In the money puts and calls are subject to automatic execution at expiration. Each broker has its own rules and process for this.  For example, I am long a put. The strike is $100. The stock trades at the close, that final friday for $90. I am out to lunch that day. Figuratively, of course. I wake up Saturday and am short 100 shares. I can only be short in a margin account. And similarly, if I own calls, I either need the full value of the stock (i.e. 100*strike price) or a margin account.  I am going to repeat the key point. Each broker has its own process for auto execution. But, yes, you really don't want a deep in the money option to expire with no transaction.  On the flip side, you don't want to wake up Monday to find they were bought out by Apple for $150.


> It means we are promoting MAGAnomics—and that means sustained 3% economic growth.  [Supply side economics has been shown to only benefit the top 10%](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply-side_economics) and [even the CBO says the 3% estimate is unrealistic](http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/14/politics/cbo-trump-budget-math/index.html?sr=twCNN071417cbo-trump-budget-math0439PMVODtop).  > For merely suggesting that we can get back to that level, the administration has been criticized as unrealistic. That’s fine with us.  I'm sure since you are the 10% and will be long gone when the chickens come home to roost.


Patents grant one company or individual a coercive monopoly on an idea.  One cannot own information...information is neither scarce nor rivalrous.   “If you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange these apples then you and I will still each have one apple. But if you have an idea and I have an idea and we exchange these ideas, then each of us will have two ideas.”  -George Bernard Shaw   Granting someone a monopoly on an idea is a wrong in practical terms, as stories like these, and the various patent trolling occurring in the tech sector demonstrate.  Patent/copyright protect neither the fashion nor the food industry (in terms of recipes) and those industries thrive, as well as constantly innovate (indeed, they are *forced* to innovate, since they cannot monopolize one idea and rest on their laurels).  Coercively preventing someone from doing as they will with an idea using their own resources is morally wrong because you are denying their freedom to act using their own body, and justly owned property.  By building a chair using my own tools and materials, that happens to look similar to another chair someone else built 1000 miles away using their own resources, I've done nothing to deprive the other chair builder of his property...yet under current law, I can be prosecuted (i.e. fined, jailed, and beaten if I attempt to resist) if he has been granted a legal monopoly to that design...whether I've ever even seen his chair or not.    On both ideological and pragmatic grounds, the concept of patents is a failure.


I havent used Fresh, I'll have ti give it a try if its available in my area.       For liquer/beer it's sometimes cheaper.  For the whiskey I drink, is the same price as the nearby store if I buy two bottles at a time.


Why should the costs of mandatory services be based on a sliding scale? Why shouldn't everyone pay the exact same price for the same services? Would it be fair if you walked into a McDonalds and everyone was lined up based on income with everyone below a certain level expecting everyone above the line to pay their way?   Edit. If you were on the side of the line that was subsidized would you vote to end the subsidies or vote for policies that add more people to the side that gets free things so you can continue to get free things?


">Los Angeles is ordering the company to pay about $900,000 to the employees within the next month. The company is also being fined $541,000 in penalties   How is this a whopping fine? Under federal law the minimum penalty is 100%. CA law provides for a fine of 1 months pay for a single infraction. Considering one of the charges is ""blocking investigators from interviewing employees"" and they are completely unrepentant and pretty much thumbing their nose at LA and wage laws in general, this is a paltry slap on the wrist for a company with $1.33 billion in revenue."


"This sounds like an accounting nightmare to be 100% precise.  With each payment you're going to have to track: If you can account for those, then the fair thing to do is for one person to stop paying after they have paid the amount of principal they had at the beginning of the process, or possibly after they have paid an amount equivalent to the total principal and accrued interest they would have paid if they paid their loans individually.   The problem is, one of you is likely going to pay more interest than you would have under the individual plan.  In the example you gave, if your brother pays off any of your loans, he is going to be paying more in interest than if he paid on his 5% loans. If you pay the highest rate loans first, whoever has the lower total balance is going to pay more interest since they'll be paying on the higher rates until they've paid their ""fair share"".   I don't see a clean way for you to divvy up the interest savings appropriately unless you trueup at the very end of the process.   Math aside, these types of agreements can be dangerous to relationships. What if one of you decides that they don't want to participate anymore? What if one of you gets all of their loans paid off much earlier - they get the joy of being debt free while the other still has all of the debt left? What if they then don't feel obligates to pay the other's remaining debt? Are you both equally committed to cutting lifestyle in order to attack these debts? In my opinion, the complexity and risk to the relationship don't justify the interest savings."


Most people use SMS or internet messaging similar to WhatsApp - but WhatsApp is not popular in the US. People use Apple, Google or Facebook services.   Since SMS will not work for them in a foreign country, they can only use their internet messaging. Apple people use iMessage. Many other people use Facebook Messenger or Twitter Direct Messages (DMs). It is very important to have a Facebook account for people to link to you (when they write about their trip) - so Messenger should be easy to setup.   Google, Facebook, and twitter can run on a cheaper android phone.   But many tourists probably have Apple iPhones. iMessages can only be sent from Apple devices.  If you have access to an older iPhone (iPhone 4S) - it should be able to still send iMessages.   Email is used by everyone, but younger tourists may not like it, and it may be hard for you to check. Google can give you email and messenger for free.


This is why a lot of the advice in this sub pisses me off: a lot of people in here would rather lie by obscurity than confronting issues head on to resolve them. Which I guess makes sense if you want to work your way into an obtuse, dishonest company culture (sometimes perceived as the only way to get a job to pay your bills). But I've been able to do pretty well by being honest. I don't think there is a need to buy into the bullshit.   Edit: oops for some reason I thought I was in /r/jobs


Then do a backup, factory reset the phone afterwards and install your iPhone clean through iTunes. Without proper maintenance even the longest lasting items will break.   You went through probably 3 major iOS updates on the phone, so there are tons of old shit clogging the thing up.


My insurance has been the same for nearly a decade. Cable, too. Some groceries have gone up, like fresh fruits and Milk, but I've eliminated my home phone in that time, since my cell phone works everywhere, so it sort of balances out.


Twitter is like screaming in space. Nobody hears shit. Internet advertising through links and text is a zero sum game and its on the decline. Basically they need someone around to play with the foosball tables and eat the free food.   /thread


"There's no law in California that says you have to have a cash register. Logging cash sales manually, as you are doing, is fine. A cash register would help you track your cash sales as you describe. Some POS software will also allow you to log cash transactions, but it sounds like you just use a credit card processing web site or application, not a full-fledged POS system. In any case, for a small business, one option might be to get a cash register to log your cash sales, and continue to process credit cards the way you are (or continue as you are doing). Come tax season, use the output from both systems to calculate your income. You might want to consider an accounting software like Quickbooks so you can reconcile your income and expenses and statements from different sources. Also, as with any small business, it's worth your while to consult a tax accountant to make sure you're doing everything ""by the books"". Once you're set up properly, keeping the books in order becomes routine and easy."


Did you even read the article?  Did you read what the government put out this week?  In places where the state government set up their own systems the insurance companies have stabilized the markets and made a very good profit last year. The only places it's failing are places where republicans did nothing to help it succeed. If you actually think this legislation is failing you've bought into the republican talking points.


"A lot of people have already explained that your assumptions are the issue, but I'll throw in my 2¢. There are a lot of people who do the opposite of long term investing.  It's called high frequency trading.  I'd recommend reading the Wikipedia article for more info, but very basically, high frequency traders use programs to determine which stocks to buy and which ones to sell. An example program might be ""buy if the stock is increasing and sell if I've held it more than 1 second."""


"Your dad may have paid an ""opportunity cost"" for that outright purchase.  If the money he saved had been invested elsewhere, he may have made more money.  If he was that well off, then his interest rate should have been the lowest possible.  My own father is a multi-millionaire (not myself) and he could afford to have paid for his house outright.  He didn't though.  To do so would have meant cashing in on several investments.  I don't know his interest rate but let's say it was 2.5%.  If he invests that million dollars into something he expects to get a 7% return on in the same period, then he would make more money by borrowing the money.  Hence, he would be paying an opportunity cost. Assuming you need to work, some jobs will also do background or credit checks.  Credit cards can be used by well off people to actually make them money by offering rewards (compared to straight cash transactions).  The better your credit history, the better the cards/rewards you can get.  You can build that credit history better by having these loans and making timely payments."


"So I've done some digging and have some new information.   I looked up Beam in California's business search and found Beam Financial, registered in November of 2015 by Yinan Du, incorporated in Delaware.  Searched Delaware's database and found a listing from 6/24/2014 with the agent ""National Registered Agents, Inc""--not much to go on from that.   Some Google Sluething and it appears that Du was previously in charge of something called 24quan.com (not entirely sure what that business was).   Still trying to figure out which bank will be covering them for FDIC and when they will launch."


I was wondering if I could make part of the payment here in USD legally? Although not directly illegal ... From an India tax and FMEA point of view this would be a bit complicated.  A NRI Seller cannot repatriate the proceeds from sale of house unless he had purchased this from NRE account and repatriation is only possible for original purchase amount. For the gains Seller has to apply for repatriation of funds. A NRI Seller has to pay taxes on gains and this transaction should not look like facilitating a tax fraud in case NRI Seller does not pay his taxes. As a Buyer if you make the purchase from your NRE account [i.e. Move US funds into India into NRE Account], it will ease you ability to repatriate funds in future. Depending on the property value and PAN card availability of seller, you have to deduct 1% to 30.12% tax from the value and deposit this with Income Tax India. PS: It is recommended that you consult a Professional CA to help you with modalities.


