This sounds like a shady trick. I would consult with a consumer debt lawyer in your area. Most county bar associations in the US have a referral service, where they recommend a local lawyer and there is a reduced fee for the initial visit. I think the statute of limitations is 10 years in most cases, but it depends on where you live. From these bare details,I think they don;t have much of a case. Go see a lawyer and don't let them harrass you.


"The problem here can be boiled down to that fact you are attempting to obtain a loan without collateral.  There are times it can be done, but you have to have a really good relationship with a banker.  Your question suggests that avenue has been exhausted. You are looking for an investor, but you are offering something very speculative.  Suppose an investor gives you 20K, what recourse does he have if you do not pay the terms of the loan?  From what income will this be paid from?  What event will trigger the capability to make a balloon payment?    Now if you can find a really handy guy that really needs a place to live could you swap rent for repairs?  Maybe.  Perhaps you buy the materials, and he does the roof in exchange for 6 months worth of rent or whatever. If you approached me with this ""investment"", the thing that would raise a red flag is why don't you have 20K to do this yourself?  If you don't how will you be able to make payments?  For example of the items you mentioned: That is a weekend worth of work and some pretty inexpensive materials.  Why does money need to be borrowed for this? A weekend worth of demo, and $500 worth of material and another weekend to build something serviceable for a rental.  Why does money need to be borrowed for this? 2K?  Why does money need to be borrowed for this? This can be expensive, but most roofing companies offer financing.  Also doing some of the work yourself can save a ton of money.  Demoing an old roof is typically about 1/3 of the roofing cost and is technically simple, but physically difficult. So besides the new roof, you could have a lot of your list solved for less than 3K and three weekends worth of work.  You are attempting to change this into a rental, not the Taj Mahal."


Annualize quarterly returns:      AR = (1+QR)^4  Where *QR* is a decimal return, e.g. 0.05.  Standard deviations are similar:      Annual SD = SD * sqrt(T)  If you have quarterly deviations, *T=4*, if you have daily, *T=252*, etc.  As an aside, for work with money riding on it, it is *not* okay to aggregate standard deviations if there's autocorrelation amongst observations at a smaller time scale. Volatility is often quoted this way and that's fine, but it is dangerous to do any sort of risk management with this and you'll require more due diligence. It's a good enough approximation for napkin math, though.


"sorry, my response was supposed to be to the above comment, not yours. My main point was that colonizing in Africa, where there was already a large population did not require bringing in people (which you would need to incentivize to move to, hence offering the ""free"" carrot of property rights to settlers of NA) to extract resources. Instead the British (and other European powers) just used the local populace to extract the resources. The main reason the US and Canada are well off is that property rights were established very early on and this encouraged people to ""invest"" and produce more because the higher production accrued to the producer and the producer would have legal recourse should a negative ""externality"" be put upon them by someone else. Obviously there were other reasons as well, but property rights are huge (this is true globally now) in encouraging people to ""grow"" their assets. Part of the reason Africa is still so screwed up is that many of their institutions and governments are too corrupt to protect their citizens' property rights, thereby discouraging investment and production."


I'd say no. They're basically a very staid form of gambling. It's a non-interest bearing security, so your money isn't growing at all, and while you might win a million, you might never win anything at all. Better off putting your money in interest bearing bonds, an interest bearing bank account, or stocks, which, while also gambling, tend to make money in the long term.


No they don't, but they are sure as hell not going to make the sandwiches themselves. Try need employees and to abide by the laws on paying them.   If your business can not sustain itself paying employees legally, than you should not have that business.


"I will disagree with some of the other answers here.  In my view, the most important dimension of the situation is not your friend's potential loss but the potential losses of the people he may convince by using his position as youth group leader, etc., to draw more them into the scam. Exactly how to handle this depends on many factors that aren't mentioned in your question (and probably rightly so, as this aspect of the situation moves beyond personal finance).  For instance, if your friend is a ""pillar of the community"" who is widely trusted, and you are not, there may be little you can do, since people will believe him and not you.  If you have some influence over the groups he is trying to recruit, you can attempt to provide a counterweight to his recruitment activities. Again, how to do this depends on other factors, such as how he is recruiting them.  If he is just privately contacting individuals and inviting them to these meetings, you may have to just keep your eyes peeled for anyone who seems tempted and try to dissuade them before they suffer the ""brainwashing"".  If he actually tries to do some sort of public recruitment (e.g., holding a meeting himself), you could try to inject doubt by, e.g., attending and asking probing questions to expose the dangers.  If you think the danger is widespread, you could consider taking some more public action, like writing a column in a local paper about this organization. Of course, another major factor is how much you think people stand to lose by this.  However, in your question you indicated that your friend has invested ""multiple month or years of income"".  If he intends to pressure others to invest similar amounts, this sounds to me like enough danger to warrant some preventive action.  Few people can afford to lose months or years of income, and sadly those most vulnerable to a scammer's siren song are often those who can least afford it.  It doesn't sound like a situation where you'd have to devote your life to the cause of stopping it, but if I knew that dozens of people in my community stood to lose years of income, I'd want to make at least a small effort to stop them, rather than just keep my mouth shut. In doing this, you may lose your friendship.  However, you stated that your goal is to resolve the situation in a way that is ""best with lowest loss of money for everybody"".  If you really take this utilitarian view, it is likely that you may have to give up on the friendship to prevent other people from losing more money."


I have an example of a trade I made some time ago.  By entering the position as a covered call, I was out of pocket $5.10, and if the stock traded flat, i.e. closed at the same $7.10 16 months hence, I was up 39% or nearly 30%/yr. As compared to the stock holder, if the stock fell 28%, I'd still break even, vs his loss of 28%. Last, if the stock shot up, I'd get 7.50/5.10 or a 47% return, vs the shareholder who would need a price of $10.44 to reflect that return. Of course, a huge jump in the shares, say to $15, would benefit the option buyer, and I would have left money on the table. But this didn't happen. The stock was at $8 at expiration, and I got my 47% return. The option buyer got 50 cents for his $2 bet.  Note, the $2 option price reflected a very high implied volatility.


Yup. What I wanted to know was where they are pulling it up from. Have casually used Google finance for personal investments, but they suck at corp actions. Not sure if they provide free APIs, but that would probably suck too! :D


">I bet we worked less as hunter gatherers.   Definitely. IIRC, there's quite a bit of stuff written about this.   This thread surprises me. I really thought Reddit would be like ""yes! And people under 40 too!""  Personally, I don't think humans are made to work jobs. We are made to acquire wealth which makes working jobs tolerable. So, if we could change the way we get wealth or minimize the time spent at jobs, we'd all be better off in the long run."


"My visa would put the goods on the current monthly balance which is no-interest, but the cash part becomes part of the immediate interest-bearing sum. There is no option for getting cash without paying immediate interest, except perhaps for buying something then immediately returning it, but most merchants will do a refund to the card instead of cash in hand. This is in New Zealand, other regions may have different rules. Also, if I use the ""cheque"" or ""savings"" options at the eftpos machine instead of the ""credit"" option, then I can have cash immediately, withdrawn from my account, with no interest charge.  However the account has to have sufficient balance to do so."


why should I have any bias in favour of my local economy? The main reason is because your expenses are in the local currency.   If you are planning on spending most of your money on foreign travel, that's one thing.  But for most of us, the bulk of our expenses are incurred locally.  So it makes sense for us to invest in things where the investment return is local.   You might argue that you can always exchange foreign results into local currency, and that's true.  But then you have two risks.  One risk you'll have anywhere:  your investments may go down.  The other risk with a foreign investment is that the currency may lose value relative to your currency.  If that happens, even a good performing investment can go down in terms of what it can return to you.  That fund denominated in your currency is really doing these conversions behind the scenes.   Unless the bulk of your purchases are from imports and have prices that fluctuate with your currency, you will probably be better off in local investments.  As a rough rule of thumb, your country's import percentage is a good estimate of how much you should invest globally.  That looks to be about 20% for Australia.  So consider something like 50% local stocks, 20% local bonds, 15% foreign stocks, 5% foreign bonds, and 10% local cash.  That will insulate you a bit from a weak local currency while not leaving you out to dry with a strong local currency.   It's possible that your particular expenses might be more (or less) vulnerable to foreign price fluctuations than the typical.  But hopefully this gives you a starting point until you can come up with a way of estimating your personal vulnerability.


that would be socialism, what do you have against people making profits? if people want more money, they should work hard and get a second job, then a third, then a fourth. family is not so important if you want to get ahead.  /sarcasm


Now that was a fun fucking Monday . . .   It seems our  Cheeto in Chief has lost his words and been reduced to a soggy sobbing Cheeto and his hands are trembling to much to abuse Twitter  You have to admit it has been quite peaceful not having to hear him blubber mindlessly about shit he has no clue about   The Koreans made him blink and shut up in Panic . . I guess they know he was a draft dodger and would lock up  Well we picked him


"Yeah, I understand the financial realities of it, but as others in this thread have pointed out, our *current* situation isn't ""insurance"", it's ""government bailout at a net loss to the public for a token fee"".  Whether I have to pay more in insurance premiums or more in taxes, at least make it *honest*.   And I think you overestimate the financial savvy of the average consumer.  It may be ""common knowledge"" that most homeowner's insurance doesn't cover floods; but somehow it *still* manages to surprise half the people actually affected by something like Harvey, when they discover that fact."


