First of all, I didn't say anything about Bitcoin - nothing I said was even related to Bitcoin but rather the inherent value of the market beyond a cryptocurrency.  This market is at the beginning stages right now, so of course you are going to have schemes and scammers, why wouldn't you? The established financial market as it stands today has been around for a while and still has schemes and scammers. Wherever there is money, specifically copious amounts of money, you will have people trying to game the system or pull the wool over other people's eyes. Sometimes in life, the sheep get slaughtered, so I am not really sure why certain people losing their ass in crypto could be considered different from people losing their ass in other financial instruments. You ever been to /r/wallstreetbets?  Your basic view is more than likely developed from what you are reading in main stream outlets, which is why I encouraged you to go beyond what you are reading in the easily accessible, and often way behind and misinformed, news sources and go straight to the updated and credible sources, usually from the developers themselves.  ICOs alone have proven themselves to be a new and revolutionary capital raising instrument. It makes sense that traditional and conservative finance communities would be opposed to it because it disrupts their ecosystem and gives not only very new companies, but non-accredited investors an opportunity to participate. When major VCs are able to look at ICOs, which are in direct competition to their industry and purpose, and say to themselves wow, what an innovative way to raise capital - that's a big deal.  Regarding anonymity, the purpose of most cryptocurrencies and protocols isn't focused on that, it is usually a side effect of the decentralization of the ecosystem in general. Bitcoin isn't even a top coin for anonymity, which is again why I suggested you research the industry.  Several projects are being launched and have been launched that will help revolutionize certain areas of the web, ranging from predictive markets with projects like Augur and Gnosis, to the Golem Network which taps into idle computer time for users that need additional computing power. Even something like Steem which is essentially a social platform similar to reddit which utilizes its own token system so content creators within the ecosystem can receive monetary payment for their time and contribution to the site and the community from other users. Imagine instead of an upvote, you received money.  To reiterate, we are at the beginning stages of seeing what is to come in the space. Many of these projects will fail, and many new ones will launch. As blockchain technology continues to grow not only individually, but in tandem with the IoT industry, there are scenarios where machines are interacting, bartering, and negotiating with each other, without human interaction or intervention, to agree on payments for products and services and then conducting said payments.


Almost all major no-load mutual fund families allow you to do the kind of thing you are talking about, however you may need an initial investment of between $1000 to $3000 depending on the fund.  Once you have it however, annual fee's are usually very little, and the fees to buy that companies funds are usually zero if it's a no-load company (Vanguard, TRowPrice, etc)  With the larger companies that means you have a pretty large selection of funds, but generally EACH fund has a minimum initial purchase, once that's met then you can buy additional amounts in small quantities without a problem. For someone on a smaller budget, many low cost brokers (ETrade as mentioned by Litteadv, Scottrade as mentioned by myself in another similar question today) allow you to start with smaller initial balances and have a small selection of funds or ETF's that you can trade from without commission.  In the case of Scottrade, they have like 15 ETF's that you can trade comission free.  Check with the various low cost brokerages such as ETrade, Scottrade, and TDAmeritrade, to see what their policies are, and what if any funds/ETF's they allow you to trade in without commissions. Keep in mind that for Mutual funds, there may still be a fund minimum initial investment that applies, be sure to check if that is the case or not.  The lack of any minimum investment makes ETF's a slightly more attractive option for someone who doesn't have the 'buy in' that many funds require.


"If you look around online and read about credit scores, you'll find all kinds of information about what you should do to maximize your credit score.  However, in my opinion, it just isn't worth rearranging your life just to try to achieve some arbitrary score.  If you pay your bills on time and are regularly using a credit card, your score will take care of itself. Yes, you can cut up the card you don't like and keep the credit card account open.  The bank may close your account at some point in the future because of a lack of activity, but if they do, don't worry about it.  You have other accounts that you are using.  Personally, I don't like having open credit accounts that I'm not using; I close accounts when I'm done with them.  I realize that it goes against everything that you will read, but my score is very high and my oldest open credit card account is 2 years old.  Don't let them scare you into credit activity that you don't want just to try to ""win"" at the credit score."


"IANAL, but. As you note, when you open a new account, they give you temporary checks that are usually blank in the upper left. I've used such checks and the bank has honored them. Therefore, I conclude that there must not be any legal requirement for anything to appear there, nor does the bank require it. Businesses are often reluctant to accept such temporary checks, for the obvious reason that anyone could go to the bank, open an account with $10, write checks for thousands of dollars, and disappear. At least if they've waited long enough to get the permanent checks in, there's some reason to believe that they plan to stick around.  In any case, it's not clear what you are trying to accomplish. You want to hand-write either your business name or your personal name depending on whether the check is for personal or business purposes? I don't see what that gains. You could always use a personal check for business purposes. If you're afraid someone will say, ""Hey, that doesn't look very professional, what kind of fly-by-night company is this that uses personal checks?"", surely a hand-written company name would look even less professional. Why not just open a business account and have your personal checks printed with your personal name and your business checks with your business name? I don't know where you live, but I have a business account on which I pay zero fees. The only cost is getting checks printed. There's the small hassle of having to make one trip to the bank to open the account. Well, the biggest hassle I have is that the bank won't let me transfer money between my personal and business accounts over the Internet, so I have to either go to the bank to move money back and forth, or I have to write a check from one account to the other and deposit through an ATM."


"So let's say, as a counterfactual, that Obama did not bail out the banks: what would happen? The world economy would have collapsed. Every creditor and their funds to endless bankruptcy stays. All credit would have been frozen. No businesses would have been able to pay off their loans or pay their employees' salaries. The banks, sadly, were too big to fail because everyone and everything depended on them for funding. The issue is not the bailout, but the activites of the banks that forced the bailout. This is why all of the current legislative schemes being put into operation are looking at way to limit systemic risk to both prevent future catastophic bankruptcies and limit their impact on the credit markets.   As a last note: notice how inflation did not significantly increase since the bailout, despite Bernanke printing trillions of dollars. Cleary, ""printing money"" has not caused harm in and of itself. Its only harm is reinforcing the too big to fail mentality. This can be cured, but by not bailing out the banks, we would have seen a catastophic collapse."


DJ is one of the most popular requests as you need a good DJ for your special party and events. We provide the best disco's and partying equipment service, including mobile disco’s and karaoke’s for clubs, pubs, and many special events from 25 years. If you want to Disco equipment hire in Northampton, then you can visit our site. Our company has a team of creative and professional entertainers.


"Let's say you should have paid $4000 in taxes in a year, but you paid $5000, so you get a tax return of $1000. ""Somebody"" thinks that you should have tried to only pay $4000 in the year and get zero tax return. I hope he or she doesn't think you should pay $5000 and mess up your tax return so you get no refund.  Once the end of the tax year is there, you should do what you can to get as much tax returned as possible. On the other hand, you should also have tried to pay less during the year - obviously every dollar you paid less is a dollar less refund."


There are many moneylenders in Singapore, it is hard to decide which money lender you should approach or turn to for a loan. Thus, Legal Loan Singapore is here to provide you with reviews on money lenders in Singapore. This will help you to decide better which money lender you can count on. You can call them at +65 6871 4268 if you have any questions.  For more details visit us at : https://www.legalloansingapore.com/best-moneylender-review/


Tax-free money funds invest in municipal bonds, so you'll want to factor in the likelihood that the issuing government (state, local, etc.) will stiff its bondholders.


"An accounting general ledger is based on tracking your actual assets, liabilities, expenses, and income, and Gnucash is first and foremost a general ledger program. While it has some simple ""budgeting"" capabilities, they're primarily based around reporting how close your actual expenses were to a planned budget, not around forecasting eventual cash flow or ""saving"" a portion of assets for particular purposes. I think the closest concept to what you're trying to do is that you want to take your ""real"" Checking account, and segment it into portions. You could use something like this as an Account Hierarchy: The total in the ""Checking Account"" parent represents your actual amount of money that you might reconcile with your bank, but you have it allocated in your accounting in various ways. You may have deposits usually go into the ""Available funds"" subaccount, but when you want to save some money you transfer from that into a Savings subaccount. You could include that transfer as an additional split when you buy something, such as transferring $50 from Assets:Checking Account:Available Funds sending $45 to Expenses:Groceries and $5 to Assets:Checking Account:Long-term Savings. This can make it a little more annoying to reconcile your accounts (you need to use the ""Include Subaccounts"" checkbox), and I'm not sure how well it'd work if you ever imported transaction files from your bank. Another option may be to track your budgeting (which answers ""How much am I allowed to spend on X right now?"") separately from your accounting (which only answers ""How much have I spent on X in the past?"" and ""How much do I own right now?""), using a different application or spreadsheet. Using Gnucash to track ""budget envelopes"" is kind of twisting it in a way it's not really designed for, though it may work well enough for what you're looking for."


25 credit-hours=60+ hours of class time    5 classes. 4 hour class sessions (typically, sciences were usually 5) meeting 3 times a week. Two classes was considered full time. Like I said, I finished a four year degree in two. Most of my classmates are just about to graduate and I've been working for two years.


Especially because rather than fix true trade deficits (like the US has with China) Trump and his cronies are lying to the public about NAFTA.     U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said publically that the he has to fix the draft deficit with Canada yesterday (or was ~~tit~~ it the day before?). The US has a trade SURPLUS with Canada.        So he's either lying or he's an idiot. Not sure which is worse.