Yes, if there is liquidity you can sell your option to someone else as a profit. This is what the majority of option trading volume is used for: speculative trading with leverage.


"The one thing that I saw in here that raised a big red flag is that you said you ""overpaid"" on your interest.  ALWAYS make sure you tell them that any extra money should be applied to principal only, not to interest.  You accrue interest based on your outstanding principal amount, so getting that lower reduces the overall amount of interest you end up paying.  Paying the interest ahead saves you nothing.  However, make sure you pay the current interest owed that month. They can capitalize past due interest - in affect, change that to be considered an addition to the loan principal amount and you end up paying interest on the interest."


What you are describing is perfectly legal, and is well under the threshold to attract the attention of the IRS ($10K+).  The money is not income, because it is repayment for goods provided or a loan made to your friends.  I do this myself oftentimes to take advantage of the rewards on my credit cards.  With cash to cover expenses coming in immediately from friends/family, there is virtually no risk. If you are concerned and want to protect against questions in the future about the source of the money, you ought to start keeping records of dates, times, locations, amounts, and the names of people involved when the charges are made.  Then track the dates when the cash is deposited into your bank account.  That way you can demonstrate the cash flow (Charge -> Repayment -> Deposit) to anyone who needs to know.


"The overall standard of living in the USSR actually *increased* when compared to the previous Czarist regime.   Going from a pseudo feudal society to a full blown communist experiment, however, seems to be a rather unsustainable approach to social evolution.   In any case, all ""isms"" tried at large scale -feudalism, capitalism, socialism, communism- have been proven to be systemically flawed: they all revolve around arbitrary pyramidal power structures, ignore physical reality, and utilize an abstract metric as their basis, i.e. capital/money."


> People who don't understand leverage shouldn't be writing articles about them  Agreed. I wasn't condoning the article, just offering my thoughts.  > why should there be a cap at 3x for ETFs when you can get way more leverage with other instruments  3x seems arbitrary. 5x seems arbitrary. I'd love to see a study that analyzed what, if any, would be an optimal 'ceiling' for these.  > 3 seems to be a valid point to some degree  3 was getting at speculators using them in excess. A potential solution to limit misuse would be to impose higher costs on levered instruments and capping at 3x or 5x or whatever can be viewed as an (extreme) cost.


"> **give me a specific ""instability"" or ""expense"" that Global Warming may cause. Just try...**  > **I asked you before, and I notice you did not reply: Is Trump a Nazi or alt-Right sympathizer? What ACTIONS by Trump you do not like?**"


Goddamit, Benzinga and their clickbait headlines. OK, Rant over.  The bit about having zero hobbies unrelated to work (1) sounds like classic Wall Street, nothing new there and (2) seems like a great way for most of us non-superheroes to burn out. I read fiction, play with my kids, work out, etc. More sustainable for a great many of us I would think.


> you should never hire someone to work for you unless you would work for them  Sounds great in theory, but that one thing assumes a lot of organizational and cultural debt has already been overcome in your organization, which isn't always the case. Too often a less than ideal rewards system turns the success of peers into an economic or political threat, or even if such problems were solved, the culture that remains turns it into an ego-related threat.  Avoiding it almost requires you having to be in love with them, but even among spouses, it doesn't always work that way...


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/07/jamie-dimon-america-has-to-get-its-act-together.html) reduced by 66%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Some 70 percent of young men are ineligible for military service &quot;Because of either education - they can&#039;t read or write - or health, mostly obesity and diabetes. That&#039;s an unbelievable number,&quot; Dimon said.  > The number comes from a Pentagon study a few years back that said the military won&#039;t take 71 percent of males aged 17 to 24 for the reasons Dimon cited, as well as taking prescription drugs for ADHD, or having inappro.  > Government records show that the rate among men ages 25 to 54 has fallen from 96 percent in 1970 to 88.4 percent in May. In addition, Dimon blasted the regulatory climate in the U.S., saying small-business formation has been limited and prospective homebuyers can&#039;t get access to mortgages.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6g3jsp/3_really_bad_facts_are_hurting_the_us_economy/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~139604 tl;drs so far."") | [Theory](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31bfht/theory_autotldr_concept/) | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **percent**^#1 **Dimon**^#2 **us**^#3 **growth**^#4 **Roundtable**^#5"


Have the bartenders weigh the liquor bottles before and after each shift. Compare it to the sales. Have each bartender count the beer, water and red bull bottles/cans. Keep track of the draught beer also. This the cheapest way to see how much is being taken, if at all.


I don’t believe financial transactions should be given the same rights as speech.  You don’t hand them the keys to the castle just because they want more freedom and aren’t afraid to rip people off.  Let’s try something less extreme, and easier to adjust, maybe?  Like any calibration, if you can’t adjust it, the tool no longer serves its purpose.


The stock market was already reaching highs way before trump took office. Fortune 500s and Dow were already reporting record profits every quarter before trump. The dozens of new retail/food/medial/plaza buildings to open this year in my city were already being built and going to open. The expansion on our already brand new hospital was already happening. The new school and medical university has nothing to do with trump. No i don't think the new 10,000 home development site approval has anything to do with trump. Trump literally has done nothing so far but win the election. These things were happening already. Employers are already desperate for employees I don't think anyone is hiring more because trump is in office when they were hiring already.


"Debt is nominal, which means when inflation happens, the value of the money owed goes down.  This is great for the borrower and bad for the lender. ""Investing"" can mean a lot of different things.  Frequently it is used to describe buying common stock, which is an ownership claim on a company.  A company is not a nominally fixed asset, by which I mean if there was a bunch of inflation and nothing else happened (i.e., the inflation was not the cause or result of some other economic change) then the nominal value of the company will go up along with the prices of other things. Based on the above, I'd say you are incorrect to treat debt and investment returns the same way with respect to inflation.  When we say equity returns 9%, we mean it returns a real 7% plus 2% inflation or whatever.  If the rate of inflation increased to 10% and nothing else happened in the economy, the same equity would be expected to return 17%.  In fact, the company's (nominally fixed) debts would be worth less, increasing the real value of the company at the expense of their debt-holders. On the other hand, if we entered a period of high inflation, your debt liability would go way down and you would have benefited greatly from borrowing and investing at the same time.   If you are expecting inflation in the abstract sense, then borrowing and investing in common stock is a great idea. Inflation is frequently the result (or cause) of a period of economic trouble, so please be aware that the above makes sense if we treat inflation as the only thing that changed.  If inflation came about because OPEC makes oil crazy expensive, millennials just stop working, all of our factories got bombed to hades, or trade wars have shut down international commerce, then the value of stocks would most definitely be affected.  In that case it's not really ""inflation"" that affected the stock returns, though."


Anyone jump out of finance too fast? Been in acct/fin for 7 years and only in current role in 1.5yrs I'm being offered an ops role with a 60% bump but was told could get a promo in finance within a year.   Probably wouldn't be that much but am having trouble deciding.


Princess & Tiaras Spa Celebrations spa party bus is the ultimate spa festivity on wheels.Let us roll out our pink carpet and help you make your little princess’s special celebration one that she will always remember. Whether you are having a birthday party, school fundraisers, pajama party, or play dates, have the best party ever with our swanky and stylish spa party bus


"It's not like Google did it out of the goodness of their hearts, though. Google did it so many people would consolidate their services with Google, casually forcing their users to use Google's very profitable search engine, which was and is arguably the best search engine on the internet anyway. This same idea is also what's making Google lose the social networking war to Facebook. They are trying to force fit a service that people do not want, as they did before with other Google products.  It was really a win-win for everybody at that time. But that same thought process might make Google go through some ""tough"" times in the next couple of years. But they are a cash rich company who can bring in literally the best talent in the world. I'm sure they'll make management changes and adapt accordingly."


"paywalls are defunct.  The abject lesson of the last presidential election is that the real money will be found in providing ""Newz""(tm) that people already believe and want to hear, true or not.  You can call it ""fake news"" if you'd like, but I tend to think of it as ""personalized news""."


Why do you care? In any case, you can easily Google the answer... Effective Sunday, April 2, 2017 for trade date Monday, April 3, 2017, and pending all relevant CFTC   regulatory review periods, Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc. (“CME” or “Exchange”) will list Monday   Weekly Options on the E-mini Standard and Poor’s Stock Price Index Futures and Standard and Poor’s   500 Stock Price Index Futures contracts (collectively the “Contracts”) for trading on CME Globex and for   submission for clearing via CME ClearPort as described in Appendix A below. Appendix B below provides   the Exchange fee schedule for the Contracts. source


Question: I live in half of a duplex together with other college students. I put my rent (roughly $750 in cash) in the landlord's mailbox while he was out of town for three weeks. I told him ahead that I would do this, but he claims I never did, and he would have asked me not to. Anyway, now he claims the money was not there when he returned and I still owe $750.  Answer: Well, that's tough. It could be that the money was stolen from the mailbox. It could be that the landlord pocketed the money and is trying to scam you. Your problem is that you have no receipt, and no evidence at all that you paid the money. There's little you can do other than paying up (again) and learning from this expensive lesson.


Airbnb can investigate those cases. I've never experienced that before. I likely less than 1% of cases. In fact, I'd be surprised if it's even legitimately taking place. It would be so difficult, and costly, to do such a thing. It may have happened once, it twice, but I doubt it's common.