"To begin, I'm not sure you understand what COL refers to.  It's what you spend, not what you bring in.  Let's say Bob makes 60k in some midwest town, but spends 30k for living.  If his salary and his cost of living both increase at the same rate, let's say they both double, this means Bob now makes 120k but spends 60k.  He now saves double what he would have before.  That 30k extra saved is 30k extra saved.  His purchasing power has now gone greatly up, especially in respect to housing outside of an expensive area like the valley.  For one, let me clear this up - SF, the city itself, is expensive.  I'm talking more generally about the bay area, and silicon valley as a whole.  Most tech jobs from the big tech companies that we think of as ""the bay"" are not in SF.  they are in mountain view, Sunnyvale, and that area.  So this might explain some of our disagreements.  Most people who work for large tech companies understand they have a decision to make - live in the city proper, pay a lot more than the greater valley, use transit into work (all of the giants have regular shuttles in), but get to love a more ""hip"" life, or be more conservative in the valley, where rental prices are on par with NYC.  In talking to a lot of people who work for the big companies, they know this.  Younger folks who want to live the city life pay the premium, but by far and wide they live outside of it, where it is closer to work, and they take the rail up for weekends out with buddies.  I'm still not sure where you are getting a doubling of the COL in the valley versus outside.  Yes, housing as a single item is going to be a person's largest expense.  But all the rest of their expenses are not going to see a similar increase.  It's also important to remember that saving 10% of 60 v 10% of 120 is significantly different.  Lots of people take jobs in the valley, are able to save vastly larger amounts of cash, and then leave.    In my calculations I evaluated the COL markup to be ~30% for the valley for a 200k job.  That is, I spend maybe 50k of my earning on all living expenses in the Midwest (in a downtown, nice area), and would expect I'd pay about 70k for the same standard in the valley.  But I'd be saving a shitton more.  I've done the math, I'm not here to argue with someone who just googled SF cost of living searching for the answers I want.  I've talked to actual people out there.  I appreciate your passion for this, but your 100% increase in COL estimate is simply wrong.  But then again, it depends on how you live and where you live in your current situation.  I live in a large midwest city, actually in the city itself."


My wife took Megabus last weekend to DC from NYC.  Bus was a half hour late and took over 6 hours to get there (should have been around 4).  Flew home for $90 in about an hour - well worth the extra $65.


"But for the people that do, and sacrifice it all in order to make a better life for their children, would you then tax them so their children have to start over at nothing again?  Would I personally tax them? Only if I truly wanted a meritocracy. If I wanted a pure meritocracy then yes absolutely. The parent is the one who clawed out of poverty, not the kid. The kid just rode along, he didn't agonize to get out. Why should he enjoy the fruits of someone else without any of the labor? (This is just the argument.) What I personally want would be something a little more 'gray' but it is hard because everyone in a society is going to want a different shade of that gray.   ""That sounds like incentivising poverty again, and it doesn't actually fix anything.If unemployment benefits and higher taxes are the problems keeping people in poverty, I don't see how the solution should be to tax more so that we can what... have more benefits programs that incentivise poverty?""  There's a lot to this question so I might not respond to each and every thought here, sorry about that. Sure, some unemployment benefits and higher taxes might de-motivate people to work harder. Why work harder when your labor won't be enjoyed by your offspring? Well you as an individual would still enjoy your labor, and presumably it would be easier to claw one's self out of poverty because economic mobility would have been improved upon. The issue that many are complaining about is that it is becoming more and more common for Americans to die in the same socioeconomic status they were born in, or a lower one. There are higher economic mobility rates in many of these other countries, but why? (Big research topic). Furthermore, I personally think that economic policy needs to adapt to the changes in society and technology. To think policies of the past are appropriate for other times, is an over simplification in my mind.   ""It feels good to demonize the ""rich"" because we all can participate. The homeless can blame the $40k income can blame the $250k income can blame the $1M income can blame the %1. Because they have more stuff than we do. But taking that stuff away doesn't increase the standard of living for anyone, it actually makes it more difficult for everyone.""  Maybe for some people, simply attacking people who have more money is satisfying and they will simply always attack someone who has more. However, my understanding is that extreme inequality is actually a problem that reduces a countries rate of growth. (I am not alone in this) That is, the distribution of wealth has been slowly shifting, why? How are things changing? Why are things become more stratified? Why is economic mobility decreasing? Why is American productivity raising dramatically while wages have been stagnating and not keeping up with how hard they work? The distribution of wealth is simply a data point, an indication of underlying issues. No one I know says that the distribution itself is inherently bad, the question is what that distribution tells us about the structure of a country."


One of the things I found most interesting is while the national average is 7.45 years, Texas fell in the best position at 5.68 years while Hawaii fell in the worst spot at an average of 10.10 years to pay off their debts. What causes such a huge discrepancy within the same country. I realize cost of living can vary drastically even from city to city but we're talking a difference of nearly 4.5 years here.


I see no reason why not, I just opened a joint account with my partner and all we needed was proof of our address and some valid ID - driving licence/passport plus a utility bill worked for us. Of course if you both already bank with HSBC they will already have this information and your bank card may suffice, if you don't have utility bills for example.


We take pride in the relationships we’ve forged over many years of working here in Hamilton. Providing top-notch plumbing and gasfitting services has been our livelihood since the mid 80’s and we’ve enjoyed both the challenging and rewarding nature of the work. With satisfied clients all over town, there’s always a reason to turn up to the next job with a smile and a duty to serve.


In all fairness, I have turned opportunities from their site into my own personal cash machine, so this is quid pro quo to me. It is my personal rolodex that self updates. I perceive value in the site. Where else can I click a few buttons and find out who I know or have connections to at a given company for business purposes? For free? I'm trying to reconcile this with why I don't mind them yet I dislike facebook so much.


"Do you think that publishers haven't thought this through pretty carefully already? You can't *easily* make a thousand copies of a dead-tree book and give it to all your friends, or make it available to millions on the internet. (Possible? Sure. But not without a ton of work and hassle.) Publishers rely on customers buying paper books for their personal consumption, and figure that they might loan the book out once or twice - big deal. They still get paid.  Without DRM, publishers would basically be inviting the public at large to steal their e-book product. Marginal costs to copying a ""book file"" are nothing, unlike in the paper comparison, so everyone would do it if they could. Sure, the DRM is easy to hack, but the vast majority of the public isn't going to do that or know how. Just like for video games - the publishers know some folks will do it, but enough don't that it makes the product profitable. DRM is what creates the whole business model for e-books in the first place.  By the way, Amazon's DRM doesn't lock you into using the Kindle. The official Kindle app for the iPad works just fine, and I read many books with it."


">right wing  A big part of the problem is that people continue to distinguish between ""right"" and ""left"" when they are the same thing.   >speaking points mix facts in with lies  *All* mainstream political discourse is rife with lies.  >Democratic speaking points are slightly better because  This is you buying into the deception. Slightly better than absolutely terrible is still terrible.  >I suspect they are to some extent pretending to disagree more than actually disagreeing  Your suspicion is accurate. This is a process called ""framing"", where the two ""sides"" collaborate to establish the ""acceptable boundaries of the discussion"". Anyone who doesn't stay within the boundaries are dismissed as ""radicals"" or ""extremists"" on ""the fringe"". You pitch your frame such that the desired outcome falls in the middle, then you look like you've ""compromised"" when you agree on the same thing the establishment wanted in the first place.   >The fact is, both parties are neoliberal as heck and neither at this point has the country's best interests at heart.  That's because they're the ""right"" and ""left"" hands of the establishment. Your hands oppose each other, such that through opposing each other, they can work together to accomplish your goals. The same is true of politics.   And politicians never have ""the country's best interests at heart"". They have only their interests, and whatever promises they made to the people they depend on to fund their campaigns. Hint - they don't care about your donation. Your money is nothing compared to the big money.  >Its a side effect of the concentration of wealth caused by accelerating technological growth  No, the concentration of wealth has *not* been caused by accelerating technological growth. Technological growth *reduces* concentration of wealth. What has caused concentration of wealth has been government policy that actively takes money from the majority public and gifts it to the wealthy establishment, encompassing both monetary and fiscal policy.   >It will get worse as more and more jobs succumb to automation..  Again you're on the wrong side of this (and the politicians thank you for that). Automation is a *good thing*, automation has *always* resulted in having a wealthier and more productive society. Whenever jobs are automated, it frees people up for new pursuits, and people think of new ways to be useful."


"I think that the general public is conditioned to think more in terms of points rather than percentages, so that 200 points is easier to fathom than the equivalent percent. We all translate internally what this means. Of course it is less precise, but it also makes for good copy in the publishing industry (""Market Down 1000 points!"")"


Rent a car in Kuwait Airport at affordable prices from Castle Car Rental. Check out our range of services and offers for a new model car. Get Free services, Free delivery! Full Insurance! Call us at 22055022 to book a car today!


UPDATE: reddit’s GM Erik Martin responded to this post, simply stating:  **“You can’t have democracy if people can rig the ballot box.”**  There are not enough upvotes in the universe for this!  Does Forbes also support buying elections elsewhere?


For now it could possibly happen, assuming there are that many people wanting to offload their coins and recent charts are showing that trading volume is pretty damn low right now, even with prices being so high.  I'm going to guess most people with Bitcoin plan to hold onto it for a while.  Considering bitcoin can only be divisible to 8 decimal points (1 bitcoin = 1^8 satoshis), prices will start to skyrocket once supply cedes and (if) demand continues to rise.  Or so it should, if it ever reaches that point.  Most naysayers believe it'll die before it reaches that point.


[Here](https://www.reddit.com/r/economy/comments/6h8pv4/tax_evaders_exposed_why_the_superrich_are_even/dj31o5v/). The entire notion of taxation not being theft is the idea that the government has a legitimate ownership claim on resources, but the problem with that line of thinking is that it can't get resources without first taxing. That's what I mean by putting the cart before the horse.


