEO's are able to read their own email on a computer without the aid of paper.     It will be a loss to mankind when those in control of the media and IT infrastructure actually understand how to use the tools that they rely on.      Civilization will crumble as generations move closer to their work place and demand more flexible schedules.   The utter horror society will face as a new generation of diverse racial, sexual and subcultural backgrounds collaborate to solve daily problems.


">When you work, you are creating value.  This is incorrect.  Not all businesses add value to society - there's a reason capitalism function based on ""profit"" and ""loss"" signals.  Some businesses destroy value.  >How do you think the concept of money came about?   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eP6iujgeWI  >Why not? This is the reason that hedge fund managers and CEOs pay so little in taxes...most of their compensation is in stocks and bonds, taxed as investment income. If you were paid in gold, i'm sure you could claim the same.   Because investments are fundamentally different from money.  They each serve a purpose - money is a store of value, while investments are risk-taking strategies to increase value.  >That's sillie: i'm emotionally invested in a gift economy. I accept a fiat paper standard.   You appear to be afraid of what would happen if people were allowed to voluntarily choose what money to use, without government interference.  Anyway, I've lost interest in this discussion.  Have a good day."


No, always give the most current address information to the IRS, not least because they will use this address to send you important communications, such as refund checks or notices of deficiency. Per the 1040 Instructions, you should put in your address, with no mention of past addresses.  Moreover, if you will change addresses after filing, the IRS has provided Form 8822 to notify them of the new address.  There is a similar Form 8822-B for business addresses. They will use your Social Security Number (SSN), Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN), or Employer Identification Number (EIN) to track who you are.  There's no point to purposely giving an invalid address, and in fact it's technically illegal since you will sign and certify the return as true and accurate to the best of your knowledge.


The Dexmet MicroGrid® EM series of expanded metal foils (EMFs) are versatile, effective materials for shielding against electromagnetic interference (EMI). EMFs are formed from solid metal foil in a proven, economical “slit-and-stretch” process. For more information email us at: sales@dexmet.com or call us at 800-714-8736/(203) 294-4440 and Fax at (203) 294-7899. Visit our website: www.dexmet.com.


I can't  wait to see this crash and burn for two reasons:  1. Voters don't want to be taxed to oblivion which is why we vote no every time on an increase in taxes.   2. If the city loses, the case may create a legal stumbling block for civil asset forfeiture.   If you want higher taxes, donate your own to the city... Do with what you got, Seattle.


I know how you feel, but at least we are paying 40/month for two services instead of 100/mo for more stuff we don't want.  I have a young kid and Netflix. And, well, the Netflix original shows for kids are just the worst. The Disney stuff is a major reason that we watch so much Netflix, and I'm well in their demographic crosshairs. I would switch, but I'm pretty sure that the Disney service will be just like I imagine, with the same level of shat out 'originals', no Darkwing Duck, the one or two most current out of theatres animated movie, stv sequels, and the entire back catalog of Dog with a Blog to round out the roster.


(To be clear, IRA accounts are just wrappers, and can contain a large variety of investments. I'm restricting myself to the usual setup of investment in the stock market.) So, let's say you have $5000 in savings, as an emergency fund. Of the top of my head, putting some of it into a Roth IRA could backfire in the following ways: The basic principle here is that the stock market is not a good place for storing your emergency cash, which needs to be secured against loss and immediately accessible. Once you're happy with your level of emergency cash, however, tax-advantaged investment accounts are a reasonable next step.


That's 100% correct. There is a long anthropological legacy of Chiefs destroying wealth as a display of power. The famous example for us American folk is potlatch ceremonies where Cheifs burned of buicks (cars). It was used as a rationale for Congress/department of Indian Affairs to renege on signed treaties.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potlatch


"An individual's net worth is the value of the person's assets minus his debt. To find your net worth, add up the value of everything that you own: your house, your cars, your bank accounts, your retirement investments, etc.  Then subtract all of your debt: mortgage, student loans, credit card debt, car loans, etc.  If you sold everything you own and paid off all your debts, you would be left with your net worth. If Bill Gates' net worth is $86 Billion, he likely does not have that much cash sitting in the bank.  Much of his net worth is in the form of assets: stocks, real estate, and other investments.  If he sold everything that he has and paid any debts, he would theoretically have the $86 Billion.  I say ""theoretically"" because in the amounts of stock that he owns, he could cause a price drop by selling it all at once."