"I'm afraid you have missed a few of the outcomes commonly faced by millions of Americans, so I would like to take a moment to discuss a wider range of outcomes that are common in the United States today. Most importantly, some of these happen before retirement is ever reached, and have grave consequences - yet are often very closely linked to financial health and savings. Not planning ahead long-term - 10-20+ years - is generally associated with not planning ahead even for the next few months, so I'll start there. The most common thing that happens is the loss of a job, or illness/injury that put someone out of work. 6 in 10 adults in the US have less than $500 in savings, so desperation can set in very quickly, as the very next paycheck will be short or missing. Many of these Americans have no other source of saved money, either, so it's not like they can draw on retirement savings, as they don't have that either. Even if they are able to get another job or recover enough to get back to work in a few weeks, this can set off a desperate cycle. Those who have lost their jobs to technical obsolescence, major economic downturns, or large economic changes are often more severely affected. People once making excellent, middle-class (or above) wages with full benefits find they cannot find work that pays even vaguely similarly. In the past this was especially common in heavy labor jobs like manufacturing, meat-packing, and so on, but more recently this has happened in financial sectors and real estate/construction during the 2008 economic events. The more resilient people had padding, switched careers, and found other options - the less resilient, didn't. Especially during the 1970s and 1980s, many people affected by large losses of earning potential became sufficiently desperate that they fell heavily (or lost their functioning status) into substance abuse, including alcohol and drugs (cocaine and heroine being especially popular in this segment of the population). Life disruption - made even more major by a lack of savings - is a key trigger to many people who are already at risk of issues like substance addiction, mental health, or any ongoing legal issues. Another common issue is something more simple, like loss of transportation that threatens their ability to hold their job, and a lack of alternatives available through support networks, savings, family, and public transit. If their credit is bad, or their income is new, they may find even disreputable companies turn them away, or even worse - the most disreputable companies welcome them in with high interest and hair-trigger repossession policies. The most common cycle of desperation I have seen usually starts with banking over-drafts, and its associated fees. People who are afraid and desperate start to make increasingly desperate, short-sighted choices, as tunnel-vision sets in and they are unable to consider longer-term strategy as they focus on holding on to what they have and survival. Many industries have found this set of people quite profitable, including high-interest ""check cashing"", payday loans, and title loans (aka legal loan sharks), and it is not rare that desperate people are encouraged to get on increasing cycles of loan amounts and fees that worsen their financial situation in exchange for short-term relief. As fees, penalties, and interest add up, they lose more and more of their already strained income to stay afloat. Banks that are otherwise reputable and fair may soon blacklist them and turn them away, and suddenly only the least reputable and most predatory places offer to help at all - usually with a big smile at first, and almost always with awful strings attached. Drugs and alcohol are often readily available nearby and their use can easily turn from recreational to addictive given the allure of the escapism it offers, especially for those made vulnerable by increasing stress, desperation, loss of hope, isolation, and fear. Those who have not been within the system of poverty and desperation often do not see just how many people actively work to encourage bad decision making, with big budgets, charm, charisma, and talent. The voices of reason, trying to act as beacons to call people to take care of themselves and their future, are all too easily drowned out in the roar of a smooth and enticing operation.  I personally think this is one of the greatest contributions of the movement to build personal financial health and awareness, as so many great people find ever more effective ways of pointing out the myriad ways people try to bleed your money out of you with no real concern for your welfare. Looking out for your own well-being and not being taking in by the wide array of cons and bad deals is all too often fighting against a strong societal current - as I'm sure most of our regular contributors are all too aware! With increasing desperation often comes illegal maneuvers, often quite petty in nature. Those with substance abuse issues often start reselling drugs to others to try to cover lost income or ""get ahead"", with often debilitating results on long-term earning potential if they get caught (which can include cost barriers to higher education, even if they do turn their life around).  I think most people are surprised by how little and petty things can quickly cycle out of control. This can include things like not paying minor parking or traffic tickets, which can snowball from the $10-70 range into thousands of dollars (due to non-payment often escalating and adding additional penalties, triggering traffic stops for no other reason, etc.), arrest, and more. The elderly are not exempt from this system, and many of America's elderly spend their latter years in prison. While not all are tied to financial desperation as I've outlined above, a deeper look at poverty, crime, and the elderly will be deeply disturbing. Some of these people enter the system while young, but some only later in life. Rather than homelessness being something that only happens after people hit retirement, it often comes considerably earlier than that. If this occurs, the outcome is generally quite a bit more extreme than living off social security - some just die. The average life expectancy of adults who are living on the street is only about 64 years of age - only 2 years into early retirement age, and before full retirement age (which could of course be increased in the next 10-20 years, even if life expectancy and health of those without savings don't improve). Most have extremely restricted access to healthcare (often being emergency only), and have no comforts of home to rest and recuperate when they become ill or injured. There are many people dedicated to helping, yet the help is far less than the problem generally, and being able to take advantage of most of the help (scheduling where to go for food, who to talk to about other services, etc) heavily depends on the person not already suffering from conditions that limit their ability to care for themselves (mental conditions, mobility impairments, etc). There is also a shockingly higher risk of physical assault, injury, and death, depending on where the person goes - but it is far higher in almost every case, regardless. One of the chief problems in considering only retirement savings, is it assumes that you'll only have need for the savings and good financial health once you reach approximately the age of 62 (if it is not raised before you get there, which it has been multiple times to-date). As noted above, if homelessness occurs and becomes longstanding before that, the result is generally shortened lifespan and premature death. The other major issue of health is that preventative care - from simple dentistry to basic self-care, adequate sleep and rest, a safe place to rejuvenate - is often sacrificed in the scrambling to survive and limited budget. Those who develop chronic conditions which need regular care are more severely affected. Diabetic and injury-related limb loss, as one example, are far more likely for those without regular support resources - homeless, destitute, or otherwise. Other posters have done a great job in pointing out a number of the lesser-known governmental programs, so I won't list them again. I only note the important proviso that this may be quite a bit less in total than you think. Social Security on average pays retired workers $1300 a month. It was designed to avoid an all-too-common occurrence of simple starvation, rampant homelessness, and abject poverty among a large number of elderly. No guarantee is made that you won't have to leave your home, move away from your friends and family if you live in an expensive part of the country, etc. Some people get a bit more, some people get quite a bit less. And the loss of family and friend networks - especially to such at-risk groups - can be incredibly damaging. Note also that those financially desperate will be generally pushed to take retirement at the minimum age, even though benefits would be larger and more livable if they delayed their retirement. This is an additional cost of not having other sources of savings, which is not considered by many. Well, yes, many cannot retire whether they want to or not.  I cannot find statistics on this specifically, but many are indeed just unable to financially retire without considerable loss. Social Security and other government plans help avoid the most desperate scenarios, but so many aspects of aging is not covered by insurance or affordable on the limited income that aging can be a cruel and lonely process for those with no other financial means. Those with no savings are not likely to be able to afford to regularly visit children and grandchildren, give gifts on holidays, go on cruises, enjoy the best assistive care, or afford new technological devices to assist their aging (especially those too new and experimental to be covered by the insurance plans they have).  What's worse - but most people do not plan for either - is that diminished mental and physical capacity can render many people unable to navigate the system successfully. As we've seen here, many questions are from adult children trying to help their elderly parents in retirement, and include aging parents who do not understand their own access to social security, medicaid/medicare, assistive resources, or community help organizations.  What happens to those aging without children or younger friend networks to step in and help? Well, we don't really have a replacement for that. I am not aware of any research that quantifies just how many in the US don't take advantage of the resources they are fully qualified to make use of and enjoy, due to a lack of education, social issues (feeling embarrassed and afraid), or inability to organize and communicate effectively. A resource being available is not very much help for those who don't have enough supportive resources to make use of it - which is very hard to effectively plan for, yet is exceedingly common. Without one's own independent resources, the natural aging and end of life process can be especially harsh. Elderly who are economically and food insecure experience far heightened incidence of depression, asthma, heart attack, and heart failure, and a host of other maladies. They are at greater risk for elder-abuse, accidental death, life-quality threatening conditions developing or worsening, and more. Scare-tactics aren't always persuasive, and they do little to improve the lives of many because the people who need to know it most generally just don't believe it. But my hope here is that the rather highly educated and sophisticated audience here will see a little more of the harsher world that their own good decisions, good fortune, culture, and position in society shields them from experiencing. There is a downside to good outcomes, which is that it can cause us to be blind to just how extremely different is the experience of others. Not all experience such terrible outcomes - but many hundreds of thousands in the US alone - do, and sometimes worse. It is not helpful to be unrealistic about this: life is not inherently kind. However, none of this suggests that being co-dependent or giving up your own financial well-being is necessary or advised to help others. Share your budgeting strategies, your plans for the future, your gentle concerns, and give of your time and resources as generously as you can - within your own set budgets and ensuring your own financial well-being. And most of all - do not so easily give up on your family and friends, and count them as life-long hopeless ne'er-do-wells. Let's all strive to be good, kind, honest, and offer non-judgmental support and advice to the best of our ability to the people we care about. It is ultimately their choice - restricted by their own experiences and abilities - but need not be fate. People regularly disappoint, but sometimes they surprise and delight. Take care of yourself, and give others the best chance you can, too."


Next time you are with your son, have him request a credit freeze. The choice is his, of course.