You cannot just cherry pick 1 quarter and say 'corporate profits are up' - I beleive they were up 16 billion in the quarter you referenced. Should I reference 4th quarter 09' when they were down [250.3 Billion] (http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/2009/gdp109p.htm)  >The cost of labor right now can't support consumption in our economy. That is the simplest of economics.** What you're doing is claiming that businesses will be able to hike up prices without repercussions from consumers.**  I am saying exactly the opposite - there will be repercussions. Corporations would be forced to increase pricing - consumers would obviously take note - nullifying your perceived increase in demand bolstered by their increased wages. ****  I think you are attaching a straw man that I think there is enough demand - there isn't I agree with you - I am stating your solution to that problem (companies reducing profit margin by maintaining selling prices and boosting wages) would not increase demand.


Yes, Better Place was a massive failure, in Israel (also Japan).  As an Israeli I can tell exactly why: greed, and unreasonable prices and charges (literaly, charges of electricity and money.)  The fact that Tesla is trying the SAME thing is showing you that this is the only way to have an electric car drive for a long distance.  Personally, I think that also Tesla will fail with this battery exchange program.  Only what happened with Standard Oil will work: a government mandated ONE standard for how to refuel a car (i.e. standard size and design of batteries to be exchanged for any Electric car.)


You're talking about ESPP? For ESPP it makes sense to utilize the most the company allows, i.e.: in your case - 15% of the paycheck (if you can afford deferring that much, I assume you can). When the stocks are purchased, I would sell them immediately, not hold. This way you have ~10% premium as your income (pretty much guaranteed, unless the stock falls significantly on the very same day), and almost no exposure. This sums up to be a nice 1.5% yearly guaranteed bonus, on top of any other compensation. As to keeping the stocks, this depends on how much you believe in your company and expect the stocks to appreciate. Being employed and dependent on the company with your salary, I'd avoid investing in your company, as you're invested in it deeply as it is.


Indices such as SP500 are typically including dividends - the payment of dividends doesn't impact the value of the index. Where can I find data on these dividends?  I found data on dividend yields, but these give me access only to the sum of dividends over the last year. This in turn can change either because there are new dividends being paid, or because you stop counting last year's dividends...


Part 1 Quite a few [or rather most] countries allow USD account. So there is no conversion.   Just to illustrare; In India its allowed to have a USD account. The funds can be transfered as USD and withdrawn as USD, the interest is in USD. There no conversion at any point in time. Typically the rates for CD on USD account was Central Bank regulated rate of 5%, recently this was deregulated, and some banks offer around 7% interest.   Why is the rate high on USD in India? - There is a trade deficit which means India gets less USD and has to pay More USD to buy stuff [Oil and other essential items]. - The balance is typically borrowed say from IMF or other countries etc. - Allowing Banks to offer high interest rate is one way to attract more USD into the country in short term. [because somepoint in time they may take back the USD out of India] So why isn't everyone jumping and making USD investiments in India? - The Non-Residents who eventually plan to come back have invested in USD in India. - There is a risk of regulation changes, ie if the Central Bank / Country comes up pressure for Forex Reserves, they may make it difficut to take back the USD. IE they may impose charges / taxes or force conversion on such accounts. - The KYC norms make it difficult for Indian Bank to attract US citizens [except Non Resident Indians] - Certain countries would have explicit regulations to prevent Other Nationals from investing in such products as they may lead to volatility [ie all of them suddenly pull out the funds] - There would be no insurance to foreign nationals.   Part 2 The FDIC insurance is not the reason for lower rates. Most countires have similar insurance for Bank deposits for account holdes.   The reason for lower interst rate is all the Goverments [China etc] park the excess funds in US Treasuries because; 1. It is safe 2. It is required for any international purchase 3. It is very liquid.   Now if the US Fed started giving higher interest rates to tresaury bonds say 5%, it essentially paying more to other countries ... so its keeping the interest rates low even at 1% there are enough people [institutions / governemnts] who would keep the money with US Treasury.   So the US Treasury has to make some revenue from the funds kept at it ... it lends at lower interest rates to Bank ... who in turn lend it to borrowers [both corporate and retail].   Now if they can borrow cheaply from Fed, why would they pay more to Individual Retail on CD?, they will pay less; because the lending rates are low as well.   Part 3 Check out the regulations


>My iPhone is made with products from Fox con.  Last time I check Fox Con didn't make any products they assembled them.  And Fox Con is improving their treatment of their employees.  >I do not see rival companies (like Samsung) doing the same thing.  Rival companies aren't also under heat to do such a thing like Apple is.  But that doesn't mean they aren't doing this.  As just because they aren't making a PR stunt out of it doesn't mean they aren't doing it.  >I would never say that I live a purely virtuous life.  So don't pretend to be all virtuous then.  Before you jump the gun I am not saying unethical behavior should outright be accepted, but that the world needs some unethical behavior to well operate.  As they say there are necessary evils that need to be done/carried out.


As average house prices continue to rise, almost 40% of homes in the UK are purchased with cash. Stage 1 – Finding a property you can afford Stage 2 – Making an offer Stage 3 – Organise a solicitor and surveyor Stage 4 – Finalising the offer and mortgage (in your case, cash with proof of funds, balance due at closing) Stage 5 – Exchanging contracts Stage 6 – Completion and final steps You don't need to prove where the money came from but, as you have said that you are a cash buyer, you do need to be able to prove that you have the cash to buy the house. So, assuming you have the money in an account with a bank or building society, you should be able to satisfy your solicitors by showing them a recent bank statement or passbook which clearly shows that you have whatever amount it is in cash.


> But the more pressing question is: What obligations should be imposed on the Web Trust giants as they embed themselves ever further into our lives? How do we assure ourselves that the “users” they connect us to are human or that the search results they feed us are based on merit — not pay for play (or worse, algorithmic racism). >  >  >  > It’s time to consider whether to break up the Google search and advertising functions, or to deny safe harbors that protect the tech platforms if they turn a blind eye to sex trafficking or commercial piracy. We need a new privacy Bill of Rights to demystify the algorithms that track and tag you and shape your on-line experience. >  >  >  > In these partisan times, it speaks to how dangerous The Web Trust has become that both Republicans and Democrats are calling for action and reform. If Congress and the administration want to preserve a truly open internet, they need to become the trustbusters for a new, digital generation.  I guess those parts are not important for you? This article to me was more along the lines of; it's this, or it is that; the authors formatting for this op-ed was a bit wack, creating uncertainty in his assessment.  I'm not worried if you didn't see that though!


"I've been wondering the same thing - I can't find any ""official"" information from the banks, but there is the following info: So, if it's all with the same bank - try it! The worst that can happen is that the bank won't credit your ISA and will refund you."


Everything you say is true also of private companies, particularly ones that are publicly traded.  As a shareholder, you bet your ass I don't like it when the CEO I've hired is doing stupid shit like this instead of saving the company money and making me more money.


Recycled toner cartridges spill excess toner all over the insides of printers, causing higher maintenance costs and shorter life spans for other consumable components, such as the fuser. The reason this occurs is that the drum assembly has a conductive coating on it that wears out after the cartridge's service life. Once that coating is weakened or removed, it can no longer keep excess toner from spilling out. I'd say a good 95% of recycled toners are just drill and fill, so the old drum remains unchanged.  Even changing the drum doesn't work all the time. HP uses a special coating on their drums, which isn't replicated when an aftermarket drum is used.


"Increasing wages need not increase prices.  Remember a simple phrase:  ""Just compensation for services"", which is one that fiscal conservatives used to love.  Apply it at all steps of the ladder and see how much flatter the pay ""topology"" gets."


Get various kinds of Open firewood under one roof, there are different burning characters like birch burns easily and quickly which makes it excellent for soapstone Stove. Other open firewood like oak burns slowly but makes good fireplace wood. All wood is kiln dried to give you perfect heating experience in late winter evenings as well as keeping environment safe and healthy. Get dried firewood in sized blocks to easily stock up at your fireplace.


The worst part of government induced tuition inflation wasn't even the GI Bill. Although I'm sure that started it a bit. It really took off in the late 1970s / 1980 with the establishment of the Department of Education and the Sallie Mae loan clearing house. There's a massive inflection point in historical inflation adjusted tuition prices right around 1980, when those were established. No coincidence.      Also, you know whats worse than the **government** getting in the housing-price-inflation business? The freaking **central bank** getting in on the housing-price-inflation business.      https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/quarterly-balance-sheet-developments-report.htm      https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/quarterly_balance_sheet_developments_report_201708.pdf      The federal reserve holds $4.4 T in total assets. That is the sole source of the entire money supply of the United States Dollar. It does not come from anywhere else. Of course, you get money velocity and money multipliers after that, but this is the origin. Of that $4.4 T, they hold $2.4 T in US Treasury securities. Ok, that's fine. That's the whole point of the federal reserve. They control the money supply through buying / selling (letting mature / redeem) US government securities. But wait, hold up, what the heck happened to the other $2.0 T in assets ... um, where did those go? There are some other assets, but the next largest ... the federal reserve owns $1.7 T in mortgage backed securities.      Holy ... effing ... sheeeeeeeet. What in the actual f*** is the central bank doing buying mortgage backed securities? That absolutely, positively, is **NOT** monetary policy. That shit is fiscal policy, which the federal reserved is **NOT** supposed to be engaging in.      And now you know why housing prices are even more effed up than tuition prices.