Really though, anyone who bought crypto as an alternative to fiat bought long ago and have profited massively off this hype.  All the bag holders are the novice investors trying to jump in on a gold mine that's already been milked dry.


Really?  His desire for food makes him no more willing to pay?  I doubt that will hold any further than a test environment.  If he was starving and only had a little cash, I could see he would have less desire to pay.  But when he has wealth and is starving, stubbornness may be the only holdback.  How many people charge more for water because their oasis is the only one around?  You think the travelers they see won’t ever pay?  They may not WANT to, but they will if they have no other choice.  The value is immediate.    Unless you are thinking of some other sort of pseudo value, value is what you are willing to give for what you will get at any particular point in time.  A man dying of dehydration may give much more than a man sated.  Once the first man is sated, what he would probably give is less.    This is called “Diminishing Marginal Utility”.


[Here's a link to the actual paper](https://eml.berkeley.edu/~saez/Piketty-Saez-ZucmanNBER16.pdf)  Something I found interesting from it:  >Third, we find that the upsurge of top incomes has mostly been a capital-driven phenomenon since the late 1990s. There is a widespread view that rising income inequality mostly owes to booming wages at the top end, i.e., a rise of the “working rich.” Our results confirm that this view is correct from the 1970s to the 1990s. But in contrast to earlier decades, the increase in income concentration over the last fifteen years owes to a boom in the income from equity and bonds at the top. The working rich are either turning into or being replaced by rentiers. Top earners became younger in the 1980s and 1990s but have been growing older since then.


"I'm a visual person so the idea of a 30 year mortgage didn't make much sense to me until I could see it  This isn't exact but it's pretty close. The green Interest lines represent the money you're giving to the bank as a ""thank you"" for lending you a large amount of cash up front. As you've already figured out, that's at least the same amount as the price of the home! As much down-payment as is reasonable. Keep one eye on beating the interest Best of luck!"


"Your funds are in a retirement account.  Withdrawals from your IRA will be penalized if you withdraw before you turn 59.5 years old, and you appear to be decades away from that age. The general advice I would give you is to pick a ""target year fund"" that targets the year you turn 59.5.  The stock market is more volatile, but its average gains will protect you from inflation just eating your funds.  Bonds are in counterpoint to your stocks - more stable, and protecting you from the chance that stocks dip right before you want to withdraw. Target year funds start with higher amounts of stock, and gradually rebalance towards bonds over time.  Thus, you take your market risks earlier while you can benefit from the market's gains, and then have stability when you actually would want to retire and depend on the savings."


What would they be trying to predict?  The value YNAB and Mint provide is objective truth about what you've spent. They can force you to think about the tradeoffs inherent in budgeting by showing that you've overspent one category, and making you decide where to find the money to cover it. They can call your attention to a credit card swipe that's larger than you intended, to a subscription you didn't intend to keep, etc. by just generally getting you to read and think about your transaction history and the sums of transactions per category and overall. Prediction doesn't really enter into it. One way to understand Mint's business model is as a service that collects training data for machine learning models that do try to predict things, such as how stock prices will move or whether users will click on certain ads.


Ahh... Well I joined twitter when they first started (mid 2003 or 2004?), and handles like @john were available. Annoyed with myself I didn't bother to snag any actually, could have made a mint. But that said, I still use it today and I've never noticed a single ad. Facebook in the other hand, is teaming with ads - some I even *want* to click on. So I guess that should still answer the question. Unless McDonalds is going to start sending me private messages to get my attention?


Buying properties in another country has never been easier thanks to Keyholders International Property Group. With a wide range of properties in different countries such as Turkey and Spain, you can easily get a relaxing house of your choice through their help. What are you waiting for? Log on to their website at keyholdersinternational.com and start browsing their complete list of available properties!


It's true, Detroit schools are a patchwork of expensive charter schools and failing public schools. But the surrounding metro area has nationally recognized public schools.   Changing Detroit's public schools from bad back to quality is going to be very hard, and will take time. But investments are being made ($200 million in private donations just two weeks ago, to name one example) to improve education, particularly in employable computer science skills. But there is still a lot of work to be done, absolutely.


I used to think this exact same way. But there are something that transcend general topics and are common throughout every part of life just due to general human nature. You may be surprised in how you can draw parallels from these fiction books to the real world including finance.


"You're not ""encouraging thought"", you're patronizing me and calling the ideology I have chosen ""anti-human"". What is there to debate if you already have decided that socialism is anti-human? The issue here is that you don't understand socialism, while I do understand laissez-faire capitalism and disregarded it as something I would stand for.  There are plenty of ""objective conclusions"" drawn by Marx, but somehow I get the feeling you haven't actually read much of Marx since you probably feel that you already know what socialism is all about anyway.  Let's just both save some time and skip debating this at all, because I'm not in the mood for more patronizing."


Not on board.  We've gotten this far without making it a regulated monopoly.  Not sure why it's important to do so going forward.  It's a two-way debate.  I'm generally a political progressive, but I'm happy to say that the cards are stacked against you on this particular issue.  Sorry you aren't on board.


"Note that the quote distinguishes between ""all families"" and ""families with some savings"" - this just means there are so many families with less than 5k that they equal all those with savings above 5k. That might be because they are young and haven't started yet, or because it is just not a priority for them compared to food and rent. Nothing about the quote suggests that anyone believes once you've saved 5k, you're done. In fact since they show savings vs age, you can immediately see many people still have decades to save more. They may have 5k or less now, but they're not retiring now. How do you survive if you get to 65 and have nothing saved? There is some government money (social security) and many people sell their houses or get a reverse mortgage. Having equity in a house is not the same as having savings. And some older people live very frugally - they stop buying clothes, they stop redecorating their houses - while others live in flat out poverty. But you can't tell if that is their future from the fact they only had 5k saved when they were 32."


"I've seen some Chipotles where you can see the McDonald's ownership coming through in a big way. Some of their employees just have a massive case of ""don't give a fucks"" that's usually not the type of people you want handling raw chicken."


"I know a fellow who has spent a few decades coaching large WMs at many major firms, and who has been extremely successful for them.  This ""destination vacation"" format referral development has been very successful - invite one of your whales on a genuine getaway (not just a golf outing, but rather, a private jet to a deep sea fishing weekend, or as close to that as you can get in your budget), and ask him to bring a few friends."


"It's probably a scam or maybe some amateur agency trying to put pressure on their target. Normal garnishment goes through the court system. Just ignore it. Tell your employer they obviously have the wrong person since the SS is wrong.  Suing clowns like this is not worth it. Just to clarify this some more for you: Trying to collect on a random person with the same name is called ""tagging"" in the collection industry. Before 2010 it was common because it was actually easier to legally bully the wrong person (who had money) than the right person who does not have money. That was then, this is now. Various federal and state laws have been passed since that time to prevent identity theft and these laws create big liabilities for debt collectors that try to bully the wrong person. Therefore, it rarely happens anymore, though of course sometimes agencies will still call you if they think they have a soft target. That's what the call to your employer is, just a test. A pro collector (like a law firm) would never call an employer, because they could get sued for doing that, but some amateur working out of his basement might. That's what you are dealing with: some joker in a basement. Such people never sue, they just buy old debt for pennies on the dollar and try random harassing phone calls. Ignore it and he will move on to the next ""John Smith"" on his list. A lot of lawyers will advise you to ""talk"" to the collector, correcting their misinformation, blah blah. Lawyers like talking, because the more talk there is, the more money they make. In the real legal world: never talk to your enemy or give them information. The way real courts and judges work is that they don't like plaintiffs who sue the wrong person. In fact, they do not like it VERY MUCH. Very bad things happen in courtrooms to people who sue the wrong person. Judges have VERY short patience in general and they DO NOT LIKE IT when somebody wastes their time by suing the wrong person. Basically what this means is: ignore the guy and he will go away."


"I am a realtor. When I am approached directly by a buyer, it's their choice to bring their own agent, come unrepresented, or buy through us via disclosed dual agency. With no buyer agent, my office and I get the full commission. The seller has already agreed to a fixed percent of the sale price. How does it benefit me to agree to this?  Update From all the comments below, I'll add this. The Realtor site (country-wide) states  ""A real estate professional can also agree to rebate a portion of   his/her commission to a consumer.  However, note that some states do   have laws prohibiting the payments of rebates to unlicensed   individuals, and so this would not be legal in those jurisdictions."" So far, so good. My own state, Massachusetts, says Inducements or rebates to the seller or buyer are permissible given   that the seller or buyer in the transaction is a principal and is not   required to be licensed as a broker. Brokers are, by definition,   agents for either the seller or buyer. Consequently, using inducements   to attract listings or giving incentives such as rebates for those who   purchase a listed property do not violate the prohibition on sharing   valuable consideration with those who are brokering without the   benefit of a license. The sellers and buyers in purchase and sale   transactions are not acting for anyone else and, therefore, are not   brokering. Indeed, it is their broker who acts on their behalf. Thus, in my state, what OP asks for is legal, and a matter of whether or not either broker wishes to participate. If another member wishes to research NY laws, that would be great."