Only if you sell the stock in question, and use the proceeds to buy other stock. (You should probably never feel bad about selling your company stock, even if it goes up a lot later, because from a risk-exposure basis you are already exposed to your company's performance through your career. Unless you have a lot of other savings, you should diversify.)


If this is the issue then it may be happening because you have not connected to your Netgear extender. Please make sure this to access mywifiext.net and for troubleshooting tips to solve this issue, get in touch with us through the live support window provided.


There are very few banks which offer two-factor authentication.  Part of the reason is cost.  Providing a token to every account-holder is expensive, not just in the device or system, but in providing support and assistance to the millions of people who won't have the faintest idea how it works and complain that they no longer have access to their accounts. That said, it is sometimes available on request for personal accounts and many banks require it for their business clients. My HSBC Business account comes with two-factor as default and it works extremely well. There is also the pseudo-two-factor security offered by Visa and MasterCard (3-D secure) which performs a similar function.


SeekingAlpha has a section dedicated to Short ETFs as well as others. In there you will find SH, and SDS.  Both of which are inverse to the S&P 500.  Edit: I linked to charts that compare SH and SDS to SPY.


> Go to a Burger King and you'll never get soggy fries.  In four attempts at my local Burger King, I've paid, but never gotten my food at all.  I realize this doesn't speak for the company on a nationwide scale, but my local franchisee is a dick.


"For most people ""home ownership"" is a long term lifestyle strategy (i.e. the intention is to own a home for several decades, regardless of how many times one particular house might be ""swapped"" for a different one.  In an economic environment with steady monetary inflation, taking out a long-term loan backed by a tangible non-depreciating ""permanent"" asset (e.g. real estate) is in practice a form of investing not borrowing, because over time the monetary value of the asset will increase in line with inflation, but the size of the loan remains constant in money terms.  That strategy was always at risk in the short term because of temporary falls in house prices, but long-term inflation running at say 5% per year would cancel out even a 20% fall in house prices in 4 years. Downturns in the economy were often correlated with rises in the inflation rate, which fixed the short-term problem even faster. Car and student loans are an essentially different financial proposition, because you know from the start that the asset will not retain its value (unless you are ""investing in a vintage car"" rather than ""buying a means of personal transportation"", a new car will lose most of its monetary value within say 5 years) or there is no tangible asset at all (e.g. taking out a student loan, paying for a vacation trip by credit card, etc).  The ""scariness"" over home loans was the widespread realization that the rules of the game had been changed permanently, by the combination of an economic downturn plus national (or even international) financial policies designed to enforce low inflation rates - with the consequence that ""being underwater"" had been changed from a short term problem to a long-term one."


God forbid those services reflect the poor compensation that the public servants receive or there'll be hell to pay. Some people just have this weird idea that things can just keep working as you continue to just strip away the resources needed to function in the first place.


"I haven't had cable in forever... but I still like to watch comedies on NBC.com (Community!) which of course has commercials.     They're a nuisance, but I guess it's the ""price"" I pay to have hilarious new content streamed to me for free on the internet every week.   Honestly, I wish they would give me the option of ""watching"" one big 5 minute long commercial up-front and then stream the rest of the show commercial-free... but unfortunately they don't."


"OK, reading between the lines here it looks like the services offered by your company are of an ""adult"" (possibly illegal?) nature and that this individual has actually paid you in full for the services rendered up to this point. The wrinkle here is that you say that you've been offered large cash ""gifts"" in return for unspecified future favours, but that your client hasn't provided a real Paypal account to do so. When you pressed him on it, he sent a fake email and invented a ""financial adviser"" to fob you off, then hasn't contacted you  since. It's pretty clear that he hasn't got any intention of making these payments to you. What you're now proposing to do is to use his known banking details to collect money to cover those verbal promises. In pretty much every part of the world, that's a crime. Without a written agreement to use that payment method for those promises, he could easily call the police and have you arrested for theft of funds. The further wrinkle is that his actions (claiming to have made payment via paypal, forged email headers, etc) strongly suggest that this individual is involved in cyber-crime and may well have used a fake bank account to pay for your initial services.  The bottom line here is that you need real legal advice, from an actual lawyer."


Annual sales dived five straight years, and the company closed 450 stores. Then they tried to merge with Office Depot. That didn't work. So by going private with Sycamore Partners Staples they have an opportunity to revamp their businesses away Wall Street pressure. Staples is being sold at a fraction of the price.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://civicskunk.works/new-study-finds-seattles-15-minimum-wage-achieved-its-goal-fc9a0056bdfa?gi=8b9fdb9ecf0) reduced by 77%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Today, researchers Michael Reich, Sylvia Allegretto, and Anna Godoey from University of California Berkeley have released a new Seattle-area minimum wage study with an even larger scope than the UW team.  > The Berkeley study put Seattle&#039;s real numbers up against &quot;Data from other areas in Washington State and the rest of the U.S. to construct a synthetic control group that matches Seattle for a nearly six-year period before the minimum wage policy was implemented.&quot; In this way, they can compare what might have happened in an economy like Seattle&#039;s had the wage not increased.  > The minimum wage didn&#039;t lower employment - not even at Subways and McDonald&#039;s, which we were warned were especially vulnerable to a minimum wage increase.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6kjqoh/new_study_finds_seattles_15_minimum_wage_achieved/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~156485 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*: **wage**^#1 **Seattle**^#2 **minimum**^#3 **increase**^#4 **restaurant**^#5"


> There's no entry path into these jobs. A lot of companies only seem to want to hire people who somehow earn these skills through osmosis and don't want to hire people on straight out of school.   At least in my case, I have several positions open and would most assuredly hire someone straight out of trade school. I have already set aside the budget to have them trained on our software platforms anyway. It would be great to actually find someone with 3-5yrs experience, however these types are hard to come by, even in this job market. 4 year degrees are a dime a dozen, finding people who have learned a concrete skill such as CAD/CAM, machining, welding, etc are not.   I can't just hire someone who has no training whatsoever either, nor can a hire someone who has a 4 year engineering degree, given that they are likely to up and leave when the opportunity arises, and after we have spent thousands of dollars and the time to have them trained.  Baby boomers have dominated these blue collar manufacturing jobs for decades. They are now retiring in droves leaving prime opportunities open for those willing to take advantage of them.


If you are not banking with a credit union, open an account.  Speak with a person there an explain you are wanting to build your credit history.  They will likely have a product designed for the purpose. Also, to agree with duffbeer703, why is your score so low at this point? Make sure your three credit reports do not have anything incorrect on them and challenge wrong items. If everything is fine on the report, you just to have more credit and use it for a longer period of time. I presume you are building credit for a large purchase such as a house.  Please be very careful with borrowing money and do your best to avoid carrying balances.


The breakdown between how much of your payment is going toward principal and interest is very important.   The principal balance remaining on your loan is the payoff amount.  Once the principal is paid off, your loan is finished.  Each month, some of your payment goes to pay off the principal, and some goes to pay interest (profit for the bank). Using your example image, let's say that you've just taken out a $300k mortgage at 5% interest for 30 years.  You can click here to see the amortization schedule on that loan.  The monthly payment is $1610.46. On your first payment, only $360 went to pay off your principal.  The rest ($1250) went to interest.  That money is lost.  If you were to pay off your $300k mortgage after making one payment, it would cost you $299,640, even though you had just made a payment of $1250.  Interest accrues on the principal balance, so as time goes on and more of the principal has been paid, the interest payment is less, meaning that more of your monthly payment can go toward the principal.   15 years into your 30-year mortgage, your monthly payment is paying $762 of your principal, and only $849 is going toward interest.  Your principal balance at that time would be about $203k.  Even though you are halfway done with your mortgage in terms of time, you've only paid off about a third of your house. Toward the end of your mortgage, when your principal balance is very low, almost all of your payment goes toward principal.  In the last year, only $513 of your payments goes toward interest for the whole year. You can think of your monthly loan payment as a minimum payment.  If you continue to make the regular monthly payments, your mortgage will be paid off in 30 years.  However, if you pay more than that, your mortgage will be paid off much sooner.  The extra that you pay above your regular monthly payment all goes toward principal. Even if you have no plans to pay your mortgage ahead of schedule, there are other situations where the principal balance matters.  The principal balance of your mortgage affects the amount of equity that you have in your home, which is important if you sell the house.  If you decide to refinance your mortgage, the principal balance is the amount that will need to be paid off by the new loan to close the old loan.


No worries. It seems your ego is robust enough to entertain you are wrong. If maintaining such ideological positions are important to you I'm sure you will do the minimum research to put them to the test and re-evaluate them if evidence shows then to be untennible.


I'm a database guy who got his education in economics. Economists use non-cooperative behavior to model short term, individual benefit chasing behavior by actors.  People are selfish. *shrug* You can make life a lot shittier for everyone if you opperate on the assumption that they can be made better. Hundreds of millions of people have already been killed in that pursuit.  Capitalism works because it monetizes and rewards contribution. The greater the value your contribution has, the more reward you get, generally speaking.


Get the best administration of the database, the Dubai professional resource is the primary free web professional listing for Dubai with a Dubai area outline organizations can list their business elements for  UAE business directory professional listing. We have a more database service such as mobile database, business database, email marketing Dubai and we provide new technology service with UAE real estate database. Database For Business connects its users to Dubai real estate information, analysis data, news and opportunities.


Crown Equity Holdings Inc., together with its digital network, currently provides electronic media services specializing in online publishing, which brings together targeted audiences and advertisers. Crown Equity Holdings Inc. (CRWE) announced that it has launched CRWE Tube, www.crwetube.com, a video sharing site that allows billions of people around the world to upload, watch and share original videos.