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


>A new Star Wars feature film every two to three years  Ya one of the things that makes the original series so great is that they only made 3. I think by the time we get to Star Wars 27 its gonna start to feel a lot less special than they think.


"Ok this is random but now I am super curious -- how can one argue plastic's inability to store value comes artificially/by opinion?  As a man-made good, are there not any finite restrictions on its creation?  It reminds me of the Golgafringians of Douglas Adams' *Life, the Universe, and Everything* when they attempted to make leaves a currency.  Or do you argue something along the lines that plastic's value is artificial in the same manner as the dollar -- whether it is paper or plastic it can represent a promised/existing product despite its potentially infinite nature?  And yeah, I know ""potentially infinite"" is a TERRIBLE term given the finite nature of anything on earth required to make plastic...but I couldn't come up with a better term though I am sure one exists"


The solution to this overly complex bullshit monetary system we currently find ourselves drowning in is to teach the next generation the concept of the *community*.  Instead of competing for resources, the apple farmer, the hunter and the shoemaker must, by necessity, form a community. And they must be taught that competing against each other (capitalism) will doom everyone's existence. Thus, they must develop a cooperative mindset.  BUT this cooperative mindset must still hold each person accountable, otherwise if someone becomes irresponsible and lazy, the system will break down (socialism).   So there must be a cooperative mindset that holds individuals accountable; cooperation is the antidote to capitalism and accountability is the antidote to socialism.  [Reminds me of a *family*](http://www.scribd.com/doc/34551310/The-Principles-That-Govern-Social-Interaction)--the most economically, socially and philosophically sound choice that alleviates us from the slavery and burden of money. In practical terms, this means whenever you view a business as a stranger or whenever a business becomes a stranger to you (big chains like walmart and home depot), you're competing against yourself. And whenever refuse to spank a family member exhibiting dysfunctional behavior (unions and the welfare system), you allow your community to rot from within.   Capitalism is an attack from the outside that will kill a family, and socialism is an attack from within that will make a family die of malnutrition and poor oversight. A community mindset does not equate to an aggressive, dog-eat-dog yuppie or a passive, live and let live, hippie. The best fruit requires both a good soil *and* pruning, and the best society requires both cooperation and discipline.


If the trend in Sears' net income stays the same, shares should get low enough they could acquire it at a steal. Then again, if brick and mortars like Sears is following the same trend, why would Amazon jump in?


Cost talent innovation all go hand in hand.  I can hire 2 skilled labor at cost of one. So companies may hire 1.5 replacement and pocket savings.  Are you going to say we should ban excel? Cause of jobs??  Like I said stop Visa and they will just have office set up off shore...


Capitalism has become a religion and laze faire capitalism is a fundamentalist death cult within that religion. laze faire capitalism is to Capitalism as ISIS is to Islam. Wealth has become people's God. And I'm glad the Pope is challenging them. There's too much idol worship and dogma and fundamentalism when it comes to Capitalism. And people need to stop acting like regulation and redistributing wealth are blasphemous in all circumstances.


"> How can it be fake news when we're looking at government generated economic data?   Because government economic data shows the economy improved under Trump!  Do you seriously think that stock market is at a record and unemployment is going down and yet ""the economy is not doing well under Trump""?"


AirCard is one type of modem. It is wireless in type. It is widely used for connecting the internet for mobile devices(such as mobile, laptop) that are not in the range of any kind of Wi-Fi hotspot. There are wide ranges of wireless aircards used in different fields. In this article three of them are discussed.


For the hundredth time? Your argument was that no one would pay anyone for weed once it got decriminalized. Like you said, you *can* grow carrots and potatoes legally and yet people still go to supermarkets and pay for them. Thus, your argument makes no sense. There still will be value for weed in the market.


The point of Lewis' speech is that society and culture has (wrongly) been attributing all success to skill alone, and almost completely discounted luck of opportunities as a factor.  It is a given that successful people work hard, they have to in order to make the most of the opportunities they were given.  But the general consensus has been that people who are not successful are not simply because they lacked somehow in skill, determination or dedication.  In doing so, as a society, we (well, the majority anyway) have allowed ourselves to become emotionally separated from those who aren't presented with the same opportunities and instead attribute their failure in life to lack of the aforementioned attributes.


Haha seemed like it was a big step in agriculture for me! Not that I'm in the industry, but cool to see the development of tech in various fields.   Title seemed intriguing to me haha maybe I'm not too familiar with PR etiquette! Cool company though