In general, all income is taxable, regardless of the source. If you living in the U.S. -- I don't think you said anywhere where you live -- then if you are donating this money to charity, you would have to declare the income, and then declare a deduction for the charitable contribution. At that point the two would cancel out and the net result is that you wouldn't have to pay any tax on the income, but you can't just leave it off your tax return. Well, even if you donated all of it to charity to that you don't have to pay income taxes on it, you would still have to pay social security taxes, and it would still affect your social security benefits when you retire. If you're saying that the organization receiving the money is itself a charity, as opposed to donating the money to some other organization that is a charity, than you usually have to be registered as a charity with the IRS to avoid income taxes. There are still forms to file to report the income, but you wouldn't have to pay taxes. There are some exceptions to the requirement to register, basically if your organization is very small and for certain religious organizations.


Shares often come associated with a set of rights, such as ability to vote in the outcome of the company. Some shares do not have this right, however. With your ability to vote in the outcome of the company, you could help dictate that the company paid dividends at a point in time. Or many other varieties of outcomes. Also, if there were any liquidity events due to demand of the shares, this is typically at a much higher price than the shares are now when the company is private/closely held.


Where is the money coming from? If you already have the money (inheritance, gifts or similar) sitting in your account, you can just buy e.g. index funds from Vanguard, Robinhood or other low-cost brokerages. But first you should estimate how much money you need for your studies - it is a bit of a gamble to invest money that you'll need to withdraw in a few years time. Even though the average return may be quite high (12% sounds like an overestimate, more commonly quoted figure is 7%), over short timespans your stocks will go up and down randomly. Once you actually have a job and have income from it, then the 401k and IRA and similar retirement accounts start to make sense. There is no need to have all your savings in the same account, so you can start saving now already.


i think emergency fund should be in a more liquid account (like regular saving or money market) so you can withdraw money any time, while your regular saving can be tied up in a long term CD, bond or an investment account.


I would behave exactly as I would expect it from others. If you were the one giving away too many points by accident you would be thankful if somebody notifies you about this error. You can write a letter or call them. I would not use the points (of course only not use the points which are added in error). Other options are possible but I would advise against them. It's just about fair play and the points are clearly not yours.


"Generally not.  Since authorized user cards are the same account and the difference between the two (the original and the AU card) are minimal. Note, there's nothing technically stopping banks from offering this as a feature, two cards do have identifiers that indicate they're separate cards, but the banks concern for your needs stops at how much they can bleed from you, and ""helping you control your spending"" is not part of that."


Most investors vote with their wallets. I expect ZERO glitches from a trading platform. If someone was actually causing trades to fail maliciously, their reputation would immediately suffer and their business would dry up over night.  You can't just play dumb and not respond to a button click. I can watch and replay the traffic I'm sending out to their server and see if they are responding to verify this. If their system goes down and has no redundancy, that is their fault and opens them to lawsuits. No trading platform could withstand scrutiny from its users if it was dishonest in the scenario you imagine.


If it's either/or, I'd pay down the mortgage, no question. I know I'm in the minority, but I'm not a fan of tax-advantaged retirement accounts.  There are too many things that can change between now and the next 30 years (the time frame that you'll be able to withdraw from your IRA account without penalty).  The rules governing these accounts can change at any time, and I don't think they'll be changes for the better. Putting the money toward your mortgage will relieve you of that monthly payment faster.  The benefits of IRAs come retirement age are too uncertain for my taste.


And it all depends what you are advertising. We target business owners and startups. I have yet to see a millennial as a client of ours.   Our CFO also pointed out some research found on LinkedIn pitying millenials unable to afford housing. Their age and choice living with parents is much larger by contrast, compared with previous generations. Many millenials wont pay rent, not because they can't, but they blow that money elsewhere for example on entertainment, electronic, or food they like as opposed to cooking, etc. so of course they can't. They learn their financial advice from each other. In some cases their word of mouth interaction with each other is depriving them more than the boomer paranoia spread has deprived baby boomers from taking certain risks.


Fractional shares don't occur from Dividend Reinvestment Programs - residual credit is carried over until there is enough to purchase a whole share.


Cada uno de ellos necesita una consideración personalizada, y es aquí donde se separa padilla-bujalil. Tenemos amplia experiencia en la administración de compra, venta y arrendamiento de propiedades de lujo casas, villas, pisos y apartamentos. Por lo tanto, le ofrecemos nuestro experto inmobiliaria tierras beneficios juntos vamos a descubrir la casa que está buscando. La confianza y el cumplimiento de nuestros clientes es nuestra mejor garantía. La compra, trato o arrendamiento de una casa, señorío o nivel es debido a diferentes causas de especulación, fantasía, requieren.


"> Kenyes wrote explicitly about deficit spending, and the repayment of those deficits. The denomination of the currency, floating or otherwise, is besides the point.  It's not at all besides the point.  A government can run out of gold. It cannot run out of its own free-floating currency. When it comes to borrowing, whether or not you can be unable to service that debt is **very** relevant to how much interest you pay.  As Japan cannot run out of yen, Japan can borrow yen very cheaply - despite books that don't make a lick of sense if evaluated like a business.  Because the US government cannot run out of USD, the US government can borrow USD very cheaply - even if there isn't any credible plan to ""pay down the debt"". Lenders quite simply don't consider the US's revenue/expenditure before loaning the government USD, for if you're not willing to loan USD to the guys that issue it, what *are* you going to be willing to do with it?"


You have to look at stocks just like you would look at smaller and more illiquid markets. Stock trade in auction markets. These are analogous to ebay or craigslist, just with more transparency and liquidity. There is no guarantee that a market will form for a particular stock, or that it will sustain.  When a stock sells off, and there are no bids left, that means all of the existing bidder's limit orders got filled because someone sold at those prices. There is nothing fishy about that. It is likely that someone else wants to sell even more, but couldn't find any more bidders. If you put a bid you would likely get filled by the shareholder with a massive position looking for liquidity. You could also buy at the ask.


"Let's say you see a café. You're looking to buy a café so you walk into one and ask the manager how much profit he makes in a year. He says $N and you walk out and think to yourself, ""I'd be willing to pay $500,000 for this café."" You arrange to meet again to discuss purchasing the business (and he's looking for someone to purchase it).  You go into the store again the following day and the manager says, ""Sorry, I told you we make $N. I've checked the numbers and it's actually only $0.8N (20% lower than what you thought)."" Are you still willing to buy the café for $500,000 as well? No, of course you're not.  I think that this is a sufficient analogy to public companies."


I never understand the mindset of infrastructure being paid for through private investment. On a municipal level it makes sense that development fees can help a city pay to replace a bridge that leads to the development or put in some new parks, but considering that infrastructure like rail lines and dams are the big concern, I don't really see private entities taking a big interest in them. It would've really helped Houston if private investment was funnelled into stormwater management while developing into a major suburban centre. Based on the evidence shown, those private investors didn't have major concerns for improving the city's infrastructure and just did what they had to in order to be allowed to put in their development.  Infrastructure belongs in the public sphere. Things like rail, highways, dams and coastal protection are in the public's best interest. What does a businessman have to gain by paying to electrify a rail line or put in new traffic signals at an intersection?


Slippage is tied to volatility, so when volatility increases the spread will also increase. There is no perfect formula to figure out slippage but from observations, it might make sense to look at the bar size in relation to previous bars to determine slippage (assuming fixed periods). This is because when there is a sudden spike in price, it's usually due to stop order triggering or a news event and those will increase the volatility dramatically in seconds.


"Be mindful of your reporting requirements. Besides checking the box on Schedule B of your 1040 that you have a foreign bank account, you also need to file a TD F 90-22.1 FBAR report for any year that the total of all foreign bank accounts reaches a value of $10,000 at any time during the year. This is filed separately from your 1040 by June 30 of the following year. Penalties for violating this reporting requirement are draconian, in some cases exceeding the amount of money in the foreign bank account. This penalty has been levied on people who have been reporting and paying tax on the interest on their foreign bank accounts, and merely neglected this separate report filing. Article on the ""shoot the jaywalker"" punitive enforcement policy. http://www.rothcpa.com/archives/006866.php Mariette IRS Circular 230 Notice: Please note that any tax advice contained in this communication is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, by anyone to avoid penalties that may be imposed under federal tax law. EDITED TO ADD"


I agree with the comments so far. Access doesn't equal ownership. There are also different levels of access. E.g. your financial advisor can have access to your retirement account via power of attorney, but only ability to add or change things, not withdraw. Another consideration is when a creditor tries to garnish wages / bank accounts, it needs to find the accounts first. This could be done by running a credit report via SSN. My guess is an account with access-only rights won't show up on such a report. I suppose the court could subpoena bank information. But I'm not an attorney so please check with a professional.


Deming Electro Plating Corporation provides high quality electroplating services in NY. We provide Gold, silver, Nickel, Copper, Chrome, Zinc electroplating to a wide range of industries. We use highest quality materials to provide top notch electroplating and have the fastest turnaround in NY. We can handle all types of electroplating requirements whether small or big. Our prices are quite reasonable too.


In the real world, there are only two times you'll see that 5% become worth anything - ie, something you can exchange for cash - 1) if another company buys them; (2) if they go public. If neither of these things happen, you cannot do anything with the stock or stock options that you own.