It took me a while to understand the concept, so I'll break it down as best as I can.  There are three parts to the accounting equation: Assets = Liabilities + Owner's Equity We'll look at this in two ways   1. As a business owner you invest (say) 10,000 USD into your bank. The entry would be: Debit: Assets: Cash for 10,000    Credit: Owner's Equity: Contributions for 10,000 In this case, you have assets of 10,000 from your deposit, but it is due to owner contributions and not business transactions. Another example (say a sale):  Debit: Assets: Cash for 10,000    Credit: Owner's Equity: Sales for 10,000 Debit: Assets: Cash for 10,000    Credit: Liabilities: Deposits for 10,000 Deposits are a banking term to reflect a bank's obligation to return the amount on demand (though the bank has free reign with it, see fractional banking)  You will NEVER debit or credit your bank as it is assumed you will be storing your money there, note bank reconciliation. Hope this helps, comment with any more questions.


Draft up a promissory notes.  Have a lawyer do it use one of those online contract places if you have simple needs.  Your promissory note need to cover Be specific.  There are probably a lot more items that can be included, and if a quick internet search is any indication it gets deep fast. http://lmbtfy.com/?q=car+sale+promissory+note (Like @LittleAdv says) Head to your DMV with the title and the promissory note.  The title is signed over to you and held by the DMV.  When you pay up, the seller informs the DMV and they send you the title.  If you don't pay up, the seller can legally repossess the car.  All butts are covered. Pay the note as agreed.  When you are all paid up, your friend notifies the DMV who then mail you the title. Your butt is covered because your name is on the car, you can insure it and nobody can take it from you (legally) if you are paying the note as agreed.   Your pal's butt is covered because if you stop paying half way through, he can keep whatever you have paid him and get his car back.


Yes, there is such possibility. Also, there's a possibility people made your computer, your operation system, your browser, etc. put there some code there that would intercept your communications and steal your money. So could bank clerks (and unlike all other examples, this really happened in real world, numerous times, though usually at smaller banks), ATM makers, etc.  In the modern world, you rely on things made by thousands of people, this is a part of modern world's conveniences. You don't have to use it - you can store all your money in a big jar in your basement and nobody but occasional thief breaking in could take it.  However, fraudulent unauthorized transactions in most banks can be rolled back, and any transaction is reported to you. So fraud from mint.com people would be quite low on my list of risks. Much bigger risk is that somebody could break into mint.com servers and steal information about your accounts from there or install some malicious code. I believe they have good protections, but no security system is perfect. You need to evaluate how the convenience of using mint.com compares to your personal feeling about this risk. If you feel you couldn't sleep at night knowing somewhere out there there is information about your money - don't use it. I don't worry about it too much as I know the chance of it happening is low and the chance of getting the money back if it happens is high, but if you feel differently - don't do it.


Wow, crappy article.  To answer the question: extremely cheap areas in proximity to urban wealth are the best places to speculate in terms of large-scale real-estate developments.   A golf-course developer ideally wants a huge amount of cheap land in close proximity to some combination of wealthy retirees, business-executives, or vacationers. Traditionally that means farmland or undeveloped land on the fringes of urban areas. But there's not a lot of that left in America.   Blighted and depressed suburbs or neighborhoods with lots of abandoned housing are the new under-utilized farmland.   This is how gentrification happens. Some factory-town goes under, gets poor, goes to the dogs, and eventually the big old mill-building becomes cheap enough for a movie-studio, nightclub-impresario, shopping-mall developer, art-gallery, or whatever to take an interest. A lot of them fail, but the ones that succeed drive up the surrounding property-values a little bit. Shuttered storefronts get rented to restaurants and retailers catering to the moneyed visitors. Richer people move into the nearby homes and drive up property values.   Savvy real-estate developers work on a multi-year time horizon. They are not paying cash, they are borrowing, and they are counting on the totality of circumstances to repay the debt not just with greens-fees but with real-estate appreciation.   You or I could not simply buy one house in a poor neighborhood and hope to reinvigorate it, no matter how nicely we kept our lawn. But someone bringing in $500mm in financing is *counting* on transforming the area, not on getting poor people to pay the greens fees. They're not selling golf to poor people, they're selling cheap land to golfers.   It might fail spectacularly, but if it works, the plan will bring jobs, capital, development, and appeal to a blighted, jobless, decaying neighborhood.


Also, you can definitely stay at the same institution. It is perhaps looked down upon by some who say you need to get out there and explore the academic world a little more, but I wouldn't worry too much about them if you're happy.  That said, I had the choice of staying at the same institution or going elsewhere and I did choose to go to a new school. Nine years in one place is a long time.


There is no difference in safety form the perspective of the bank failing, due to FDIC/NCUA insurance.  However, there is a practical issue that should be considered, if you allow payments to be automatically withdrawn from your checking account  In the case of an error, all of you money may be unavailable until the error is resolved, which could be days or weeks.  By having two accounts, this possibility may be reduced.  It isn't a difference between checking and savings, but a benefit of having two accounts. Note that if both accounts are at the same bank, hey make take money from other accounts to cover the shortfall. That said, I've done this for years and have never had a problem.  Also, I have two accounts, one at a local credit union with just enough kept in it to cover any payments, and another online account that has the rest of my savings.  I can easily transfer funds between the two accounts in a couple days.


You don't understand how global warming works and where most emissions sources come from (hint: transportation is a huge one). Never mind local air quality.   Neither of these things mean we must live devoid of petroleum products. Just that we don't need to burn it and live with the exhaust it creates and the consequences that arise from it.   But yes, wind and solar are already becoming the cheapest forms of electricity available. The price point for renewables no longer requires heavy subsidies and is now becoming cost competitive.


"So this has been bugging me for a while, because I am facing a similar dilemma and I don't think anyone gave a clear answer. I bought a 2012 kia soul in 2012. 36 months financing at 300/mo. Will be done with my car loan in 2015. I plan on keeping it, while saving the same amount of money 300/mo until I buy my next car. But, I also have an option of trading it in for the the next car. Question: should I trade it in in 2015. should I keep it for 2 years more? 3 years more, before I buy the next car? What makes most financial sense and savings. I tried to dig up some data on edmunds - the trade-in value and ""true cost to own"" calculator. The make and model of my car started in 2010, so I do not have historical data, as well as ""cost to own"" calculator only spans 5 years. So - this is what I came up with:  Where numbers in blue are totally made up/because I don't have the data for it. Granted, the trade-in values for the ""future"" years are guesstimated - based on Kia Soul's trade-in values from previous years (2010, 2011, 2012) But, this is handy, and as it gets closer to 2015 and beyond, I can re-plug in the data where it is available and have a better understanding of the trade-in vs keep it longer decision. Hope this helps. If the analysis is totally off the rocker, please let me know - i'll adjust it/delete it. Thank you"


Supplier of Quartz Grit in India http://quartzpowdermanufacturers.com/supplier-of-quartz-grit-in-india.php#supplier-quartz-grit-in-india Supplier of Quartz Grit in India, Manufacturer of Quartz Grit in India - Shri Vinayak Industries is offering high grade Quartz Grit. We produce finely processed Quartz Grit by our super efficient production unit. We are dominant supplier, Manufacturer and exporter of Quartz Grit. Usage of Quartz Grit in tiles, Ferro alloys, Ferro silicon, Ferro chrome, oil drilling, artificial granites, and electrical industries. Other applications of quartz grit are in steel industries, sugar refining, dairy farms, paper industries, chemical industries and water treatment plants.


I agree with Joe that you seem to have your stuff together. However I can't disagree more otherwise.  You are getting a loan at such a cheap rate that it would be almost impossible to not substantially beat that rate over the next 15-20 years.  You paying off your home early might give you warm fuzzy feeling but would make me queezy.  This is a MONEY website.  Make money. For our purposes let's say your home is worth 500k, you can get a fixed rate loan at 3% over 30 years, and you can earn 7% on your investments per year.  Note that I have earned 12% on mine the past 15 years so I am being pretty conservative. So let's not get into your other stuff because that is fine.  Let's focus just on that 500k - your house. Interest only Loan for the whole thing-  The flip side is you pay off your house.  Your house could be worth 400K in 30 years.  Probably not but neighborhood could decline, house not kept up, or whatever.  Your house is not a risk-free investment.  And it fluctuate in many areas more than the stock market.  But let's just say your area stays OK or normal.  In 30 years you can expect your house to be worth somewhere between 700k to 1.5 million.  Let's just say you did GREAT with your house.  Guess what?  At 1.5 million selling price you still lost 1.5 million because of your decision plus sunk your money into a less liquid option.   Let the bank take the risk on your house price.  The warm fuzzy feeling will be there when you realize you could rebuy your house two times over in 6-7 years. Note: I know my example doesn't use your exact numbers.  I am just showing what your true cost is of making a decision in the most extreme way.  I am guessing you have great credit and might be able to find an all interest loan at 3%.  So not doing this is costing you 1.5 million over 30 years.  Given a lower home price after 30 years or a higher rate of return this easily be much more.  IF you earned 12% over the 30 year period you would be costing yourself 16 million - do the math.  Now you are talking about doing something in-between.  Which means you will basically have the same risk factors with less return.


I would use that money to buy a car instead of taking out a loan to buy the car.   It does however prompt the question:  What do you want more a house or a car?