First question:  Any, probably all, of the above. Second question:  The risk is that the currency will become worth less, or even worthless.  Most will resort to the printing press (inflation) which will tank the currency's purchasing power.  A different currency will have the same problem, but possibly less so than yours.  Real estate is a good deal.  So are eggs, if you were to ask a Weimar Germany farmer.  People will always need food and shelter.


"now that's just crazy talk. Politicians on capitol hill wouldn't dream about talking about any sort of *tangible* aspects of economy. Focusing on raw goods/commodities production through a campaign? Shit... that's PR suicide in every urban area (which immediately matters based on population numbers). Much easier to either reference your local military benefactors as ""job creators"" and espouse them if you have them. If you don't, then speak to an idealistic sentiment which entertains any willingness to jump to total warfare at a moment's notice. Once you fall out of favor with the military elite in the rest of the country, you are seen to be managing your community ""dangerously irresponsibly"" and ""frighteningly ignorant of the dangers in the world."" And, obviously, the biggest money is in technology people simply *can't* talk about publicly. It's unwise to ignore those efforts/finances, however.  The only flexible mainstay in the budget is Defense. Healthcare spending is, well, the term *gluttonous* comes to mind. Education? Lol. Right. Just put the kids in debt and go fuck yourself / have a nice day. Oh and don't forget your 306^^th monthly installation of your house payment. The other mainstay of the budget? Pensions. Good luck reforming that with the unions in any direction but toward the sky. Welfare? Welfare reforms generally play out really well in the media, don't they? Can you say, ""fuck you, poor people,"" any louder?   Defense. Defense is the only malleable entity in the budget but we all know it's easier for the commercial politicians® to purchase media campaigns and drum up not only a sentiment of war, but conditions for their own interests to secure new business in other countries. Teaching Americans to fear things about the world can be done and it costs about $150m per year in a single direction if you know someone who will take your money (gurgling network executives shitting their pants with good, old-fashioned Incontinence). If anyone was ever serious about turning greater profits from commercialization of military research, they'd improve the goddamned state of education in the country. [What a fucking farce.](http://i.imgur.com/22mZxCr.png)  There should be a plan in place to study the rate of the nominal value of domestic technological innovation, as best as can be perceived, and the spending elsewhere in the budget needs to be correlated to that figure directly. We cannot continue assuming innovation is constant in the United States while restricting education funding so heavily. It is such an embarrassment. And we're imperiling ourselves by finding supplementary, service-based revenue solutions by beating the same dead horse with financial policy. The guys at the Fed are tired. Believe me."


If you are looking for a solicitor to help you with different legal matters, there’s no better place to go than here at MJR Solicitors Ltd. We offer reliable assistance in will writing, lasting power of attorney, and many more. And because we have fixed fees and hourly rates, you will never find overpriced or hidden costs here. To learn more, log on to our website at mjrsolicitors.co.uk.


Wow you really are stupid, aren't you? Treasuries are the debt. Derp da derp, we sell 600b a year in treasuries because we don't have enough $$$ to pay our bills. America doesn't just print money, moron. You buy $100 in treasuries and they give you a voucher, and they can spend $100.


An option is freely tradable, and all options (of the same kind) are equal. If your position is 0 and you sell 1 option, your new position in that option is -1. If the counterparty to your trade buys or sells more options to close, open, or even reopen their position afterwards, that doesn't matter to your position at all. Of course there's also the issue with American and European Options. European Options expire at their due date, but American Options expire at their due date or at any time before their due date if the holder decides they expire. With American Options, if a holder of an American Option decides to exercise the option, someone who is short the same option will be assigned as the counterparty (this is usually random). Expiry is after market close, so if one of your short American Options expires early, you will need to reopen the position the next day. Keep in mind dividends for slightly increased complexity. American and European Options do not in any way refer to the continents they are traded on, or to the location of the companies. These terms simply describe the expiry rules.


"It appears as others have said that companies are not required to state this on as any sort of Asset. I remembered a friend of mine is a lawyer specializing in Intellectual Property Rights so asked him and confirmed that there's no document companies are required to file which states all patent holdings as assets. There are two ways he suggested for finding out. Once you find a company you're interested in can search patents by company using one of the two following: US Patent Office website's advanced search: http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/search-adv.htm aanm/company for example entering into the textarea, ""aanm/google"" without the quotation marks will find patents by Google. The other is a Google Patent Search: http://www.google.com/patents/"


I would consult a tax professional for specific help.  On my own research, I believe that you could.  I know that when I made payments when I was in school for my undergraduate, I made payments on the interest.  I believe that I was even told by my financial aid office that I could deduct the interest that I paid.  I made not much money so I wasn't anywhere close to the MAGI >75k, but I believe you still could.   Not only that but one other thing to consider is that if you have an unsubisidized loan, the interest still accrues when you are in school.  In that case, it might be better to make at least some payments.  It would save you from the total loan amount ballooning so much while you are in school.


>[**Супер Мега кран Биткоина!До 500 сатошей на 19 минут! Спеши !!! Топ сайт по заработку без вложений [1:35]**](http://youtu.be/ymGO7wcf3os)  >>¦ Ссылка на регистрацию в проектах:  > [*^Вектор ^Криптовалют*](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAOABF2yT1SjVqI7RK9aIUg) ^in ^People ^& ^Blogs  >*^2 ^views ^since ^Jun ^2017*  [^bot ^info](/r/youtubefactsbot/wiki/index)


The target date investment will automatically reduce equity exposure and increase bond exposure as it approaches retirement date.  If you are unlikely to make adjustments as you get older, you may be setting yourself up for more risk down the road.  Only you can decide what level of risk you can tolerate as you chase higher gains.


Duke's business plan is to buy regulated utilities, cut costs, and hire lobbyists and lawyers to find all possible loopholes and avenues for raising rates and outsmarting the regulators. A non-regulated business doesn't fit that model. That's probably why they're selling.


> Prove it, name an example country that is now a devastated wasteland for providing decent wages alone.  He can't. In fact, most European nations mandate a much higher minimum wage than what is being proposed in the United States; and do so while maintaining a higher standard of living for the average citizen. The argument to depress wages is nothing but right-wing propaganda, enthusiastically supported by employers.


I own a non-union company in the construction industry and my employees are harassed weekly... At home, by phone, on jobs, all the time. They keep raising pay rates (around $75/hr + $30/hr in benefits now) but no one is working because clients are balking at the union prices. We pay well, give good benefits and are really low pressure. In the last 7 years we have not had a single employee switch over... I think that makes the union more annoyed than anything.


It did none of that.  My mom was dropped by her doctor and it was hard to find a new doctor who was willing to take Medicare patients at the reduced rates.  The idea that Obama suddenly found $500 billion in painless cuts when nobody could before is propaganda.


"> the creation was such a black box, not even the creators fully understood.  Such a load of shit. They completely understand, this is just a nice fall back if something goes wrong they can say ""it's a black box!""  I've made these Lin reg models before for fraud analytics and it's not black box."


That's a civil suit. The family is claiming that the app distracts drivers and that Uber should give them some money. I think it's a bit ridiculous, considering the Uber driver wasn't on a fare and thus is no different than any other driver.


I don't expect you to remember the area for the surface of a sphere; I do expect you to be able to take a derivative of a volume. Especially if you are a PhD. Believe it or not, it IS faster than looking it up on the internet. And abilities to do quick back of the napkin estimations are very handy in my field (CS).  Also, I noticed that meetings with people who are in command of basic facts are usually faster and more productive than with people who are constantly looking things up on the internet.


Sewing Machines Australia offers a variety of industrial sewing machine thread for every model and purpose. When you need a thread for applications exposed to marine conditions, choose from our Dabond range, which features durable, reasonably priced bonded polyester thread. For your specific requirements outside our available product-range, feel free to get in touch with us over phone or email.


Money, like anything else, is subject to the demands of people.  There are times when money is in high demand.  This drives up its value. People in Japan want cash because they have an immediate need to buy emergency supplies as well as rebuild and replace damaged items.  This is why the yen strengthened.  This is probably why the market plummeted as people liquidated some of their stocks to get cash. The Bank Of Japan (BOJ) will not stand for a rising yen, however.  It is pulling a Bernanke and printing yen in an effort to keep it weak.


Actually, I think the survey was conducted in the city. So the point is that those who live outside the city, in country side perhaps, earn a salary lower than $1.1K. Let's say they don't spend much on transportation, then maybe their minimum wage is just equal to those who work in the city. Those who drives to the city from outside, whether they don't have a car or not, spends more money for transpo.


Nancy Sharp who is the author of the book ‘Both Sides Now: A True Story Of Love, Loss And Bold Living’ shares her life experience on various forums will amaze you. Her heart touching work goes beyond her books through inspiring people to tackle their stress and take life towards positive change.


"There's actually a lot of smaller questions in your question, so I'll answer just a few here. The standard bond index for high yield corporates is the Barclays Capital High Yield Corporate index, which is the basis for JNK.  I am not familiar with the index behind HYG, the ""iBoxx $ Liquid High Yield index."" The ETFs are managed quantitatively to try to track the index as closely as possible.  AFAIK these ETFs do not attempt to take active positions. New issues are typically purchased with cash which is constantly coming in from interest and principal payments from other bonds.  There is rarely a need to sell bonds just to buy new issues.  Selling bonds is more common when a fund is experiencing redemptions. These ETFs and the high yield bonds they buy are not derivatives (your question seems to be confused on that point). The US Treasury is not directly involved in any way.  They are indirectly involved, as they are indirectly involved in US equities markets or world markets for that matter, although perhaps they have greater influence in the bond world. Moody's has extensive studies of default rates by ratings."