"Can it be so that these low-interest rates cause investors to take greater risk to get a decent return?  With interest rates being as low as they are, there is little to no risk in banking; especially after Dodd-Frank. ""Risk"" is just a fancy word for ""Will I make money in the near/ long future."" No one knows what the actual risk is (unless you can see into the future.) But there are ways to mitigate it. So, arguably, the best way to make money is the stock market, not in banking.  There is a great misallocation of resources which at some point will show itself and cause tremendous losses, even maybe cause a new financial crisis? A financial crisis is backed on a believed-to-be strong investment that goes belly-up.  ""Tremendous Losses"" is a rather grand term with no merit. Banks are not purposely keeping interest rates low to cause a financial crisis.  As the central banks have kept interest rates extremely low for a decade, even negative, this affects how much we save and borrow. The biggest point here is to know one thing: bonds. Bonds affect all things from municipalities, construction, to pensions. If interest rates increased currently, the current rate of bonds would drop vastly and actually cause a financial crisis (in the U.S.) due to millions of older persons relying on bonds as sources of income."


"This link:  http://www.ifs.org.uk/fs/articles/ewgm_feb93.pdf (from 1996, describing the proposals for the change) seems to answer the question in its description of ""the current system"" - they had to file business accounts and it was calculated by the Inland Revenue from that."


"That's the fault of the consumer misunderstanding then. Again, there is an ingredient listing that makes it clear that there are other ingredients present. That's laziness on the part of the consumer.    Though actually, there are minimums to claim ""made with..."" A drop of grape juice would not be sufficient to claim ""made with 100% grape juice."" Some of those limits seem arbitrary to me, but they are there."


Businesses you are already established with may do a soft pull to pre-qualify you for an offer.  They store the information and if you accept, may instantly setup and account.  You may also see language to the effect that they may do an inquiry (hard pull) - I guess if their data is old.  When you went outside of Amazon to Chase, they did a hard pull on their side which is what you saw.


"I actually tend to disagree.  This was one of the most watched IPOs in history.  Facebook would have benefited greatly from a pop.  People would have thought ""wow, they really can do no wrong"".  Instead there are endless negative articles about how this is a horrible failure.  Sure, financially savvy people look at this and think FB did a beautiful job.  They maximized their take from the IPO.  But the price of the bad press can't be accurately measured.  The benefit in terms of publicity of being seen as a stock/company on the move UP is hard to measure too.  Suppose they had priced it at $25 and limited the number of shares they would have gotten less money but they'd also be looking at a massively successful pop on their share price.  The halo effect on their business of THAT reality seems to me to have had the potential to be significant.  So I'm not so sure, in the long term, whether it would have made more sense for them to get less money up front and get a successful IPO rather than go for the max dollars and have a PR disaster.  I think the way things turned out made FB go from an unstoppable juggernaut into a company that can fail just like any other."


First, congratulations on even thinking about investing while you are still young!  Before you start investing, I'd suggest you pay off your cc balance if you have any.  The logic is simple: if you invest and make say 8% in the market but keep paying 14% on your cc balance, you aren't really saving. Have a good supply of emergency fund that is liquid (high yielding savings bank like a credit union. I can recommend Alliant).   Start small with investing.  Educate yourself on the markets before getting in. Ignorance can be expensive. Learn about IRA (opening an IRA and investing in the markets have (good)tax implications. I didn't do this when I was young and I regret that now) Learn what is 'wash sales' and 'tax loss harvesting' before putting money in the market. Don't start out by investing in individual stocks. Learn about indexing. What I've give you are pointers.  Google  (shameless plug: you can read my blog, where I do touch upon most of these topics) for the terms I've mentioned.  That'll steer you in the right direction. Good luck and stay prosperous!


Android O has been the talk of the town since March. Ever since the release of alpha version, many have been curious about what Google is going to name the new treat. Since the Google developer preview version 3 has rolled out this month. Read more.


Yes. As long as the stock is in a taxable account (i.e. not a tax deferred retirement account) you'll pay gain on the profit regardless of subsequent purchases.  If the sale is a loss, however, you'll risk delaying the claim for the loss if you repurchase identical shares within 30 days of that sale. This is called a wash sale.


California is great for everything except tax environment. That being said I wonder how far backwards they'll bend when in reality HQ2 could surpass Seattle meaning a city inside CA would house an eventual trillion dollar company. Amazon may not be first but they're all but guaranteed to reach 1T in market cap.


Capital surplus is used to account for that amount which a firm raises in excess of the par value (nominal value) of the shares (common stock).. Investopedia has a much simpler answer. Somebody has tried to be smart on wikipedia and have done the calculations without much explanation. The portion of the surplus of a business arising from sources other than earnings :  all surplus other than earned surplus usually including amounts received from sale or exchange of capital stock in excess of par or stated value, profits on resale of treasury stock, donations to capital by stockholders or others, or increment arising from revaluation of fixed or other assets The number of shares a company wants to issue is decided and agreed with the regulators. They decide the par value and then decide how much premium will be charged, extra money above the par value. Take out any RHP of an issue and you find all these details. Par Value = 1  Issue price(Price at which investors buy) = 10 Premium = 9 For a single share the capital surplus is 9, multiply it by the number of shares issued and you have the total capital surplus.


The changes to Equity given are: Since the total change is 42,500, the difference would be change in Retained Earnings (net income), so net income is


You need experience. Work in retail, hopefully to some sort of managerial level where you get to see behind the scenes and not just manage associates.  If you're really gung-ho about it and willing to take a big risk, I've heard many people say the same reason that a small business fails - not enough cash flow. You might be lucky to raise enough capital for start-up costs, but can you survive two years of negative income? And I'm not even talking about your personal living expenses. Forget about that, you're going to be living at home eating ramen. I'm talking about having enough cash to pay the rent and keep the lights on. Unfortunately, it's going to be a vicious cycle because banks know small businesses are a huge risk and are unwilling to provide loans for them to survive...but small businesses fail because they aren't able to survive in the short-term no matter how good the prospects are in the long-term.   Your safest bet is to grow organically. This means having a business model with negligible start-up costs and little overhead costs. Your inventory is going to be small and because of that, your margins are going to be thin (no wholesale prices). But at this point, based on the products you're selling, you're basically just another one of the millions of internet re-sellers. You're going to basically have to place all your value in getting savvy to learn how to spot good deals and re-sell products for a higher price.   Honestly, I'll be harsh about it. You have 0 competitive advantage and offer 0 extra value in your idea. There's really no point in wasting your time and money unless you can pivot the idea so you're creating actual competitive advantages for yourself. Otherwise, just stick to re-selling online, at the very least to get a feel for the profit margins and gain experience.


"The biggest change is the the relationship between the content providers (newspapers, tv, etc) is becoming more and more *interactive.*   For as long as mass media has existed, it's been a one-way relationship: content providers shovel content to the audience.  The Internet has ushered in a change so radical that it's unlikely the centuries old model can survive, except perhaps in movie theaters.  Who's going to suffer the most I think is advertisers.  They are still struggling to figure out what to do, from all appearances.  There's evidence that a few kind of get it, with heavy emphasis on ""a few.""  Up to this point, their business has been built on smoke and mirrors.  I mean, since I was a kid, I've always switched channels or got up and left during TV commercials rather than watch them, and I think that's common.  In TV at least, advertisers have had to convince networks that most people don't do this but instead are watching advertisements, but really couldn't *prove* it.  With more interactive models becoming predominant, the smoke and mirrors are disappearing.  Advertisers who depend on elaborate analysis schemes to ""prove"" people are watching ads will too.  I think it's a good thing.  I don't mind content providers knowing *exactly* what pisses me off on the screen, be it a web site or TV show, and makes me skip their content.  Advertising will *have* to change from the model of selling people things they aren't interested in to a model based on finding out that people are interested in and matching them up with products accordingly.  Again, I welcome that.  If I never see another tampon ad in my life, it's worth a bunch of starving ad execs asking for handouts on street corners."


December, 1, 2011 (03:00pm) :-  China's manufacturing data's are slides to 49 below 50, a signal of contraction by which whole Chinese economy affected.  Due to the European crisis, the global demand is weak which Chinese affected the most because china is the only market which manufactures the product an unbelievable cost.  Global demand still weak this may be continues by next 2 - 3 months.  Base metal prices are higher composed to 2010 levels, the profit levels also drooped by 5% to the manufactures.  Base metals trends looking down in December.  Cooper may be range Rs 370 - Rs 440  Zinc mzy be range Rs 97 - Rs 113.  Nickel may be range Rs 870 - Rs 960.  Lead may be range Rs 98 - Rs 112.


The UK doesn't tax gifts or wealth, so you don't have to pay any tax on your existing savings or the money your parents transfer you. If your parents lived in the UK then you might be potentially liable to inheritance tax on the money if they died less than seven years after giving it to you, but if they live in Japan this won't be relevant. In theory you might have to pay tax on any interest received in the bank account while you live in the UK. However this is likely to be very small, and if you don't have any other income then it's highly unlikely this would apply, as you can get up to £16,000 of interest without paying tax: https://www.gov.uk/apply-tax-free-interest-on-savings/how-much-tax-you-pay


>  the west needs to make massive gains every year short term and if the choice is screw the consumer or build loyalty  This isn't the fault of the system - it's a result of the dotcom creating irrational greed over capital gains. Once upon a time a company could be large and *not* have massive growth every year, so long as they had consistent profits. People bought their stock for the dividends, to share in the profits, and any capital gains were just gravy.   The way the market is running now is a ponzi scheme - when a company has a billion shares valued at $50, you can never actually **get** $50B by selling the stock. As stock is sold, the price will drop - only the first people to sell get that price.