> That is likely to require some extra work  Surely there are jobs that can get done on-time in 40 hours/week.  It's one thing when you *sometimes*, in an *exceptional* situation, need more than that, but if a job *consistently* requires overtime, doesn't that just indicate incredibly bad planning on the employer's part?  > At the same time there is no reason to believe that significant professional challenges will necessarily fit neatly into standardized work time arrangements.  Then what about the people whose jobs can get done in *less* than 40 hours/week?


100% scam. This is classic of mixing real (Exxon) with fiction. This gives credibility to story. Don't give any thing, there is no damage yet. If you take the bait, there are multiple ways to get money from you.


So why is the capital income a problem, I don't get it? It also seems to be confusing the issue with the separate concern of wealth inequality. I say this because the capital income is not money earned from doing nothing - to generate the income one must invest in assets, and if a decent return is desired then even riskier investments must be considered. This creates new products and services, businesses, jobs etc. Also it does beg the question can everyone earn a capital income, or is there always a need for labour income? What happens as employment becomes more difficult to obtain due to automation? It was a neat explanation but it's left me with more questions than answers.


You can generally withdraw cash from an ATM with a major credit card. There are exceptions of course, but generally yes. It's a terrible deal unless you are in the most dire of straits. Avoid it. Credit card companies make money on purchases at a store from the store. If you pay late, they make money from you.  For an ATM, they make money by charging you a fee and then charging interest on day one with no grace period. This is a very high interest rate short term loan. You will also be charged a fee by the ATM itself - and you will pay interest on that fee!


I can believe it. This reminds me of another article I read from NYTimes (?) that described the new business environment. People are beginning businesses for their own purpose rather than to serve consumers. While these MBAs might have altruistic motives, it's still the underlying desire for respect.


"First, do you get charged a commission or other fee for reinvesting?   Second, why would capital gains and dividends be grouped together? If the broker charges you for that run away. As Joe explained, it is done as a courtesy. Doesn't this mean if I sell the stock, the profit will be used to buy   that stock right back? No, this is only the capital gains distributions of funds. Lastly, there are two additional checkbox options I was hoping   somebody could explain: ""All equity positions currently held in this   account"" and ""Future equity purchases, transfers, and deposits to this   account"". ""All equity positions"" means your selection will be valid for all the positions you already have. ""Future positions"" means it will only affect future positions, not the ones you already have. For example: FOLLOW-UP: Looking around, some people suggest not doing this for   taxable accounts because it complicates cost basis reporting. Is this   a valid concern? Doesn't the brokerage handle that and send you the   information when you sell the stock? Yes, because you end up with tons of positions and you need to track the cost basis for each. Brokers are required to report cost-basis on 1099-B now, so its less of a problem, but before 2011 you'd have 10's of positions each year (if you have a monthly dividend, for example) each with different cost basis, and you'd usually sell them all at once. Go figure the gain. So the new 1099-B reporting regulations help a little on this, but it only kicks in for everything starting of 2013 IIRC. Fortunately, for some investments (mutual funds, mainly) you may chose averaging, but it has drawbacks as well."


I used MoneyCorp - they typically charge you approximately 2% on top of the official exchange rate. You would probably need to declare that in your home country - I do not know Pakistan rules so can't help there.


One of the most effective promotional items that work is school bags.  Which children will use at school. What makes them effective merchandises is that they help build a better impression of your brand. The father can use the bag to work and the mother can use it also to put baby stuff in while they both go shopping. Surely, anyone can use it and as long as you got yourself a quality supplier.


I expect to be back here in July.    I did give my [first impressions](http://www.reddit.com/r/economy/comments/ufj37/payroll_additions_in_us_misses_expectation/c4uxylq) of this job report above.  I'm just raising the possibility (and hoping like hell) that we're just seeing  completely screwed up seasonal adjustment due to the freakish early spring in much of the country.


If we assume constant volatility, gamma increases as the stock gets closer to the strike price. Thus, delta is increasing at a faster rate as the stock reaches closer to ITM because gamma is the derivative of delta. As the stock gets deeper ITM, the gamma will slow down as delta reaches 1 or -1 (depends if a call or a put). Thus, the value of the option will change depending upon the level of the delta. I am ignoring volatility and time for this description.  See this diagram from Investopedia: Gamma


"For most situations the ""no need"" answers are 100% correct. The corner case to think about depends on your health and your family history.  Not to be morose, but if folks in your family who died young from heart issues, clusters of cancer or other terminal illnesses, you may want to consider getting medically qualified for a modest amount of insurance when you are young. Then, when you have children, you usually have the option of incrementally upgrading your coverage over time."


"What does ETFs have to do with this or Amazon?   Actually, investing in ETFs means you are killing actively managed Mutual Funds (managed by people, fund managers) to get an average return (and loss) of the market that a computer manage instead of a person. And the ETF will surely have Amazon stocks because they are part of the index.  I only invest in actively managed mutual funds. Yes, most actively managed mutual funds can't do better than the index, but if you work a bit harder, you can find the many that do much better than the ""average"" that an index give you."


The only purpose the ILS market fills is directly lining up capital to pay for potential cats. Unless you're doing directly that you don't really have a way to participate, long or short.  The cat bond market really isn't liquid or developed enough for derivatives to exist at this point.   Due to the losses this year the cat bond market could shrink significantly too because all the existing catastrophe models have seemed to be inadequate to model these occurrences and investors are losing their shirts. There are questions of the extent to which the alternative capital in the reinsurance market will reload in the wake of 2017.


Skimmed this, but it is pretty true.  Try to get into sales.  Since you will basically need to be selling anyway, you might as well get paid as such.  Sales teams make a lot more than the analysts in 90% of the cases.  As long as you don't get fired a middle of the road to below average salesperson will make a lot more than all but the top analysts (who are probably on their way to being promoted to managment to no longer be analysts).  Again maybe not all firms are like this, but from what I have seen it seems to be a trend...


I have friends in Denver, once upon a time they could afford the suburbs nearby but prices have to growing too fast for even their tech incomes to afford it. There are cheap, less decent areas but gentrification will sky rocket the costs even without Amazon.    In reality, wherever Amazon chooses to settle their HQ2, prices will rise. By how much depends on how little is in the area already.


The short float ratio and percent change are all calculated based on the short interest (the total number of shares shorted).  The short interest data for Nasdaq and NYSE stocks is published every two weeks. NasdaqTrader.com shows the exact dates for when short interest is published for Nasdaq stocks, and also says the following: FINRA member firms are required to report their short positions as of settlement on (1) the 15th of each month, or the preceding business day if the 15th is not a business day, and (2) as of settlement on the last business day of the month.* The reports must be filed by the second business day after the reporting settlement date. FINRA compiles the short interest data and provides it for publication on the 8th business day after the reporting settlement date. The NYSE also shows the exact dates for when short interest is published for NYSE stocks, and those dates are exactly the same as for Nasdaq stocks. Since the short interest is only updated once every 2 weeks, there is no way to see real-time updating of the short float and percent change.  That information only gets updated once every 2 weeks - after each publication of the short interest.


Well, this covers about 6 trillion.  Monetary base wasn't defined in the table and I was too lazy to drill down.  I'm guessing it is M2.  Annnnnnd if you think about it a lot of the red and blue section went into shoring up bank balance sheets.  Why?  I can't prove it yet but i suspect twas to support the derivatives market and keep it from collapsing.


> you could try to persuade the public that paying more for energy is in their interest, but good luck with that.  That's exactly what I'm hoping for.  >tax the hell out of it and hope no one notices  Not only am I hoping that people will notice, I'm hoping they'll heavily support it. The reason being that not doing it will harm the future of the human race.  >I'd suggest eliminating democracy would be an... ahem... undesirable side effect.   Not what I was suggesting


I'll tell you what DOES work though, is grocery pickups.  My wife loves to grocery shop online and then just swing by to have the bags loaded up and pay for them.  Maybe Amazon will integrate online shopping for grocery pickup somehow.


"It depends what you mean. Finance Independence and Retirement Early (FI/RE) are two overlapping ideas. If you plan to retire early and spend the same amount of money every year (adjusted for inflation), then you need to save twenty-times your yearly spending to satisfy the 4% Safe Withdrawal rule of thumb. Carefully notice I say ""yearly spending"" and not income.  I'm unaware how it is in Pakistan, but in America, people who retire in their sixties tend to reduce their spending by 30%. This is for a host of reasons like not eating out as much, not driving to work, paid off mortgages, and their children being adults now. In this type of profile, a person needs to save 17.5x yearly spending. This numbers presume a person will only use their built assets as an income source. Any programs like a government pension acting as a safety net. If you factor those in, the estimates above become smaller."


Salut, c'est Vincent. Tu recherches un système qui fonctionne et permet des résultats incroyables, à terme, bien sûr, parce que c'est très sérieux et honnête ! 100% transparent, 100% sûr, 100% honnête, comme toi, comme moi. Alors contacte-moi à vincentmusschoot@gmail.com et je t'en dis plus. Tu vas être scotché et cela va te retourner complètement le cerveau, crois-moi ! Tous les avantages du crowdfunding, des achats groupés et du marketing de réseau, sans aucun (aucun, pas un, nada, quéquette) de leurs inconvénients ! Totalement nouveau. A découvrir absolument.


From mid 2007 to early 2009 the DJI went down about 50 %. This market setback won't happen on a single day or even a few weeks.  Emergency funds should be in cash only. Markets could be closed for an unknown period of time.  Markets where closed September 11 until September 17 in 2001.