Given the following variables Where b[n + 1] = b[n] (1 + r) - w and b[0] = s then b[n] = ((1 + r)^n (r s - w) + w)/r For example, illustrating with some figures. The balances in the first four quarters (n = 1, 2, 3, 4) are Check As per the Excel formula provided by OneTruDragonGirl £670.27


"Most well-off people have investments which they have held for long periods of time, often of very substantial value such as a large part of a company.  They also have influence on legislators and officials through various social contacts, lobbyists, and contributions.  They managed to convince these law makers to offer a lower tax on income derived from sales of such investments.  The fig leaf covering this arrangement is that it ""contributes to the growth of economy by encouraging long-term investment in new enterprises."""


"And with 18 $millions of ""compensation"" for all the hard work they have done for Equifax and its customers (actually milking money for data about customers.)  It seems that Equifax will have to file for bankruptcy.   Lastly, please don't bother him about the lawsuits against Equifax while he's retired - he should not be held responsible."


FACE dropped its 10Q on 3/31/12  They reduced their total liabilities by 16%, reduced their accounts payable by 30%, looks like they eliminated their ST Debt, and increased their equity by 6%.  I'm not saying that they had a great quarter, but the numbers don't look to shabby. I don;t think you can accurately attribute the increase in their stock valuation to FB's IPO.


"So you are in IT, that is great news because you can earn a fabulous income.  The part time is not great, but you can use this to your advantage.  You can get another job or three to boost your income in the short term.  In the long term  you should be able to find a better paying job fairly easily.   There is one way to never deal with creditors again:  never borrow money again.  Its pretty damn simple and from the suggestions of your post you don't seem to be very good at handling credit.  This would make you fairly normal.  78% of  US households don't have $1000 saved.  How are they going to handle a brake job/broken dryer/emergency room visit?  Those things happen. Cut your lifestyle to nothing, earn money and save it.  Say you have 2000 saved up.  Then a creditor calls saying you owe 5K.  Tell me you are willing to settle for the 2K you have saved.  If they don't, hang up.  If they are willing getting it writing and pay by a method that insulates you from further charges.   Boom one out of the way and keep going.  You will be 1099'd for some income, but it is a easy way to ""earn"" extra money.   This will all work if you commit yourself to never again borrowing money."


"... so you don't want to know about a gas leak in a building if that leak hasn't caused the building to explode for the last 6 years?   And when he is talking ""explosion"" he's not talking the once every 10 year recession.  He's talking 1929, 1937, 1945 ... and specifically says bigger than, say, 1974 or 2008.  Where are you getting the ""10 year"" crap?  Seriously ... is that what you're saying?  Or are you saying that you just don't believe there is a gas leak?  I'm addressing the former.  The ""ignition source"" will probably not be within the US (unless long term bond yields increase substantially).  The ""ignition source"" will be from a recession in China or from Japanese yields increasing (from ""currency risk"" or ""default risk"")  -- the Japanese crisis has been 20 years in the making ( http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/04/11/olivier-blanchard-eyes-ugly-end-game-for-japan-on-debt-spiral/  ).  However, with the current Debt/GDP of Japan and the structure of Chinese total debt (govt + corporate + personal) ... and the recognition that these are the top two GDP's in the world ... the dangers for the world are undeniably larger than ever."


Selling stock means selling a portion of ownership in your company.  Any time you issue stock, you give up some control, unless you're issuing non-voting stock, and even non-voting stock owns a portion of the company. Thus, issuing (voting) shares means either the current shareholders reduce their proportion of owernship, or the company reissues stock it held back from a previous offering (in which case it no longer has that stock available to issue and thus has less ability to raise funds in the future).  From Investopedia, for exmaple: Secondary offerings in which new shares are underwritten and sold dilute the ownership position of stockholders who own shares that were issued in the IPO. Of course, sometimes a secondary offering is more akin to Mark Zuckerberg selling some shares of Facebook to allow him to diversify his holdings - the original owner(s) sell a portion of their holdings off.  That does not dilute the ownership stake of others, but does reduce their share of course. You also give up some rights to dividends etc., even if you issue non-voting stock; of course that is factored into the price presumably (either the actual dividend or the prospect of eventually getting a dividend).  And hopefully more growth leads to more dividends, though that's only true if the company can actually make good use of the incoming funds. That last part is somewhat important.  A company that has a good use for new funds should raise more funds, because it will turn those $100 to $150 or $200 for everyone, including the current owners.  But a company that doesn't have a particular use for more money would be wasting those funds, and probably not earning back that full value for everyone. The impact on stock price of course is also a major factor and not one to discount; even a company issuing non-voting stock has a fiduciary responsibility to act in the interest of those non-voting shareholders, and so should not excessively dilute their value.


">If you're in a VP+/Director position, you don't get blindsided by this shit no matter what which division you're responsible for ...  ""Blindsided"" is very different from ""responsible for.""   The Director of HR might know that the CEO is tanking the company, but have no means by which to repair or stop the damage.  You're just making an empty connection to justify your overly broad, ""tough guy"" fantasy.  >Okay, let 'em quit. Any stock options they have / other benefits get cashed out and applied to outstanding debts accrued under them before any payout reaches them.   1) Many of those benefits may have already vested, or otherwise vest when you constructively terminate them by withholding their salary.  What that means is that they no longer belong to the company, and can't just be seized to play God with. The equivalent would be your employer reaching into your 401k and clawing back vested matching.  2) You're still just engaging in tough-guy fantasy, and ignoring the problem of a rudderless, headless company.  Beating you chest and roaring won't stop the employees from being fucked over even harder when inventory stops showing up in the warehouse."


I'm a firm believer that this is most likely all part of the plan. Destroy the heath care system by jockeying back a forth useless legislative crap, until the public is basically begging for a single payer system to simply make some shred of easily digestible options for the public. And next will be our retirement plans.


Whoever told you to make major purchases in physical cash should probably be audited because the only real reason someone would be doing something so goofy would be to avoid digital records or maybe taxes somehow.  ... or worse, they listen to Dave Ramsey.


I have inherited property worth close to 1 million US Dollars. 1 Million USD is a large amount considering Bangladesh. Around 80 Million Taka; making someone with this amount amongst the high net worth individual. Check if this is not a scam as indicated in comments.  What is the proper procedure for him to send me the money to US? As per Bangladesh Foreign Exchange Regulation Act; there are limitations to transfer of funds outside of Bangladesh. Read the detail guideline, section 11 Private Remittance is relevant. However your specific case is not detailed. A professional help is advised as there would be paperwork required. What are our legal and tax obligations? Tax obligations in US, as indicated by Michael in his answer.


"Assumption - you live in a country like Australia, which has ""recourse"" mortgages. If you buy the apartment and take out a mortgage, the bank doesn't care too much if your apartment gets built or not. If the construction fails, you still owe the bank the money."


"I can sell a PUT on it a bit out of the money, and I seemingly ""win"" either way: i.e. make money on selling the PUT, and either I get to pick up the stock cheaper if XYZ goes down, or the PUT expires worthless. In 2008, I see a bank stock (pick one) trading at $100. I buy that put from you, a $90 strike, and pay you $5 for the option. The bank blew up, and trades for a dollar. I then buy the $1 share and sell it to you for $90. You made $500 on the sale of the put, but lost $8900 when it went bad. You don't win either way, there is a chart you can construct (or a table) showing your profit or loss for every price of the underlying stock. When selling a put, you need to know what happens if the stock goes to zero since the odds of such an occurrence is non-trivial.  A LEAP is already an option. With the new coding scheme for options, I'm not sure there's really any distinction between a LEAP and standard option, the LEAP just starts with a long-till-expiration time. There are no options on LEAPS that I am aware of, as they are options already."


They are still finding more because they are looking harder - compared to other banks or credit unions there is currently way more external and internal scrutiny at WFC.   And yes, my focus is on a faulty incentive system because you don't get such widespread mishaps when things are designed properly. It looks like somewhere in the command chain the supervisors responsible for oversight were also getting rewarded for failing in that duty and the people above them didn't have the ability to properly audit their behavior.   That said, when I picked which of my bank accounts to close I chose WFC. I did so partially because I don't fully understand what the fallout will be from this scandal and that part bothers me more than what I've learned about it so far, but mostly because I was using it the least.


Training and Learning are сruсiаl fоr the growth and ѕuссеѕѕ of аll organizations - big оr ѕmаll and асrоѕѕ different industries. A Learning Management System streamlines learning and is put in рlасе tо mаnаgе the еntirе trаining рrосеѕѕ in an organization. Modern Learning Management Systems and e-learning software do that and mоrе. Visit us online here: https://nowsoft.org/


Late night comedy is in there, but not much.  I read articles on the internet.  My investigation has never been on what Trump says he will do.  It has been on what everyone has done or is doing.  I’m not a rabid Trump hater or supporter, and I’m not a politician, so I’ve felt no compulsion to memorize Trump’s agenda.  What I do feel a compulsion for is vetting information and gettingbpeople to work together to create a nation where EVERYONE wins.


We have been the primary method for money related riches show in numerous social orders and societies. The greater part of these societies have, sooner or later, had a routine of keeping a lot of riches put away as jewelry. There are  available in  different  style  so comfortable  these  necklace  diffuser which design in stainless  steel. The Izzy  Bell Boutique  has been designed by us  for unmatched beautiful design. These  diffuser necklaces  are  Eco-friendly pads  that  hold  you scents for  days. We  help  to the customer  to look and feel  your  best  after wearing these  diffuser  necklaces.