"Banks will always and forever make the claim that regulations are ""hurting"" them.  Bankers will always and forever trade tomorrow's systemic risk for today's profits -- if given the chance.  Once regulations are reduced, it's only a matter of time before these pathologically self-interested children blow up the system (again)."


Construction loans have an entirely set of rules and factors than mortgages and that's hard to reconcile into one instrument.  Also, I'm guessing the bank would be a bit shy about giving a commitment to a home loan before they have any information about how the construction process is going.  There would have to be a ton of contingencies put into mortgage and they probably can't account for everything.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://thehill.com/policy/technology/344410-feds-eye-crackdown-on-digital-coin-investments) reduced by 89%. (I'm a bot) ***** > At issue are initial coin offerings, where new companies or smaller projects seek to crowdfund - or raise investment funds from the public - through crypto online currencies.  > In their report, the SEC warned investors to make sure a coin offering is registered properly if it is a securities exchange, and to learn about their rights and level of control, as well as to understand potential cybersecurity threats.  > &quot;They&#039;re the right people to look at it this sort of thing, says Peter Van Valkenburgh director of research at Coin Center, a research and advocacy group focused on digital currencies.&quot;Creating token and selling them is like selling portions of businesses.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6qotdi/feds_eye_crackdown_on_digital_coin_investments/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~179906 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*: **coin**^#1 **SEC**^#2 **currency**^#3 **offered**^#4 **security**^#5"


There are many different things that can happen, all or some. Taking Russia and Argentina as precedence - you may not be able to withdraw funds from your bank for some period of time. Not because your accounts will be drained, but because the cash supply will be restricted. Similar thing has also happened recently in Cyprus. However, the fact that the governments of Russia and Argentina limited the use of cash for a period of time doesn't mean that the US government will have to do the same, it my choose some other means of restraint. What's for sure is that nothing good will happen. Nothing will probably happen to your balance in the bank (Although Cyprus has shown that that is not a given either). But I'm not so sure about FDIC maintaining it's insurance if the bank fails (meaning if the bank defaults as a result of the chain effect - you may lose your money). If the government is defaulting, it might not have enough cash to take over the bank deposits. After the default the currency value will probably drop sharply (devaluation) which will lead to inflation. Meaning your same balance will be worth much less than it is now. So there's something to worry about for everyone.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://asia.nikkei.com/Markets/Commodities/China-sees-new-world-order-with-oil-benchmark-backed-by-gold?page=1) reduced by 93%. (I'm a bot) ***** > The contract could become the most important Asia-based crude oil benchmark, given that China is the world&#039;s biggest oil importer.  > &quot;It is a mechanism which is likely to appeal to oil producers that prefer to avoid using dollars, and are not ready to accept that being paid in yuan for oil sales to China is a good idea either,&quot; Macleod said.  > Yuan oil futures are expected to attract interest from investors and funds, while state-backed oil majors, such as PetroChina and China Petroleum & Chemical will provide liquidity to ensure trade.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/70lu5h/china_announces_the_backing_of_the_yuan_by_gold/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~211390 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*: **oil**^#1 **China**^#2 **Saudi**^#3 **yuan**^#4 **gold**^#5"


Is it normal for such transactions to create new outstanding shares? Yes a company can create new shares or a Majority share holder can sell some of his stake or it can be a mix of both. how will this news affect the short-term and long-term price of the company's stock? This is opinion based and not apt for this site. It can be positive or negative depending on how the market reacts to the news.


"The number one difference is that bank savings accounts, or money market accounts (MMAs allow limited checking--six non-ATM withdrawals per month, max, else possible fees) have FDIC insurance up to $250,000.  However don't put that much in--allow some room for interest, so you never go over the $250,000.  Money Market Mutual Funds do not enjoy FDIC insurance.  There may be some SPIC insurance--generally against brokerage failure though, but its coverage is questionable--search out those details, and if they apply to anything besides actual cash held at the brokerage.  If the money market mutual fund is strictly invested in US Treasury securities (like T-Bills, or other short-term US Treasury instruments), it enjoys the full faith and credit of the US government, FWIW--but many MMMFs invest in corporate instruments.  If the fund has any pricing issues, there might be a delay in getting paid off.  (Extremely unlikely.)      Number two, and more importantly, bank savings accounts (or MMAs) pay way more!  You can get a bit over 1% APY now--many paying 0.90% APY, or higher.  No money market mutual funds are close to that, generally yielding a small fraction of that, almost zero for US Treasury MMM funds.  Sure 1.05% ain't too exciting, but you may as well get the most you can if holding ""cash,"" and fully insured to boot."


"I'm sorry, i should have said I was saying that sarcastically, but those are the arguments which I suspect are being made.  >*""You did not answer my question: Where's my advocate in the negotiations?""*  Its doubtful that they would be among the hundreds (thousands?) of lobbyists. Unless you are a corporation and you have one.  >*""Why should I believe the negotiators have my best interests at heart?""*  I don't think the negotiators have your or the country's best interests at heart. I think they barely even play lip service to it any more.   >*""What's the point of negotiating a treaty that doesn't have the people's interests at heart?""*     Well, look at all the things that are in TTIP, for example, here in the US, by underfunding government agencies tasked with enforcement of existing laws and recommending new ones, the chemical industry has succeeded for the last 25 years or so at preventing a lot of needed regulation of a lot of demonstrably dangerous substances. Particularly a class of chemicals called [endocrine disruptors](http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/tag/Endocrine-Disruptors/).   Meanwhile, Europe has put into place much more stringent regulations based on the Precautionary Principle, which requires that chemical industry prove some chemicals are safe to get them approved, while the US the key issue is overcoming lobbyists and even chemicals which are clearly dangerous have to go through a lot of hoops before they are regulated, and even when its shown to be extremely likely they are dangerous, it is very difficult when lobbyists are there often regulators are political appointees from the industries they are supposed to regulate. There is no denying that having different regulations is complicated, but what they are promoting as a solution is not a good approach.   They are pushing for what they call regulatory coherence- which is basically the forcing of all environmental and chemical laws in a bunch of countries [into the same mold](http://www.ciel.org/Publications/ToxicPartnership_Mar2014.pdf). It would overrule a lot of state laws involving things like fracking..and food safety -   Instead of raising our standards to the European level, they want to bring theirs down, and get rid of the (IMO, quite prudent) Precautionary Principle, which I think is incredibly stupid. But, people are not aware of this.  There- I think has clearly been a high level decision - some kind of gentlemans agreement between the 5 media corporations that control virtually all US media, to never cover some issues.  To not cover those issues at all. But in Europe they have a similar problem, just not quite as bad. But there people make more of an effort to find out whats really happening. Also there are fewer astroturfers.  (the US is known for massive levels of astroturfing in its online world)  For example, in the UK, there is a lot of protesting because of the implicit goal of the FTAs is to privatize public services, although they deny it, its right there [in agreements like GATS](http://www.iatp.org/files/GATS_and_Public_Service_Systems.htm), framing public services as bad, some kind of theft from companies, and ratcheting any small privatization into a permanent entitlement for that company to that market so its permanent, even if its unsuccessful. Thats been [disastrous to their NHS](https://www.opendemocracy.net/ournhs/john-hilary/on-ttip-and-nhs-they-are-trying-to-bamboozle-us).  How did it get this way? In part its due to the failure of Americans to seek out facts, something people really have to do because there are forces spending a lot of effort into hiding them and trying to exploit positions of trust to create a dangerous false security..  Its a direct result of so much money in politics. The so called ""stakeholders"" spend a lot of money and energy into getting candidates into office. So then they expect something in return.   This is related: http://www.chemsec.org/what-we-do/influencing-public-policy/news-updates/1321-letter-to-the-ttip-negotiators-signed-by-178-groups"


Current Money users may want to take a look at this: http://sites.google.com/site/pocketsense/home/msmoneyfixp1 Pretty easy (and secure) way to continue getting online data into Money.


Besides spending all your money, and then not being able to find a new job when you want to and where you want to, the biggest risk is the lack of health insurance.  Research your options regarding your existing insurance under COBRA. It will cover your preexisting conditions at the full price of the insurance, that means without the contribution from your employer. Make sure you have fully investigated the options to understand your out of pocket maximums, and the full price of insurance.  You will also have to understand the maximum amount of time you are covered under COBRA. If your unemployment goes beyond that period of time, you will have to get individual insurance. You need to avoid a gap in coverage or when you do get a new job, the insurance may not cover some preexisting conditions. Before NASA send astronauts to the space station for months, they give the astronauts a full physical, including a visit to the dentist and eye doctor. It would be advisable to do the same before announcing to the employer that you plan on quitting. the insurance will generally transition to the COBRA program at the end of your last work day. Because both of you work you could do the transition is phases. One would quit, then spend their time getting the sabbatical site established. The insurance would come from the employed spouse during this transition.  Some employers do have sabbatical programs where they  will ease your transition if you are going to work on your education full time, or work for a charity. They will need you to return at the end of an agreed time period. Even if they don't have a official sabbatical period they usually have a reemployment plan. If you return before the time period expires, usually one or two years, you aren't considered a new employee. That can be important for years of service calculations for a pension, vacation and sick leave earned, 401K matching.