"Ya, I thought of that.  That approach is usually what I take when I know the author and I have the same background and general level of understanding, and we're simply arguing around the edges.  In this case, the author is just all wrong.  All over the place.  I don't want to re-write history or submit some 20-paragraph tome on reddit ""correcting"" him.  It simply isn't worth my time.    Maybe, one day in your own professional life, you'll reach the point of expertise and won't waste a lot of your time addressing every tom, dick and harry pundit out there.  PS Attacking the credibility of a source is not an ad hominem attack."


HELOCs typically have a 10 year draw and 5 year payback. During the draw time you can pay interest only if you wish. The rate can range from Prime minus 1.5 to Prime plus (quite a bit).  Of course, you can always shop around for a better deal than you currently have so long as you have equity in your home.


You must mean the current debt ceiling debacle. The meaning of it is: US government is constantly borrowing money (by issuing treasury bonds) and constantly repaying some of the bonds that come to maturity, and also has other obligations it has to meet by law all the time - such as Social Security checks, bonds interest, federal employees' salaries and pensions, etc. By law, total amount of money that can be borrowed at the same time is capped. That means, there can be situation where the government needs to borrow money to pay, say, interest on existing bonds, but can not, since the limit is reached. Such situation is called a default, since the government promised to pay the interest, but is unable to do so. That does not mean the government has no money at all and will completely collapse or couldn't raise money on the market if it were permitted by law to do so (currently, the market is completely willing to buy the debt issued by US government, and with interest that is not very high, though of course that may change). It also does not mean the economy ceases to function, dollars cease to have value or banks instantly go bankrupt. But if the government breaks its promises to investors, it has various consequences such as raising the costs of borrowing in the future. Breaking promises to other people - like Social Security recipients - would also look bad and probably hurt many of them. Going back to your bank account, most probably nothing would happen to the money you store there. Even if the bank had invested 100% of the money in US treasury bonds (which doesn't really happen) they still can be sold on the open market, even if with some discount in the event of credit rating downgrade, so most probably your account would not be affected. As stated in another answer, even if the fallout of all these calamities causes a bank to fail, there's FDIC and if your money is under insured maximums you'll be getting your money back. But if your bank is one of the big ones, nothing of the sort would happen anyway - as we have seen in the past years, government would do practically anything to not allow any big bank failures.


"A real estate business could offset income from occupied property with costs from vacant property held for speculation.  For speculation, you can let a building rot, then get it reassessed.  If the jurisdiction assesses part or all of the tax bill on the value of improvements, this can drop the annual tax bill significantly while you hold.  If you plan to hold for a decade or more, this can be very important.  Strategically, this also ruins the neighborhood property values, so you can assemble neighboring parcels to support future major developments.   This is a long speculation game.  Exemplars of the strategy include Richard Basciano who bought up several buildings in NYC's Times Square and installed adult theater tenants in the 70s, for payoff today; and the late Sam Rappaport who pursued a strategy of squeezing rent and simply ignoring building inspection violations in Philadelphia, assembling major urban core parcels on the cheap, and whose children are now selling into strong markets.   Legality: Adult businesses are kind of a grey market covered by specific local ordinances, neither exactly illegal or perfectly legal.  Ignoring building violations is not legal, but the penalties are fines, not jail.  It's certainly not a ""nice"" strategy.   Richard Basciano: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/porn-king-richard-basciano-survived-rudy-giuliani-plans-risk-article-1.319185 Sam Rappaport: http://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/stories/2002/08/05/focus13.html?page=all"


The maximum you can contribute to both the 403(b) and 401(k) is $18,000. Take the amount you already contributed and subtract it from $18,000. That's how much you have left to contribute before maxing out.


Deposit it in a business savings account. The following below show you some options you can choose from. Next you can invest it in the market i.e. shares, bonds etc. If you have a more risky side, can go for peer to peer lending. If you are feeling really lucky and want to invest in the long term, then buy a property as a buy-to-let landlord. There are loads of options, you only need to explore.


3-5 years is long enough of a timeframe that I'd certainly invest it, assuming you have enough (which $10k is).  Even conservatively you can guess at 4-5% annual growth; if you invest reasonably conservatively (60/40 mix of stocks/bonds, with both in large ETFs or similar) you should have a good chance to gain along those lines and still be reasonably safe in case the market tanks.   Of course, the market could tank at any time and wipe out 20-30% of that or even more, even if you invest conservatively - so you need to think about that risk, and decide if it's worth it or not.  But, particularly if your 3-5 year time frame is reasonably flexible (i.e., if in 2019 the market tanks, you can wait the 2-3 years it may take to come back up) you should be investing. And - as usual, the normal warnings apply.  Past performance is not a guarantee of future performance, we are not your investment advisors, and you may lose 100% of your investment...


Andersen’s conviction hastened its demise.  That's not true.  Indicting Arthur Andersen caused its demise and resulted in tens of thousands of people losing their job. Prior to that it was most successful accounting firm in the nation.  Once the firm itself was indicted because of the actions of a few employees, it lost all of its clients because you can't have an indicted firm producing your statements.


"have you by chance been to the middle east? (UAE, Qatar or Saudi specifically). or perhaps been exposed to any part of the US industrial revolution (im not sure of your nationality), hell, even the french revolution. a review of any of those, and thats just relatively recent examples, would show why you are wrong.  saying it doesnt work is a broad statement without actually saying what the problem is, nor does it take any steps to underlying the root cause or possible solutions. when you say ""it doesnt work"". what specifically is not working."


The money is transferred through an electronic funds transfer, which is an umbrella term that encompasses wire transfers, direct debits, etc. The application form for Key Trade Bank (the only place I can find that uses that exact phrasing) lists a SWIFT number. This usually indicates that the transfer of funds is done through an international wire transfer.  In the most basic sense, the process works like this: Key Trade Bank uses the SWIFT number to notify your current bank of the transfer.  Your bank instructs the settlement bank, e.g. the central bank of your country, where your bank is located, to transfer funds to Key Trade.  If Key Trade is in another country from your current country, your central bank will send money to the central bank where Key Trade is located, which will in turn send the money to Key Trade. Otherwise, your central bank deposits the money into the account that Key Trade also has with them, and the transfer is complete.


You'd think I would remember this, having also bought a house in 2008, but I recall that earnest money was different from the nonrefundable deposit.  Earnest money was typically some small amount - $500 or something - that was put on the table when you made the offer.  After the offer was accepted, but before closing, the 1%-ish amount was put into escrow as part of the negiotiation process.  Maybe this is just a Massachusetts thing, though.


"1) Usually, the choice between Traditional vs. Roth is whether you believe that your tax rate will be higher or lower in the future than it is now. Your income is probably in the 25% bracket now. It's hard to say whether that should be considered ""high"" or ""low"". Some people advocate Roth only for 15% bracket; but your income would probably go into higher brackets in the future, so Roth may be preferable from this point of view. Roth IRA also has another advantage that the principal of contributions can be taken out at any time without tax or penalty, so it can serve as an emergency fund just as well as money in taxable accounts. Given that you may not have a lot of money saved up right now, this is useful. 2) In a sense, it's nice to have a mix of Traditional and Roth when you withdraw to hedge against uncertainty in future tax rates and have the option of choosing whichever one is advantageous to withdraw when you need to withdraw. That said, you will likely have many years of access to a 401k and high income in your future working years, in which you can contribute to a Traditional 401k (or if no access to 401k, then Traditional IRA), so a mix will almost certainly happen even if you go all Roth IRA now. 3) I think that depends on you, whether you are a hands-on or hands-off kind of investor."


"And specifically regarding prices of housing, what factors drive prices in that regard? I mean, the houses are roughly the same... but almost 3 times as expensive. Rent, like so many things, is tied to supply and demand. On the demand side, rent is tied to income. People tend to buy as much house as they can afford, given that mortgage interest is deductible and public schools, financed through property tax, performs better in valuable neighborhoods. Raise the minimum wage and economists expect rents to go up accordingly. When employers and pensions offer COLA adjustments, it feeds into a price loop. During the past ten years, there was also some ""animal spirits"" / irrational behavior present; people feared that if they didn't buy now, home prices would outpace their growth in income. So even though it didn't make sense at the time, they bought because it would make even less sense later (if you assume prices only go up). There's also the whole California has nicer weather angle to explain why people move to SF or LA. On the supply side, it's all about housing stock. In your old town, you could find vacant lots or farmland in less than 5 minute's drive from anywhere. There's far less room for growth in say, the SF Bay area or NYC. There's also building codes that restrict the growth in housing stock. I'm told Boulder, CO is one such place. You would think that high prices would discourage people from moving or working there, but between the university and the defense contractors triangle, they seem to have an iron grip on the market. (Have you ever seen a cartoon where a character gets a huge bill at a restaurant, and their eyes shoot out of their eye sockets and they faint? Yeah... that's how I felt looking at some of the places around here...) Remember, restaurants have to cover the same rent problem you do. And they have higher minimum wages, and taxes, etc. Moreover, food has to be imported from miles away to feed the city, likely even from out of state. In California, there's also food regulations that in effect raise the prices. If people are footing those higher bills, I wouldn't be surprised if they're racking up debt in the process, and dodging the collectors calling about their Lexus, or taking out home equity loans to cover their lifestyle."


I'm pretty sure you can lobby the USDA just like any other part of government. Add a new wing onto their building and you can have whatever food you like designated organic.  Most organic nutballs don't consider the USDA a reliable source.