Yeah sure they would add up to trillions but a very small percentage of it would go towards the important issues. So even if they did force them to pay it up you would not notice a difference. So until something gets done about the way the government spends it's money the big corporations might as well keep it and partially use it to research new technology in the industry or to advance their company because giving that extra money to the government is like burning money.


@ Daniel Anderson shared interesting insights. In my research I learned a few things Some interesting data on fraud trends  AFP Payments Fraud and Control Survey 2016 As a consumer, at the very least I'd improve awareness of I'd also learn about basic types of fraud And for the techies out there, I'd recommend learning about layered security (There's no way the customer service is going to talk about this)


If your refunds are subject to seizure because of certain debt arrears, it makes sense to let the IRS hold onto them until next year.


"You were probably not given stock, but stock options.  Those options have a strike price and you can do some more research on them if needed.  Lets assume that you were given 5K shares at a strike of 20, and they vest 20% per year.  Assume the same thing in your second year and you are going to leave in year three. You would have 2K shares from your year 1 grant, and 1K shares from your year 2 grant, so 2K total. If you leave no more shares would be vested. If you leave you have one of two options: To complicate matters subsequent grants may have different strike prices, so perhaps year two grant is at $22 per share.  However, in pre-public companies that is not likely the case. For a bit of history, I worked at a pre-ipo company and we were all going to get rich.  I was given generous grants, but decided to leave.  I really wanted to buy my options but simply didn't have the money.  Shortly after I left the company folded, so the money would have been thrown away anyway.  When a company is private the motivate their employees with tales of riches, but they are not required to disclose financial data.  This company did a very good job of convincing employees that all was fine, when it wasn't. Also I received options in a publicly traded company.  Myself and other employees received options that were ""underwater"" or worth far less than the strike price.  You could let them expire so one did not owe money, but they were worthless. Hopefully that answers your question."


"I was involved with them a couple years back. It seemed like a utopia but I couldn't seem to get it off the ground. I just recently found some disturbing info on the top tier of leaders that kindve let me breath a sigh of relief that I am no longer involved. Although I wouldn't straight up tell you no. I would ask that you really use some due diligence and make a very informed decision. Look up Amthrax in Google and jist browse there. Quite a few people that were ""successful"" had defected and don't have very good things to say. So it's not shallow criticism they're dishing out. Quite a few of them were high enough up the ladder that I had even seen them do open meetings and seminars."


Here are some typical differences between savings and checking accounts: Depending on your banks offerings and your personal goals, you would have to decide which factors matter to you. It's certainly possible that you may conclude there is no difference in your case.


"You can move most or all of those financial products into a single account at one institution, but I wouldn't go with a ""mutual fund account"" like Vanguard. The big online brokerages should offer: Consolidating everything into one statement can vastly simplify your record keeping. With a balance of $250k, you should be able to get a paper statement without a fee. Depending on where the accounts are currently held (e.g. if the stocks are at a full-service broker), you may also be able to save on fees."


All money distributed from a Traditional IRA to which no nondeductible contributions have been made is taxed as ordinary income. It does not matter if you think of the money as the original contribution or gains; the taxation is the same.  Money distributed from a Roth IRA is tax-free.  In either case, penalties apply if the distribution is premature.


"Suppose you have a bar of gold and are hungry. I buy the gold from you for cash, which you then use to buy food, clothes and generally support yourself.  Would it be fair to say that I paid for your food, clothes etc? I don't think so - I think *you* paid for them, in gold. I facilitated the exchange of gold into money, and without me or someone like me around to provide liquidity for your gold, you'd still be hungry. But fundamentally, it was the gold that was valuable.  Now, suppose there is a lack of liquidity in gold - there's a shortage of gold buyers. I take advantage of this distortion to offer to buy your gold for half its free market value. You don't want to accept this deal, but since your only alternative is starvation, you accept.  I say this is wrong, not because of socialism, but because of capitalism. The efficiency of capitalism arises from the price system of value. Goods and services command a fair market price, and buyers and sellers have access to both liquidity and good information about the relative value of things. When distortions are allowed to interfere with free market pricing - as inevitably happens under lassiez-faire capitalism - this efficiency is lost. Good government regulation is necessary to keep markets free and efficient, and this is good for everyone.  So what does this have to do with David Siegel?  First, nothing in my example above changes when you substitute ""labor"" for ""gold."" If I am hungry but I have a skill, and I sell you some of my labor for cash, then use the cash to buy food, *you did not give me the food*. You did not ""pay for my food,"" you did not ""make it possible for me to get food,"" or anything of the sort. *I paid for it myself*, by trading labor for cash in exactly the same way that you could trade gold for cash.  Second, the price system of value allows you to earn a ""normal profit,"" which means sufficient profit for resources to remain within an industry. But ""excess profit"" harms market efficiency and thus the price system. This is pure capitalist theory, straight from Adam Smith; it is nothing to do with socialism or communism. It is quite clear that David Siegel is taking excess profit. This is no different from the sort of profiteering I described when there's only one gold dealer in town. It is parasitic behavior according to *capitalist* theory.  And finally, David Siegel is the guy who invented high-pressure selling of timeshares by inviting familes to a ""free"" vacation, trapping them in a room, and basically holding them hostage until they sign on the dotted line. His business is near-criminal. You can argue that drug kingpins also create thousands of jobs - that doesn't make them good people, or their actions beneficial to society. I already thought David Siegel was a parasite on society before I ever heard of his opinion on Obama. And quite frankly, I'm shocked and appalled that people are actually defending him."


No. As a rule, the dividends you see in the distribution table are what you'll receive before paying any taxes. Tax rates differ between qualified and unqualified/ordinary dividends, so the distribution can't include taxes because tax rates may differ between investors. In my case I hold it in an Israeli account but the tax treaty between our countries still specifies 25% withheld tax This is another example of why tax rates differ between investors. If I hold SPY too, my tax rate will be very different because I don't hold it in an account like yours, so the listed dividend couldn't include taxes.


"Basically, you either borrow money, or get other people to invest in your business by buying stock or something analogous.  Sometimes you can get people to ""park"" money with you. For example, many people deposit money in a bank checking account. They don't get any interest or other profit from this, they just do it because the bank is a convenient place to store their money. The bank then loans some percentage of this money out and keeps the interest. I don't doubt that people have come up with more clever ways to use other people's money. Borrowing money for an investment or business venture is risky because if you lose money, you may be unable to pay it back. On the other hand, investors expect a share of the profit, not just a fixed interest rate."


"This highly editorialized headline makes no sense and suggests that the OP did not read and/or understand the article at all.  >*""The decision is probably driven by Qatar’s worries over losing market share to emerging competitors like the United States, whose shale gas industry has been growing fast, and Australia. An increase in the emirate’s exports could discourage investment by would-be rivals.""*  How does anything in this piece suggest a quid pro quo deal when on the surface, the strategy is meant only to harm global LNG prices and therefore US producers?"


No, unvested money returns to the employer, its not yours. They should send you W2 which will only show the actual (vested) monies you got.


Market rate of return averages about 8% annually (sometimes more, sometimes less or negative). To get 30k monthly -- even taking that as pretax -- you're talking about 360k yearly. Divide that by 0.08 and you need to have savings of 4.5 million--- and really you should double that for safety..  Tl;dr: forget it. Added thought: If you really have $20k/month coming in, you really have no business asking the Internet for advice. Hire a professional financial advisor (not a broker, someone who is paid a flat fee for their expertise and has no incentives to give you less-than-optimal advice). . The money they will save/make for you will more than pay for their hire.


Found a great article (with bibliography) that covers taxation on investment activity by non resident aliens - even covers the special 15% tax on dividends for Canadian residents. It's (dividend tax rate) generally 30% for other NRAs  (your 2nd question). And it confirmed my suspicion that there are no capital gains taxes for NRAs. (1st Q) Source: http://invest-faq.com/articles/tax-non-us-nat.html


For those interested, here is what I have managed to find fo far:  [Communist Robot](http://www.communistrobot.com/index.php?page=&nav=1&article=1)  [Robotic Nation](http://marshallbrain.com/robotic-nation.htm)  [Robots are taking mid-level jobs, changing the economy](http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9221334/Robots_are_taking_mid_level_jobs_changing_the_economy)  [Agricultural Robots – Applications and  Economic Perspectives](http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs/5324/InTech-Agricultural_robots_151_applications_and_economic_perspectives.pdf) (PDF documant).  [Economists Grapple With the First Stage of the Robot Revolution](http://www.economonitor.com/blog/2010/09/economists-grapple-with-the-first-stage-of-the-robot-revolution/) (with many external links to relevant articles).   And one last thought for Gigolo Joe and Gigolo Jane in AI:  [How would robotic prostitutes change the sex tourism industry?](http://io9.com/5902113/how-would-robotic-prostitutes-change-the-sex-tourism-industry)  (Edited for additions).


Is there any truth to this, or is this another niche scam that's been brewing the last few years? While it may not be an outright scam, such schemes do tend to be on borderline of scams. Technically most of what is being said claimed can be true, however in reality such windfall gains never happen to the investors. Whatever gains are there will be cornered by the growers, trades, other entities in supply chain leaving very little to the investors.  It is best to stay away from such investments.


"He doesn't care about his employees, he cares about keeping his salary high enough to pay off the house he couldn't afford. Which would be bad enough but then he had the audacity to add  >""people like me who made all the right decisions and invested in themselves are being forced to bail out all the people who didn't. The people that overspent their paychecks suddenly feel entitled to the same luxuries that I earned and sacrificed 42 years of my life for.""  I don't have the words to express how much of a douchebag this guy his. He deserves to have his nuts kicked in."