And the truth of the matter is that the majority of entrepreneurs are rich only because they are lucky.  Strangely none of them are prepared to admit this either.  See if you throw enough mud at a wall, eventually some of it will stick. And if 20,000 people start a business, then most will fail, but some will succeed, and some will go through the roof.  The business acumen of the directors is sometimes capable of making a business MORE successful than it otherwise would be, but mostly, it's down to luck.


I am currently in the process of purchasing a house. I am only putting 5% down. I see that some are saying that the traditional 20% down is the way to go. I am a first time homebuyer, and unfortunately we no longer live in the world where 20% down is mandatory, which is part of the reason why housing prices are so high. I feel it is more important that you are comfortable with what your monthly payments are as well as being informed on how interest rates can change how much you owe each month. Right now interest rates are pretty low, and it would almost be silly to put 20% down on your home. It might make more sense to put money in different vehicle right now, if you have extra, as the global economy will likely pick up and until it does, interest rates will likely stay low. Just my 2 cents worth.  EDIT: I thought it would not be responsible of me not to mention that you should always have extra's saved for closing costs. They can be pricey, and if you are not informed of what they are, they can creep up on you.


"Average return on the S&P500 over the last 10 years has been 1.6 %; so if you'd invested in that with money borrowed at 3 % you would have lost (so far). Investing with borrowed money implies you think you can beat the market: that you're a cleverer investor than whoever decided to lend you the money. Whoever decided to lend you the money decided that you are the best (return/risk ratio) investment for their money. It might make sense to invest borrowed money if you don't need to pay it back if things go wrong: if you're an investment professional whose bonus depends on the profit you make, but who won't need to repay any loss. It might also makes sense to borrow money if you're going to 'add value', e.g. sweat equity: for example if you use it to renovate a house or (if you're a business) to hire more staff. But the question was ""What guidelines do you use"" and the answer is, ""I don't make passive investments with borrowed money."" My Dad did it, i.e. didn't repay his mortgage as soon as he could have: but that was because (back in the '70s) he had a long-term (government-sponsored) mortgage for about 1.5 % (designed to help first-time buyers or something like that), at a time when banks were paying higher interest rates on (ultra-safe) deposits."


**Here's a sneak peek of /r/redacted using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/redacted/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!**  \#1: [Hi, I'm from T_D! I don't know where I am!](https://np.reddit.com/r/redacted/comments/5o863w/hi_im_from_t_d_i_dont_know_where_i_am/)   \#2: [Fuck /u/Spez](https://np.reddit.com/r/redacted/comments/5em9vx/fuck_uspez/)   \#3: [Well, if Reddit doesn't want us to have the_donald, then maybe they want us on r/news and r/politics?](https://np.reddit.com/r/redacted/comments/6c80g7/well_if_reddit_doesnt_want_us_to_have_the_donald/)  ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| [^^Contact ^^me](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| [^^Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| [^^Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/6l7i0m/blacklist/)


Better for you and for me, yes, but not for the disadvantaged without benefactors. That's the situation I was in.   I just wish social security wasn't spent on the elderly, when they have so little left to contribute to our society and economy, in terms of new business, growth, and constructing the future.


Do I need to pay for an inspection, or am I likely to save enough money from skipping it to cover potential problems that they would have caught?  A home inspection costs hundreds of dollars.  The average is $315.  Inspections regularly catch things that cost tens of thousands of dollars to fix, e.g. a new roof or a cracked foundation.   You also might find that a home inspection is required for your mortgage.   do I need a realtor, or can I do their job myself? Unless you are a licensed realtor or you buy directly from a seller without a realtor, the fee (charged to the seller) will be the same regardless of whether you have a realtor.  The seller's realtor will share the fee with your realtor if you have one.  So you can do the work yourself (perhaps not as well), but you won't save money by doing so.   If you have a lot of flexibility in when you purchase, you could look for especially cheap properties with motivated sellers.  Arrange financing ahead of time (before you find a house), so you can close quickly.  Some sellers will give you a discounted price to finish the sale quickly.  Even small savings on the price of a house will outweigh most savings on closing costs.


Drive thru is a good determinant, as is price point. it looks like Wikipedia considers Five Guys fast casual, but I have a hard time thinking of them that way. To me, fast casual signifies a certain level of sophistication, beyond a peanut/trash covered floor and guttural yells from the counter any time a customer walks in to the restaurant.


"In the US, ""title"" is the document that shows ownership of the car. It is a nicely printed document you get from the DMV, that includes the information about the car and about you. You ""sign off the title"" when you sell the car - part of the title is a form on which the owner of the title can assign it to someone else. With your signature on the title, the new owner goes to the DMV which exchanges it to a new title in the new owner's name. Never sign on the title unless you got the payment for the car from the buyer. Usually, when the car is bought with a loan, the lender holds the title. Since you need to sign off the title to pass the ownership if you sell the car - lender holding on to it will prevent you from selling the car until the lender gives you the title back (when you pay off the loan). Your boss, acting as a lender, wants the title to hold on to it to prevent you from selling the car that secures your debt to him. He wants that (usually pink) piece of paper. Here's an article explaining about the title and showing a sample. Lenders holding the title will usually also add an endorsement at the DMV, so that you can't go and claim that you lost it."


This sounds like a scam. Did they email you out of the blue to offer you this 'job', by any chance, and you'd never heard of them before? That's an incredibly large red flag in and of itself. While I don't know quite what the scam is likely to be, here's how I would suggest it might work: Other variants are possible - say using a cheque rather than PayPal, or having Person A be the scammer as well. But this being a legitimate transaction is very unlikely.


Yes. It is a scam, and here is how it will work. They will deposit a phony check into the account which will appear to clear. You will send money to Africa from the account. The check will take a while to bounce, but it will bounce. They will take it back out of your account (and may try to prosecute you for a fake check). At best, your account balance will go negative and you will owe the money back to the bank that you sent. The people you sent the money to will vanish.


Redditors! Buy gold and demand that the financial institution who sold it deliver it. When they try to buy enough gold to cover their short the price will explode, free money.  Disclaimer: you all have to do it or it won't work


"A share of stock is a share of the underlying business. If one believes the underlying business will grow in value, then one would expect the stock price to increase commensurately. Participants in the stock market, in theory, assign value based on some combination of factors like capital assets, cash on hand, revenue, cash flow, profits, dividends paid, and a bunch of other things, including ""intangibles"" like customer loyalty. A dividend stream may be more important to one investor than another. But, essentially, non-dividend paying companies (and, thus, their shares) are expected by their owners to become more valuable over time, at which point they may be sold for a profit. EDIT TO ADD: Let's take an extremely simple example of company valuation: book value, or the sum of assets (capital, cash, etc) and liabilities (debt, etc). Suppose our company has a book value of $1M today, and has 1 million shares outstanding, and so each share is priced at $1. Now, suppose the company, over the next year, puts another $1M in the bank through its profitable operation. Now, the book value is $2/share. Suppose further that the stock price did not go up, so the market capitalization is still $1M, but the underlying asset is worth $2M. Some extremely rational market participant should then immediately use his $1M to buy up all the shares of the company for $1M and sell the underlying assets for their $2M value, for an instant profit of 100%. But this rarely happens, because the existing shareholders are also rational, can read the balance sheet, and refuse to sell their shares unless they get something a lot closer to $2--likely even more if they expect the company to keep getting bigger. In reality, the valuation of shares is obviously much more complicated, but this is the essence of it. This is how one makes money from growth (as opposed to income) stocks. You are correct that you get no income stream while you hold the asset. But you do get money from selling, eventually."


Pre-finance major here and new to this sub. Quick background, I’m 18 and I’m starting school at the University of Iowa in January.  My question is: what resources are out there that you would recommend to help me get introduced to the world of finance? Could be books, online courses, videos, etc. and could be on any subject within the umbrella of finance.  Thanks in advance for any recommendations!


Yeah $1M is a number that a very, very select number of programmers are making. It's not really within the realm of possibility for the average person - you have to be a combination of obsessed, brilliant, and lucky to have coordinated with the right people.      Now $100-200k? Yeah, definitely.


Good for ~~him~~ her! I'm sure ~~he~~ she won't be missed, and there is at least a dozen or so twenty-something that would love to replace him minus the bitching. Someone forgot to give him the TPS memo that says you work for a startup because you enjoy the other perks, not just the financial gain, which should be ancillary to all the other relevant experiences one acquires while working those long 100-hour weeks.  And fuck you (not you) for down voting me.


Actually, the Richmond Group owns a lot of movement makers.  (ETA, Unitas, Valjoux, etc.) What this will do is, as they said, shut down all of the impostors that buy movements from them.  Why spend thousands of dollars on a Cartier or a Longines, when you can get the same movement from a different company for a couple of hundred bucks.  Now the different company will have to buy their movements from China, which does not hold a lot of weight in a collector's market.


"The point of reissuing the bonds with other bonds is that people could step away from the greenback money supply if they so chose to.  There you could switch between various and distinct money supplies just by trading places with someone whenever you feel like.  Of course, the firm would only issue the bonds if they thought they could repay it, and it would be backed by the actual good they produce, not just the ""word"" of the government and not just thin air."