I use another solution: debit card with an account kept empty most of the time and another account in the same bank without any card. I keep the money on the second card-less account, and when I want to buy something, I instantly transfer the appropriate amount to the account with the card and pay. That way money is on the account tied to a debit card only for a minute before payment, and normally it is empty - so even if someone would try to fraudulently use my card number - I don't care - the transaction will be rejected. I think its the perfect solution - no fraud possible, and I don't have to worry about possibly having to bother calling my bank and requesting a chargeback, which is stressful and a waste of time and harmful to peace of mind (what if they refuse the chargeback)? I prefer to spend a minute before each transaction to transfer the money between the two accounts, and that time is not a waste, because I use it to reconsider the purchase - which prevents impulse-buying.


The obvious thing would happen. 10 shares change owner at the price of $100. A partially still open selling order would remain. Market orders without limits means to buy or sell at the best possible or current price. However, this is not very realistic. Usually there is a spread between the bid and the ask price and the reason is that market makers are acting in between. They would immediately exploit this situation, for example, by placing appropriately limited orders. Orders without limits are not advisable for stocks with low trading activity. Would you buy or sell stuff without caring for the price?


"Let me guess, it's a fairly large amount of money, a few thousand at least. This is a scam. This is a variation on the many fake check scams out there. You deposit the check and you think it ""cleared"" your bank, but it didn't clear. A clever fake check can take a couple weeks to bounce and the bank will demand the money back. Any money you wire back to the fraudster in the meantime will be lost forever."


"Not really. High frequency traders affect mainly short term investors. If everyone invested long-term and traded infrequently, there would be no high frequency trading. For a long term investor, you by at X, hold for several years, and sell at Y. At worst, high frequency trading may affect ""X"" and ""Y"" by a few pennies (and the changes may cancel out). For a long term trader that doesn't amount to a ""hill of beans"" It is other frequent traders that will feel the loss of those ""pennies."""


If your checking account has a card associated with it, then keeping funds in savings reduces the risk that some kind of fraud will wipe you out.


"You need to go read a good history book (not Zinn).  The problem prior to the CRA of 1965 is that the GOVERNMENT itself institutionalized bigotry.  This is unacceptable because all citizens are supposed to be equal *before the law and their goverment*.    The CRA overstepped its bounds, however, insofar as it attempted to enforce ""equality"" by some definition in the PRIVATE sector and this leads to no good endgame.  It puts the revolting government bottom feeders into the position of deciding what is ""fair"" and who should get what.  This ALWAYS leads to some people's rights being more important than others.  None of us much likes, say, the KKK worldview, but a Klacker's rights should not be less defended just because they are bigots.  Once you start picking and choosing whose rights are more important, you open a door that leads to really harmful things.  In this case, a person with a particular faith traditition may be forced by their own government to support someone who's worldview they object to strenuously.  tl;dr You're still supporting slaverly, the slaves just now just the people whose point of view you do not support.  This is tyranny."


"> ""ads don't work on me, I use research"". You think marketers don't know that and influence that?   Yep. What research are you doing, reading reviews? What's the motivation of the reviewer? Did they get paid for it? Are they an affiliate for the company? Did they receive the product free in order to review it?  How did you even end up on that particular reviewer's page? Did you google them? Did you click an ad result? Ever since Google made the differentiation between ad results and organic less noticeable (and put 4 ads on highly competitive keywords, thus dropping the first organic result below the fold) the CTR on ads vs. organic has been quite a bit higher.   There are so many factors, and people that think they're immune to ads strike me as a bit naive."


You need to report the income from any work as income, regardless of if you invest it, spend it, or put it in your mattress (ignoring tax advantaged accounts like 401ks).  You then also need to report any realized gains or losses from non-tax advantaged accounts, as well as any dividends received.  Gains and losses are realized when you actually sell, and is the difference between the price you bought for, and the price you sold for.  Gains are taxed at the capital gains rate, either short-term or long-term depending on how long you owned the stock.   The tax system is complex, and these are just the general rules.  There are lots of complications and special situations, some things are different depending on how much you make, etc.  The IRS has all of the forms and rules online.  You might also consider having a professional do you taxes the first time, just to ensure that they are done correctly.  You can then use that as an example in future years.


That is an assumption that sales would not go down if prices go up.  If you lose even .5% of sales due to an increase of 17 cents, you're not going to cover your $15 wage.  Fast food is an incredibly competitive space, if you don't think 17 cents is significant, go look at how many places still offer a dollar/99 cent menu.


"Most other countries are worse off.    Your perception of what is a resource intensive lifestyle does not take into consideration future innovation or adaptation.    Government debt is large but not insurmountable.  Much of it is owned by the government itself (social security trust fund and the federal reserve) and by domestic banks.   The ""crumbling infrastructure"" claim is often made but is rarely articulated well so it's hard to respond to.    Entitlements is a bit more complicated an issue due to political gridlock, but I expect that at least minor changes will be made gradually that will help deal with this problem.  If not major reform, small things like pushing back the benefit age a year here and a year there, repealing benefits for the wealthy, reducing the size of cost of living adjustments, reducing the amount that is paid out to higher earning recipients, increasing the amount of yearly income that is subject to FICA...  These are piecemeal changes that both sides could agree to even in the current political climate.  Medicare is the bigger cost, but how to deal with that is difficult to determine considering what's going on with obamacare.  Municipal and state governments will not fail if they go bankrupt.  Most municipalities and states are able to balance a budget.  It can be done but in some place it isn't because politicians don't have enough backbone to say no.  When they go bankrupt and are unable to borrow money, they will have no choice and can blame their cuts on the banks who won't loan them money.  That is, unless the people running the federal government also have no backbone and decide to bail them out, in which case we will have an enormous case of moral hazard on our hands.  The economic dominoes in Europe and China are not damaging the core of their economies.  Unless Europe breaks apart violently and goes to war with itself or China has a civil war, the basic aspects of their economy that make them a valuable part of the global economy will not go away.  Their productive capacities will remain intact and we'll still want to buy stuff from each other.    The beauty of free market capitalism is that it's so adaptable and the fact that things are changing does not mean that everyone will be worse off.  Whether or not the US is above everyone else in the end is mostly irrelevant, but the fundamental aspects of the US economy that make it among the strongest in the world will not change because of these things.  Our workforce will remain highly educated, very productive and very innovative.  We have the best farmland in the world and a lot of it, enormous amounts of natural resources, a relatively flexible and adaptable economy and a tremendous amount of wealth.  There may be troubles related to certain institutions and governing bodies, but remember that those things are not the economy.  The economy is the people, the things they can make, the things they know, and the things that they can do."


Firstly assumption is that  Now if expense is from your savings


Okay, you win the argument.  I say this because I am giving up.  The problem is this.  Seriously think about what I'm saying.  I say I have a problem with the way the system is.  You say, no, this is wrong, you shouldn't have a problem with how the system is, because . . . and then you go and describe the parts of the system, and recite the reasons given for why those parts are the way they are.  Okay?  That's not an argument.  That's elaborating on a definition.  Your arguments aren't your own, and that's what proves you don't know what you're talking about.  You need to stop pretending that because you just learned how there's a money multiplier, it must be this way because of some law of economics.  It's not.  Did you know that in the Middle East for example, they do not have this banking system?  I'm not trying to start an argument about the better system, my point is that, dude, you don't even know that, and it undermines this whole mechanistically determined little financial ecosystem you're just assuming is a law of economic nature.  Also, I never brought up any supposed need to go to a gold standard, but nice try.  Further proof you are not really reading what I'm saying, and making assumptions.  Why?  Because you're gullible, and anything that seems establishment or widely accepted, that's what you go along with.  Everyone who is critical of the Federal Reserve system and its existence must be a tinfoil hat wearing anti-Semite who believes 9/11 was done by reptilian aliens.  I get it, believe me.  If the Fed's job is to prevent the economy from collapsing overnight due to fluctuations in the price of money, when why did it not collapse overnight before the Fed existed?  Wait, no.  I'm done.  You win.  This is all in your imagination anyway, so I'll let you have it.  Please go back and read my posts and just once sit back and say, okay, can I see any of this from this guy's perspective?  Also, we did not abandon the gold standard at Bretton Woods.  SERIOUSLY WTF.  Ugh, I can't help you.  Go on and look up stuff you just learned and keep pretending to argue with people by slapping something someone else said that sounds relevant into a paragraph with no real understanding of what you're saying.


This is a great forum, mostly focused around mutual funds though: http://www.bogleheads.org/


Here in New Zealand we have a few Groupon clones, including our biggest one, GrabOne. Almost every day I see a daily deal on this website which is horrendously misleading. This despite NZ having some of the best consumer protection legislation in the world - not much sense in having the strongest policy if you aren't enforcing it.


NYT has no authority to report on the credit card account.  The introductory offer you accepted likely had a specified duration, like a 1 year commitment from you.  It doesn't matter that you used a virtual card, or a credit card, or check or any other form of payment.  NYT can, if it wants, send your NYT account to collections and/or report your delinquency to a reporting agency.  But this reporting would be your NYT account, not the credit card.


"Yes. Filling all the orders of just reservations will bring in over 2 billion in revenue. Spending 1.16 billion to make 2+ billion isn't bad business. It is the ""it takes money to make money"" rule of life.   EDIT: I re-ran the numbers (assuming every order is the base model) and its more like 2.1 billion."