I don't even know what you're arguing at this point.  We have this collective, our nation.  We need to fund it somehow to sustain it.  We do that with taxes.  If someone doesn't want to be part of the collective they can always move away and renounce their citizenship.


Deposit $3,500 each month in a brokerage account and invest that money across a handful of diversified index funds. Rebalance those investments every quarter. The hard part is coming up with $3,500 each month; this is where your budget comes in.


You can buy from any of the well known jewelry shops. Or you can even buy it from banks. For a 24carat gold purchase, you would normally also get a certificate attesting the quality of the gold item. Also while selling your gold, you can sell to above mentioned jewellers or any decent jeweller as a matter of fact.


I read the “ad” they had.  I’m afraid EVERY economic system and our market style are all fantasy methods that don’t conform to reality.  Hence our current breakdown and division among classes.  So that is a poor argument.  The better idea is to figure out what WOULD work, would quell the Real Issues each side observed, and would leave us all stronger in the end.  It is BERY easy to criticize anything you disagree with.  It is much more difficult to come up with a solution.  So let’s come up with a solution.  You state your grievances with the system, I’ll then state mine, and we can see if we can find a solution that will handle all the issues brought up.


> current mayor, Bill de Blasio, has committed to the creation of 30,000 supportive units over the next 10 years  so, almost 60,000 need shelter and the mayor plans for HALF that number over TEN YEARS.  yup, you can count on government to protect the weak


Actually, SS the young pay for the old, hoping the our populations increased indefinitely. It is, for all purposed, EXACTLY the definition of a Ponzi.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme  You just have to be a tad more intelligent to realize its the same with the Fed.


Great reply. This is one of reasons why I like this subreddit.  I thought that fed interest are far more important that you state. Rate is low + economy is booming (lender thinks there is good chance of repayment), banks loan money much more willingly (reserves are covered by cheap fed loans -> greater profit). That should significantly affect money supply.


"Advice from a long-time flipper You negotiate price based on four factors and none of these are set in stone: How much you love the house.  Is this house a 100 out of 100 for you or a 85 or a 75.  How much have you compromised. What is the likelihood that you will find a house that will make you just as happy or at least close.  You might have a house that is a 95 out of 100 but there are five other houses that you rated between 93-95.   What is your timeframe.  Know that playing hardball takes longer and can knock you out of the game sometimes and takes a little while to find a new game. What is the relative housing market.  Zillow and other such sites are crap.  Yes the give you a generalized feel for a community but their estimates are off sometimes by 30-40%.  Other factors like street/noise/updates to house/ and so on are huge factors.  You will have to really navigate the area and look for very comparable houses that have recently sold.  Then use average housing movements to extrapolate your future houses cost. As a buyer you have two jobs.  Buy the house you want and manage your agent.  Your agent wants you to buy a house as soon as possible and to increase their reputation.  Those are their only two factors of working.   By you offering closer to the asking price they are able to get their sales as quick as possible.  Also other agents will love working with them.  In fact your agent is selling you on the home and the price.  Agents hardly worry about you paying too much - as most buyers oversell the deal they get on their home.  Admitting that you paid too much for your house is more of an admission of ignorance of yourself, compared to agent incompetency. If you decide to low-ball the owner, your agent spends more time with you and possibly reduces their reputation with the selling agent.  So it is common for agents to tell you that you should not offer a low price as you will insult the owner. My advice.  Unless the home is truly one of a kind for the market offering anything within 20% of the asking price is DEFINITELY within range.  I have offered 40% less.  If a house is asking too much and has been on the market for 8 months there is no way I am going in with an offer of even 15% lower.  That leaves you no room.   What you do? First think about how much you think this house could sell for in the next 3 months.  In your example let's say 80K based on conservative comps.  Then take the most you would actually pay for it.  Let's say 75K.  70K is about as high of an opening offer I would go.   Do NOT tell your agent your true breaking points.  If you tell your agent that you would go to 75K on the house.  Then that is what their negotiations will start at.  Remember they want the sale to happen as soon as possible.  Very likely the other agent - especially if they know each other - will ask if how flexible you are going to be.  Then next thing you know your agent calls you back and says would you be willing to go 77K or the owner is firm at 80K. Do not give up your position.  You should never forecast to your agent what your next bid or offer would be for the house.  Never get into scenarios or future counters.   So you offer 70K.  If your agent asks you how firm that is?  ""Very firm"".  If your agent doesn't want to take the offer to them, ""Thank you for being my agent, but I am going to be working with someone that represents what I want.""   If the owner says ""You are done too me cheapskate.""  Well that's how it goes.  If the owner stays firm at asking or lowers - then you can come up if you feel comfortable doing so.  But understand what your goal is.  Is it to get a house or to get a good deal on a house?  Mine was always to get a good deal on a house.  So I might offer 72K next.  If they didn't budge, I am out.  If they moved down I went from there.   Easy Summary The fact is if they aren't willing to negotiate with you enough it always ends the same.  You give them your take-it-or-leave-it offer.  You tell your agent that if he/she comes back with one penny over it comes from their commission (god I have said this 100 times in my life and it is the best negotiation tactic you have with your agent).  The owner says yes or no and it is over."


Pay down cc debt asap, take your time on your student debt, it's low and you can write the interest off related to it. If your a teacher maybe you can get it forgiven.   But you borrowed from your future self when you younger so ya you gotta start living reasonable.


Buying the right shares gives higher return. Buying the wrong ones gives worse return, possibly negative. The usual recommendation, even if you have a pro advising you, is to diversify most of your investments to reduce the risk, even though that may reduce the possible gain. A mutual fund is diversification-in-a-can. It requires little to no active maintenance. Yes, you pay a management fee, but you aren't paying per-transaction fees every time you adjust your holdings, and the management costs can be quite reasonable if you pick the right funds; minimal in the case of computer-managed (index) funds. If you actively enjoy playing with stocks and bonds and are willing/able to accept your failures and less-than-great choices as part of the game, and if you can convince yourself that you will do better this way, go for it. For those of us who just want to deposit out money, watch it grow, and maybe rebalance once a year if that, index funds are a perfectly good choice. I spend at least 8 hours a day working for my money; the rest of the time, I want my money to work for me.  Risk and reward tend to be proportional to each other; when they aren't, market prices tend to move to correct that. You need to decide how much risk you're comfortable with, and how much time and effort and money you're willing to spend managing that risk. Personally, I am perfectly happy with the better-than-market-rate-of-return I'm getting, and I don't have any conviction that I could do better if I was more involved. Your milage will vary. If folks didn't disagree, there wouldn't be a market.


Cheaper and faster are usually mutually exclusive. If you want faster, nothing is faster than cash.  I would recommend using an ATM to withdraw cash from your USD account as Florints and then use as appropriate. If you want cheaper, then the cheapest currency conversion commonly available is foreign exchange / transfer services like OFX / XE Trade / Transferwise.  Turn around time on these can be as little as a business day or two but more commonly takes a few business days, but they typically offer the best currency exchange rates at the lowest cost.  If you must make regular payments to 3rd parties, you can set these services up to send the converted currency to a 3rd party rather than back to your own account.


You need money, right? Every body want to make money easily.There are many earning way on online.I will mention here Top 100 ways to earn money online. If you have a computer with internet connection you will do it from any where of the world. pls visit- http://howtomake-moneyonline.com/top-100-easy-ways-to-earn-money-online/


Except Walmart needs to also staff an internal distribution network and storefronts along with all overhead costs.   Amazon just picks the item from the closest distribution center, jams it into a trailer with a bunch of other junk and UPS will swing by and take the already loaded trailer.


I don't think this is true and there is no evidence for it in your link anyway.  The David Knopf who was just made CFO of Heinz Kraft is from Louisville, Kentucky. His full name is David Henry Knopf. His background may be upper middle class or moderately wealthy (by Kentucky standards anyway) since it appears that he went to a private high school, but I can't find any evidence that he is connected to the Knopf publishing family. Even if he was, they sold their company in the 1950's so it's not likely that they would very superrich at this point, and Heinz Kraft has no connection with Knopf or book publishing either.  He is not the same person as this [David A. Knopf](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/03/fashion/weddings/david-knopf-edwin-marrero-weddings.html?mcubz=3) who is a management consultant in his 50's, a son of Alfred Knopf Jr. the publisher


They may stock items that frame the various price points. Of course they risk having the items go stale before they are sold. You also have situations where the store will advertise an item, but end up taking a loss on that sale because it will bring people in, and they will make other purchases. Determining what to stock, how to display it, and how to advertise it involves both math and psychology.


I assume by not-so-good prospects you mean small account clients whose revenue will not justify the time required to close a deal and/or post-sale service.  Glad to see you are being realistic about the value of your time vs. what a prospect is paying.    A big part of your practice is going to come down to what infrastructure/processes your dealer firm or back office support has.  Is yours one with a formal small account policy that assigns servicing to a centralized service center (aka call center)?    I've also seen others separate direct at fund vs held in-house (omnibus) based on client assets.  Small accounts go direct to at fund and are directed to the mutual fund transfer agent for post-sale servicing needs.  The up-front sales charge compensates for the initial consultation and the rest is self-servicing / support by the fund transfer agent.