There are lots of good reasons not to do this. HOWEVER if you do decide to, there are four things you need to consider:


Get a Bankrupsy lawyer. They'll tell you to stop paying the bills and use the money to pay their fee. Yes... You do need to pay in advance.   I can tell you honestly that it was the best thing that ever happened to me.   Think about it this way... When you loan someone moneyyou're placing a bet that they'll pay you back. You try to keep the dos in your favor by using credit ratings etc but sometimes you win and sometimes you lose that bet. It's nothing personal. It's business.   The casino doesn't feel bad when you lose your bets and your money and you don't expect them to. The person placing the bet knows what they're doing and knows all about the risks, etc. it's a calculated risk. Again... It's just business and it's nothing personal.   It's also not nesessairly a failure. Depending on the situation... Bankrupsy is an excellent business decision. Big business do it all the time.   Sometimes bankruptcy is a very smart decision and not going bankrupt is the worst decision you can make.   My only regret with my own bankruptcy is that I didn't do it sooner. I could have saved the family years of unnecessary hardship and I could have gotten it over with much sooner.   Don't be emotional. Be smart and do the smart thing.


When I have been faced with this sort of situation I have done the split at the bank.  They had the ability to recognize the deposit as a payroll transfer and split it the way I wanted. I put a specific amount of money into checking, another amount of money into the mortgage, and a specific amount of money into another fund. The balance, whether it was $1 or any other amount, went in to savings. That meant that I transferred the amounts I needed to pay my budgeted living expenses and what ever I made above that went to savings. In months I made extra, more was available to be saved.


Do not provide any personal information. If the debt is not yours, ask the caller to provide all the identifying information they have over the phone to verify whether they have your information, or are just following up on similar names. Even if they have information that is yours, do not provide more information. Always make them tell you what they know. If they provide information that is not yours, simply state that it is not your information and politely end the call. If they persist in calling you, there are local agencies you can report them to.  If they have your information, then ask for all of the details of the debt -- who is it owed to, when was the debt incurred, what was the original amount of the debt, what is the current balance, when was the last activity on the account, what is their relation to creditor.  Once you know the creditor, you can contact them directly for more information. It is possible they may have written off the account and closed it, selling it to a debt collector in order to get some sort of return on debt. If they truly have a debt that is yours, and you did not incur it, then you will need to file a police report for a case of identity theft. Be prepared for some scrutiny.


"There are tax free bonds in the United States.  They are for things like public housing and other urban projects.  They are tax free for everyone but only rich people buy them.  Why?   The issue is that the tax free nature of the bond is included in its yield.  So rather than yielding say a 5% return, they figure that the owner is getting 20% off due to not paying taxes.  As a result, they only give a 4% return but are as risky as a 5% return investment.  Net result, only rich people invest in tax free bonds.  ""Rich"" is defined here to mean people paying a 20% tax on long term investment returns.   Or take the State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction, which has been in the news recently.  Again, it is technically open to everyone.  But there is also a standard deduction that is open to everyone.  For the typical family, state and local taxes might be 5% of income.  So for a family making $100k a year, that's $5k.  The same family can take a $13k or so standard deduction instead of itemizing.  So why would they take the smaller deduction?   As a practical matter, two groups take the SALT deduction.  People rich enough to pay more than $13k in state and local taxes and people who also take the mortgage interest deduction.  So it helps a lot of people who are rich quite a bit.  And it helps a few middle class people some.   But if you are lower middle class with a $30k mortgage on a tiny house and paying 4% interest, then that's only $1200 a year.  Add in property taxes of $3000 and SALT of $2.8k and that's only $7k.  Even if the person gives $3k to charity, the $13k deduction is a lot better and requires less paperwork.   Contrast that with someone who has $500k mortgage at 3.6% interest.  That's $18k in interest alone.  Add in a SALT of $7k and property taxes of $50k, and there's $75k of itemized deductions, much better than $13k.  Now a $7k donation to charity is entirely deductible.  And even after the mortgage interest deduction goes away, the other $64k remains."


"Then my 100% honest answer would be the same. But an insignificant and uncorrectable number of people. Not that anyone going without healthcare isn't concerning, just that it will happen no matter what path we choose, and a free market diminishes it the most. Some people won't act in their own interests. Did you read the original article I posted? It appears you did not, I encourage you to do so.   Everyone would like to receive ""free"" stuff, no surprise.   I'm coming from an honest admission that the market would and should provide a variety of differing qualities of healthcare to best serve everyone and their differing valuation of their health. Government cannot do that, but a free market can. Like shoes or anything else. We can't all afford italian leather loafers, but most people can get shoes of all sorts of sizes and styles and colors. That's because the market works. Let the market work in healthcare, and you get the absolute fewest people without it, and they can spend what they want on it. People who exercise every day will probably spend more on it, those who drink and smoke everyday probably won't, and that's not my business. Or yours, quite frankly."


> Tax rates do make a difference between whether to invest here or in Ireland.   Not actual investment, but if you have the discretion to chanel profits to a lower taxed jurisdiction (necessarily a loophole that can be closed), then you may structure transactions accordingly.  > he money that American businesses profit overseas stays overseas instead of being repatriated because the taxes are too high to justify paying them before reinvesting the money in the economy.   That is an issue that is also independent of tax rates.  Providing incentives to bring money back is unlikely to finance any new investment though.  There are loopholes that allow using foreign assets (cash especially) to fund foreign loans that can finance any desired investment.  Still, even if repatriation is used for stock buybacks and dividends that would be more money flowing into the US, though not really money flowing to people who spend a high portion of flows (rich investors).  But just because there are reasonable arguments for tax reform encouraging repatriation and HQ locations as at least not being harful, does not support also including the genuinely directly harmful effects of cuts to tax rates.


“The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money.  Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles.  But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet.  This was the Captain Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socioeconomic unfairness.”  ― Terry Pratchett, Men at Arms: The Play


Consider this before you buy one: I spent 1900 dollars for a car warranty years back when I bought a car. 9 months after I bought the car it broke down and it was covered by the warranty. Without the warranty the fix would have cost me 3400 dollars. This is a huge savings except for one thing... The warranty company went bankrupt so I spent 1900 + 3400 for a grand total of 5300 :) As you can imagine, I wasn't smiling at the time. Contrast that with my second warranty (I know, I know, don't put your hand in a fire twice) where I spent 2400 for the warranty and then got my transmission fixed for 4000 dollars, and it cost me 100 dollars (deductible). In summary: It's hit and miss, but make sure you don't pay more than 10-15% of the product price for the warranty.


I'm in full agreement and came here to say just that. I felt like such a presentation is meant to cater to an ADD generation or some such. I'd rather two or three subsections each with a continuous flow of the story. As is, the all-encompassing story was tough to follow and unnecessarily chopped up.


>  It's just like an 18-21yr old kid at college, away from their parents and has the first unrestrained access to alcohol. They usually overdo it.  I actually have much more respect for binge drinkers in college. At least they don't do it everyday and understand they are impaired.  > And to second my original intent, it's up to the business/owner to determine if they want to discriminate or not against drug users. If you have a problem with that, seek employment elsewhere  I agree


"These days, just about any bank has the ability to schedule payments for free.  I usually use this.  My wife has a Chase MasterCard, because they used to automatically credit the 1% cash back monthly.  Now they ""improved"" the card, and you need to go online and redeem the rewards, either in $20 increments, or to pay off a previous purchase, which seems to be a real gimmick.  They probably get back the 1% cash back for that purchase if you use this feature.  Weird people."


Gambling losses are only offset by winnings. Those losses can't offset other income. So, the guy that wins the $1M jackpot can deduct the $100 he spent on tickets that year.


Are there specific companies leading the charge on this? I work in construction and from my experience the industry is notoriously slow to adapt as it's an old man's game when you get down to the labor but the possibilities are endless. When we got an iPad software to expedite punch list work it was revolutionary.


"Spend less.   As @jldugger said, shop around for textbooks.  Make sure to look for used books: you can sometimes save a lot of money there. Be smart about food money.  I could go to our on-campus grill and get a sandwich and a salad for lunch.  If I packed both with toppings, the salad could be a 2nd meal for the same day.  If you have the option, get a meal plan that is just 1 meal a day, and eat a lot that meal. Don't do the starbucks ""pay several dollars for a coffee each day"" thing.  Small-ish regular expenses add up quickly.   Quit smoking (if applicable). Ditch your car if possible.  Some colleges are in cities with good public transportation or are small enough that a bike will do.  Cars are very expensive.  Try to find free activities to do in your free time.  Usually college towns are great places to find free fun.  Pick-up sports, student concerts/art shows, playing board/card/video games. Make sure to track how you're spending money to look for areas where you could be spending less.  There are plenty of tools available to help with this.   Some on-campus jobs involve sitting around and occasionally doing something: IE working the checkout desk at the library.  A job like this (if you can find one) can effectively pay you for doing our homework. One other very important college-related financial tip is to not take out more loans than you can afford.  I've heard a good rule of thumb is not take our more loans than you expect to earn your first year after graduating.  Look up average starting salaries for the career you realistically expect to have after you graduate.  If you would need to borrow much more than that to get your degree, rethink your plans.  Being a slave to a bank for years is a crappy way to spend your life."