Here's your problem: The debt is valid and it is your debt, regardless of your arrangement with the insurance company. The insurance company (possibly) owes you money, and you owe the Doctor money. You are stuck in the middle, and in the end it doesn't matter whether the insurance company pays as to whether you owe the money. Don't ignore them. Also, disputing the debt it pointless because the truth is that you do owe the debt. The insurance company may owe you money (which is in dispute), but the debt to your medical provider is your own. You are just stuck in the middle. It sucks, but is pretty common. I think the best you can do is keep working on the insurance company and responding to the bill collectors letting them know that you are working on it and will need to pay late. In theory they deal with this a lot and probably understand, not that it will make them lay off you in the meantime.  In the end it is possible you might have to sue the insurance company to get the money. One thing to be careful about: If the debt is fairly old (several years) you may want to avoid making partial payments because if this goes on your credit report, that payment may extend the period where the negative information can appear on your credit history.


Well, I am an investor/ Lessor under DHA properties. Oflate, DHA lost it identity as a Govt agency and try to imitate a worst (not the best) real eastate agent. Every year rental valuation is a drama or waste of time and money to lessor. They pull down the rent by 10 to 22% and ask for a secondary valuation for no reasons. They don't even agree with market evidence and start bullying or black mailing tactics to force you to aceept a below market rent or the threat of third review , a very expensive review shared 50% by lessor and rest the poor tax payers! The thir review also badly influenced by DHA by submitting biased valuations and thereby destroying the independence of valuation. The API appointed valuer neither follow the DHA gudie nor the API guide and also ignore the market reality and take the average rent for the area. You also losse 14 to 18% as management fees paid to DHA. Selling also a problem and its high time the CWG and the Minster in charge of the DHA must institute an independent investigation to expose the potential nexus between the valuers and the DHA and how the lessor (a self funded retiree, pensioners and others). I already lodged a complaint with Ombudsman and waiting for a reply. There are 14 Lessors all in a Private street (Only DHA leased property in that street) near 213 Ray rd Epping 2121 that are leased to DHA for more than 10 years. Please note most of those Lessors almost lost $10000 per year because DHA under cut the rent to them when they paid me the market rent for many years. DHA by mistake send the rent paid to all. We have called for the details of rent paid to all the 14 lessors in that private street from 2008 todate under the Freedom of Information Act and waiting.


Your house and 25 acres was $50K? How is that even possible? Growing up in the 90's the average house in my town was around $600k. Now median home prices in that area are around $1 million. This is a suburb of Boston, so it's not like I'm talking about a place in an actual city.  Prices fluctuate in real estate so much depending on location. Growing up in Massachusetts and then doing my undergrad near NYC, my experience with average or entry-level home prices told me they were always over half a million. It didn't really hit me that prices varied significantly until I went to get my Masters from Syracuse, my friend's father decided to just buy a 5 bedroom house on the edge of campus rather than pay her rent. It was so cheap it made sense (a little under $100K, so he bought it with straight cash).   But still, 25 acres and $50k sounds unreal today. Like the cost of building materials alone would be more than that, forgetting about the cost of land.


So... we should continue to give money to an industry that essentially shakes down sick people because we have always given money to this industry. I kinda think we should go back and look at the ridiculous earnings of some of the top executives and enact a special tax to take it back and use it to actually fund healthcare.


Nanex just doesn't have the data. Some guy at CNBC, knowing that this stuff is great fodder for pageviews, *particularly* when there is a mysterious unnamed firm (its much too boring when there is an actual firm named, and the reason turns out to be something mundane like a slow market data feed), scooped it up and packaged it into a fear mongering story, and here we are.


When you invest in stocks, there are two possible ways to make money: Many people speculate just on the stock price, which would result in a gain (or loss), but only once you have resold the shares. Others don't really care about the stock price. They get dividends every so often, and hopefully, the return will be better than other types of investments. If you're in there for the long run, you do not really care what the price of the stock is. It is often highly volatile, and often completely disconnected from anything, so it's not because today you have a theoretical gain (because the current stock price is higher than your buying price) that you will effectively realise that gain when you sell (need I enumerate the numerous crashes that prevented this from happening?). Returns will often be more spectacular on share resale than on dividends, but it goes both ways (you can lose a lot if you resell at the wrong time). Dividends tend to be a bit more stable, and unless the company goes bankrupt (or a few other unfortunate events), you still hold shares in the company even if the price goes down, and you could still get dividends. And you can still resell the stock on top of that! Of course, not all companies distribute dividends. In that case, you only have the hope of reselling at a higher price (or that the company will distribute dividends in the future). Welcome to the next bubble...


Beers, I can see the math, which you are right about. My point is that the Republicans were voting to favor the banking lobby over the lawyers’ lobby, and the Dems were voting to favor the lawyers’ lobby over the bankers’ lobby.  I believe that neither party, at large, was voting for the consumer.  I concede that some individual Dems may have been voting for consumers, but overall this vote came down to bankers vs. lawyers (the two potential primary beneficiaries of the outcome).


"Posted this in that thread but i'll put it here too:  ""As somebody working in Equity research for one of the top ranked ER producing firms in NA, i'm a little surprised to see so many people down on sellside ER.  It absolutely has value, although it is not as directly tangible as somebody sitting at a desk cold calling and closing sales. Every day we are sending out a huge amount of advisory information to our sales and trading guys, as well as our clients. Our MD and analysts are on the phone constantly with guys on the other end looking to make decisions and wanting clarification.  My group in particular works in a sector where differentiating between a huge number or relatively similar firms that all require incredibly high capital investments is the name of the game, and as such finding ER analysts who can really pick out the important subtle details is very important for identifying real value.  I'll agree that being able to sell is important, but that's always something you have to be good at no matter what it is you're doing. Even in interviews with a hospital you have to sell yourself.  This got a bit long but is SS ER dying? Absolutely not. Is there going to be a concentrating focus on a smaller number of quality analysts? Possibly.  I'm a junior guy, so who knows where this industry is going. All I know is that compared to my friends in entry level roles in S&T and IB, the technical knowledge i'm picking up with regards to my sector is leaps and bounds ahead of them and will give me a great deal of optionality going into the future as to where I want to take my career.  I really like being in ER, and i respect the people I'm lucky enough to work with and I don't think that the guys who really know how to pick the winners are going anywhere.""  Just my opinion going forward. Also note that US regulation does not necessarily affect me or the team i'm a part of."


It can be helpful, but also knowing what has been tried before is vital. What works and what does not work. Many ideas are not so new. For example, typically in IT management loves the idea of RAD, but what it often means is that they want to start before they understand the scope of the problem, let alone the requirements.  It tends to be the big projects that end up being screwed up. Smaller stuff is easier, but it takes a lot of skills to manage the production of large and complex systems or pieces of engineering.  Sure, change is important but so is the knowledge of what works and what does not work. Every so often, something comes along and sets it on its head so some of that old knowledge can be discounted, but not often.


I lived and worked in my college town for 7 years before I found out we had a Sears.  It was a huge store on a main road with a parking lot so large that the store was too far back to be noticed...and they didnt have a sign.


I have never attempted to take out a loan, but I mean any kind of loan or lease based contract.  Also I am a lifer that will never return to my home country.  I have accepted the xenophobia attitude but that doesn't mean I saw screw what they think and make it worse.


Philadelphia, Pennsylvania is a world-class metropolis that's all about nonstop convenience. If you need trusted mobile locksmith service anywhere in this action-packed city, just drop Phila Locksmith a line. Our licensed, insured and highly trained team members can help you take charge of all of your home, automotive, commercial and emergency service requests. Learn more details check out here: https://www.behance.net/gallery/56815967/professional-locksmith-van-inside


First you need to ensure that you are not violating any Federal child labor laws. I would look at this: U.S. Dept of Labor, Wage & Hour Div., Standards for 14- and 15-Year Olds in Nonagricultural Employment. These were the items that pertained to Federal Law, for 14 year olds: 14 is the minimum age for employment in specified occupations outside   of school hours for limited periods of time each day and each week.   Fourteen- and 15-Year-Olds May Not Be Employed: There is a section on minimum allowed wage payment to young workers, and also a list of allowed types of work for 14 and 15 year old's. The type of household helper tasks described definitely fell within what was allowed for child labor. The same page details what sort of forms need to be filled out. I think this is something that is done quite commonly. Here are specifics in New York State for minimum wage for minors and for employing 14 year olds.


We could solve what the RIAA and MPAA are complaining about.  Remember, this only worked because the content was worth it (aka shit was funny as fuck).  Others failed (Radiohead, NIN) because you felt ripped off when you actually opened your present.


"I'd replace ""ethics"" with ""morality"" in your comment. While in many contexts ethics and morals are synonymous and used interchangeably this is a situation where the distinction is important.  Ethical behaviour is adherence to a code of conduct, such as laws and regulations. Morality is about Right vs. Wrong, regardless of what's been codified."


StackExchange points, obviously. =)


Dow Jones: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_components_of_the_Dow_Jones_Industrial_Average  NASDAQ: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASDAQ-100 (scroll down) S&P Tricky. From what I can find, you need to be in Harvard Business School, a member of CRSP, or have access to Bloomberg's databases. S&P did have the info available years ago, but no longer that I can find.


The answer to your question is governed by the structure of the company and your ownership or lack thereof in the business.  Australian business can be structured the same way U.S. ones are, as a sole proprietorship, partnership, LLC, or company.  If you are only on the board and have no equity, you cannot be affected.  You must have some amount of equity in the business to have any chance of being affected. If the business is a sole proprietorship, then the single individual running the business is personally responsible for all debt and the inability to pay obligations would result in personal bankruptcy which would in all likelihood affect your credit score (it would in the U.S.). If it is a partnership, then anyone holding stock in the company is likewise personally responsible for a portion of the debt, and can be subject to bankruptcy and credit score implications. If the business is structured as a limited liability company or a corporation, a stakeholder's personal finances are separate from the business's and their credit score cannot be affected.