"I'm going to go with ""ridiculous notion.""  :) The vast majority of businesses are legitimate, run by honest people trying to earn a living for themselves and their employees.  These days, almost all of them accept credit cards.  Crooked businesses are a very small minority. When a bad business over charges you, you dispute the charge, and you get your money back.  But that's not all that happens.  The bad merchant pays penalties for this, and if it happens more than a couple of times, the merchant loses their merchant account with their bank, which means that they lose their ability to accept credit card payments anymore.  A crooked business is not able to rob people via credit card for very long at all. A whitelist would certainly not be able to include every legitimate business.  And a blacklist would never be able to be kept up-to-date, as bad businesses come and go continuously; as soon as a business was added to the blacklist, they would lose their merchant account and would no longer need to be on the list. What you are describing is very rare.  My brother once had a bad experience with a tech support company where they were repeatedly charging him for a service they never performed.  But a credit card chargeback took care of it.  If that company made a habit of that, I'm sure that they got in trouble with their bank. Instead, the most common credit card fraud happens when crooks use your credit card at perfectly legitimate businesses.  But your whitelist/blacklist wouldn't help you with that at all."


"Actually 19th century shipped you to us to pretend teaching how ""progress"" is made, when you only seek to send us backwards.  The childish thing said : >It'a a totally different situation.  [*And you* (as I think you don't live in North Korea) *still have the choice to leave and reseign if you want btw*]  Yes, fina lly some sense. Taxation isn't an act of buying its a totally different situation. Taxation was extortion when it was used by despots for ""protection"", when in fact it was just financing a private interest. But taxation through parliamantary voted law isn't, its the community democratically represented that decide on the rule of majority that there is a need for public services or redistribution to happen in the community. And to do so they decide while granted power by the people to implement taxation.   That said, the US govt is frankly corrupted and the US system quite unperforming, but they still somehow protect your rights. The dudes in Irak or Afghanistan are a problem, but the militray is much more than that, protection from invasion is the main utility and your world status as THE power proove you achieve that. This allow you to have access to whole range of products and ressources cheaply and in abundance (agriculture in SA and Africa, Oil etc...), thats for the military.   All the thing that make your country a ""great"" one are funded by your taxes, from your education to your financial sector. You fund your world status and your society status among nation with your taxes. You don't want that ? As I said, you are still free to leave your country and reseign your citizenship. Why ? Because as I see it the majority of your population aren't agaisnt paying taxes, or else they would continuously elect dickwads republicans. ""Nah its mah country, gna gna gna"" not its not, your country was built by a community,a society that decide though your state/s  certain things have to be set up like taxes. You don't want to comply ? Fine, overthrow them or find a ""country"" free zone. {GOOD LUCK}."


"Is it worth it for me to ""charge"" him? I can think of two reasons why you might want to charge your husband:"


"If you're trying to hedge the ups and downs of your local residential real estate market, a REIT fund holding commercial properties across the country is not the ideal match. Here's a comparison of an index tracking single-family home prices in one region (Los Angeles) and VNQ (another popular REIT fund).  There's some correlation but there's clearly different magnitudes and sometimes different directions. With a national home price index, the correlation is only 68%, and it would be lower for individual cities. You could still use it for hedging, but there's significant ""tracker error"" risk to be considered. Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with any investment that would be a better match for individual residential markets. So, if you decide to use this, I'd also adjust the level of exposure to get a closer result. E.g. using approx. 50% VNQ and 50% cash results in a closer result after 2 years (compared to national single-family home price changes) than either 0% VNQ and 100% cash, or 100% VNQ and 0% cash."


"Your company actually will most likely use some sort of options pricing model, either a binomial tree or black-scholes to determine the value for their accounting and, subsequently, for their issuance and realization.  First, market value of equity will be determined. Given you're private (although ""pre-IPO could mean public tomorrow,""), this will likely revolve around a DCF and/or market approaches.  Equity value will then be compared to a cap table to create an equity waterfall, where the different classes of stock and the different options will be valued along tranches. Keep in mind there might be liquidation preferences that would make options essentially further out of the money.  As such, your formulae above do not quite work. However, as an employee, it might be difficult to determine the necessary inputs to determine value.  To estimate it, however, look for three key pieces of information:  1. Current equity value  2. Option strike price  3. Maturity for Options  If the strike is close to the current equity value, and the maturity is long enough, and you expect the company to grow, then it would look like the options have more value than not.   Equity value can be derived from enterprise value, or by directly determining it via a DCF or guideline multiples.   Reliable forecasts should come from looking at the industry, listening to what management is saying, and then your own information as an insider."


Regardless of how it exactly impacts the credit score, the question is does it help improve your credit situation? If the score does go up, but it goes up slowly that was a lot of effort to retard credit score growth.  Learning to use a credit card wisely will help you become more financially mature. Start to use the card for a class of purchases: groceries, gas, restaurants. Pick one that won't overwhelm your finances if you lose track of the exact amount you have been charging. You can also use it to pay some utilities or other monthly expenses automatically. As you use the card more often, and you don't overuse it, the credit card company will generally raise your credit limit. This will then help you because that will drop your utilization ratio. Just repeat the process by adding another class of charges to you credit card usage. This expanded use of credit will in the long run help your score. The online systems allow you to see every day what your balance is, thus minimizing surprises.


You're just blatantly wrong. There are literally hundreds of thousands of combat veterans and police officers in the US vastly more qualified than you. Beyond that, your scenario requires an instantaneous dissolution of society which is an absurd notion.   Your little dream scenario is just a childish fantasy. It's not rooted in reality so stop pretending it is so that you can publicly masturbate to the idea of trying to rip off your betters.


It just doesnt seem like the new market would even want to interact with the company because of their previous market. I think it's more likely, as others have suggested, that this is an expansion of markets and targeting to new people, not a substition from previous business model


Yes, conflicts of interest are absolutely okay - are you serious? Conflicts of interest are a constant part of life. All scientific knowledge we have ever discovered was implicated in conflicts of interest, in that the researchers have an interest in finding scientifically significant results so they can get published and receive credit for discovering that knowledge.  Do those conflicts of interest mean you dismiss evidence off-hand? Of course not. A conflict of interest is a reason to give less weight to a source's claim *in the case that you have evidence to the contrary*. It is never a reason to reject a claim in and of itself.   By your logic, it is wrong for your doctor to recommend a certain examination because they profit if you take it. It makes informed decision-making impossible.


No...it is not.  The markets are never certain. The price of oil often fluctuates and you have to take into account inflation. See the year 1980 here.  http://inflationdata.com/inflation/inflation_rate/historical_oil_prices_table.asp  At this moment, many analysts concur that the price has dropped because demand is not high.    It is not because of a Global Financial Crisis.  Political Trouble in Europe and current low demand and high stockpiles in the USA....yes.


I just called the customer service of a real bank, not a money transfer service. It seems that the limit is on the electronic transactions only. If you show up at the bank the limits tend to be huge or do not exist (the bank rep. just told me that he is not aware of a limit in this specific bank).


Mermaid Baby is swimming in the swimming pool. Mermaid Baby finds different shapes and says their colors.  Learn Colors with Bad Baby Masha and Frozen Elsa with Magic Balls for Kids Children IRL https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvJzo7tOTfg  Learn Colors with Elsa, Rapunzel, Belle, Barbie and Mickey |For Children | Nursery Rhymes Song https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YiABeuqXuhQ  Learn Colors with Masha | Spiderman eats too many Candies and got fat | Masha & The Bear Video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYupa2pc5cQ  Learn Colors with Elsa | a lot of Sweets and Candies | Nursery Rhymes | Finger Family https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsnqWmMQW6o  Learn colors with Spiderman and Glasses | Nursery Rhymes Songs for Kids | Finger Family Song https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKoY5-nBdRw  #LearnColors #forKids #forChildren #FingerFamily #NurseryRhymes #Children #Songs #Colors #Colours #BadBaby #Mermaid #Disney #FunnyVideo #IRL


Your tax rate is 20% for turnover below £300000. So deducting your expenses and all the tax your accountant thinks you need to pay is £450. But you can claim relief on your tax payments. Visit the UK gov website to check your options under which you can claim relief. Frankly speaking for such a low turnover you shouldn't have opened a limited company. Or do you expect your turnover to increase in the coming years ? If your turnover isn't going to increase any further or if there isn't going to be a substantial increase, better to go as a sole trader or an umbrella company.


"It should be made very clear, all funds from these fights were directly paid into ""Mayweather Promotions"" and from there Floyd pays himself.  As a result any cheques he posts are entirely irrelevent since its a cheque from his company to himself, he can place whatever value he wants on there for the picture and subsequently void the cheques.  This is nothing but an attempt to stay relevant once he has retired as the most hated boxer in boxing."


I've been threatened numerous times for pushing to pay with a card rather than cash by taxis.  This was before Uber blew up.  It was clear they wanted to skim from their company.  I've literally had to jump out a car and run because of 5 minute arguments to take a card.  The card machines each time looked to function and  the sticker on the window says it's accepted.  Fuck them wrong way driving, wannabe Nascar, pedophile taxi cab drivers.


I'm a bit out of my element here, but my guess is the right way to think about this is: knowing what you do now about the underlying company (NZT), pretend they  had never offered ADR shares.  Would you buy their foreign listed shares today? Another way of looking at it would be: would you know how to sell the foreign-listed shares today if you had to do so in an emergency?   If not, I'd also push gently in the direction of selling sooner than later.


"> That said, it really depends on where you are and how your business is incirporared  No it doesn't. Nepotism laws only apply to public sector jobs.   >If you or she can't answer this or don't have access to someone who can, then I fear for the business.  Well, fortunately, you don't know what you're talking about, so they don't have to worry about your fear. You don't need a law degree to run a salon. Spouses run businesses all the time.   Hence the name ""mom and pop shop""."