"Curtis' monologue fucked me up. I thought I wanted real change but after listening to him I realize I'm one of those with too much to lose even though it's not much at all in the material sense and as he put it, I ""just want to tweak it"" some. As he says, *real change* could be downright frightening.  I'm 66 and if I didn't have an extended family who still depend on me I might be one that would feel there's not much to lose.    I wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that every three letter agency in the govt had a hand in defusing OWS.   I'm assuming you have, but just checking - have you watched Cutris' [""The Century if the Self""](http://thoughtmaybe.com/the-century-of-the-self/)?"


"I cannot speak for Paypal specifically and I doubt anyone who doesn't actually work on their internal automated payment systems could. However, I can speak from experiencing in working on automated forex transaction systems and tell you what many institutions do and it is often NOT based on live rates. There is no law stating an institution must honor a specific market exchange rate. Institutions can determine their own rates how and when they want to. However, there is some useful information on their website: https://www.paypal.com/an/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=p/sell/mc/mc_convert-outside ""The most readily available information on currency exchange rates is based on interbank exchange rates. Interbank exchange rates are established in the course of currency trading among a global network of over 1,000 banks, and are not available through consumer or retail channels."" This leads me to believe they pull exchange rates from either Oanda or XE periodically and then use these rates throughout the day to conduct business. Paypal does not disclose who they use to determine rates. And it's highly doubtful they do this for every transaction (using live rates). Even if they did, there would be no way for you to check and be certain of a particular exchange rate as paypal states: "" Consumers may use these rates as a reference, but should not expect to use interbank rates in transactions that involve currency conversion. To obtain actual retail rates, contact your local financial institution or currency exchange, or check the rate displayed in your PayPal transaction."" This is partly because rates can change by the second just like stock prices or anything else which is susceptible to the open market's variables of supply, demand news events etc. So, even if you check the rates on Oanda (which you can do here: http://www.oanda.com/currency/converter/) you are not going to get a 100% accurate representation of what you would get by doing an exchange immediately afterwards from Paypal or any other financial institution. However, if you want to estimate, using Oanda's currency converter will likely get you close in most scenarios. That is assuming Paypal doesn't charge a premium for the exchange, which they may. That is also assuming they use live rates, it's also possible they only update their rates based on market rates periodically and not for every transaction. You may want to test this by checking the exchange rate on your transaction and comparing that to the Oanda rates at the same time."


"Ok, let's revisit some of the things you *did* say then.   >[If they weren't losers and were actually responsible, it would be a different situation](https://www.reddit.com/r/business/comments/6pujj4/economy_needs_workers_but_drug_tests_take_a_toll/dksx7c2/)  >[they are weed smoking losers living at home and getting paid minimum wage, that is if they even have a job.](https://www.reddit.com/r/business/comments/6pujj4/economy_needs_workers_but_drug_tests_take_a_toll/dksv33x/)  > [Stop with the smoking at home bullshit. Most [marijuana users] smoke a few times a day. Even before work.](https://www.reddit.com/r/business/comments/6pujj4/economy_needs_workers_but_drug_tests_take_a_toll/dksu660/)  > [More pot smokers smoke several times a day than drinkers who aren't alcoholics](https://www.reddit.com/r/business/comments/6pujj4/economy_needs_workers_but_drug_tests_take_a_toll/dksu9ad/)  > [That's he problem. These weed smokers do it all the time. Not many only do it on their own time](https://www.reddit.com/r/business/comments/6pujj4/economy_needs_workers_but_drug_tests_take_a_toll/dksumrg/)  > **[These people are entitled losers that don't want to be responsible for their actions. They still live at home at 30 and don't have a real job or make minimum wage, but it's not their fault according to them. They blame it on everyone else ](https://www.reddit.com/r/business/comments/6pujj4/economy_needs_workers_but_drug_tests_take_a_toll/dksupyt/)**  *Those* are the statements I was hoping you would have some research to back up. Clearly, you don't.  Finally, your reply to my statement about your generalizations of marijuana consumers being utterly fallacious is a non sequitur. I have expressed no opinion on the topic of the health of ""escaping reality by doing drugs all day everyday."" If you're curious, I do **not** think that's good. But it has nothing to do with the fact that your generalizations are just...dumb, for lack of a better word.  I'm going to go ahead and depart this conversation now; arguing with raw ignorance is exhausting. Plus I need get ready for my minimum wage job by smoking some the devil's lettuce in my bedroom, which is obviously in my parent's basement."


Absolutely. The overhead for a product based business like that is particularly high. Service based businesses tend to have much better profit margins. But if she was running a plant nursery she has to pay huge heating costs, renting the area she operates in, not to mention inventory and employees. That $300k vanishes pretty fast. This article talking about disappearing middle class is a bad argument. This sounds much more about how the recession hurts a small business. Assuming of course it is the recession. I know a coffee shop near me that isn't doing that great and says the economy is hurting them bad. They apparently don't realize that being blatantly rude to their customers drives them away. There are often other sides to the story besides the economy, whether the fault of the business owner or some other factor outside their control that may not be covered in these kinds of posts.


In what ways is SOPA seem a fitting retribution to the wrongdoing you're alleging? Also, can you prove harm from these sources hosting the copyrighted material? It seems that to **deserve** something the offense and response should fit one another.


...  My judgement, based on the direction the research is going and the rest of my knowledge of human biology, is that it's likely. We do know enough to say that; in the future, with further research, we'll have a more precise idea of just how likely. Happy now?


> So why doesn't he just short them?  Just because a stock is overvalued doesn't mean the price will go down.  A short position also loses money if the stock just appreciates more slowly than the broader market, which is one way an overvaluation can correct itself.


It's monopoly money.  Everybody treats it like that.  Of course it doesn't work.    It would be vastly different if you had you budget **plus**    (a) freedom of choice for the supplier, internal or external,    (b) your group could spend any budget surplus on whatever they wanted (well, for the office).    But that will never happen because company policy.


That is why you would *want* to apply for a patent right away, to protect yourself. Once you are in the system, someone cannot take your idea and patent it themselves.  If you do not think your idea is original or distinct enough to be granted a patent, then why would you even be exploring this avenue? Have you spoken with a patent attorney to determine whether your idea is worth going through the process?


Bubble.   User filtering tools outpace ad technology, and adoption is becoming typical. We already had this fight with pop-ups, and advertisers lost to browsers. Shoving spam in people's faces is innately unpleasant and takes one minute to fix forever.  You've already fixed it, haven't you? You block ads. Would you bother blocking scripts that made your outgoing bandwidth match your incoming bandwidth? Would you even notice?


"You may be confused on what ""non-profit"" actually means. I'd encourage you read up on the difference between the non-profit and for profit.   Since I don't know your business I cannot even begin to recommend what is right for you.    As a side note, the NFL was a non-profit for awhile (not sure if they still are).  With some fancy paperwork you can be too."


"it doesn't matter who ""takes on"" Tesla, Tesla will be crushed  the only reason the majors are not getting in there is Tesla is a loser.  no profits, huge losses and a growing reveal that the Musker's [electric cars are not green](https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/06/20/tesla-car-battery-production-releases-as-much-co2-as-8-years-of-gasoline-driving/)"


Forecasting prices to the level of accuracy they purport is a fool's errand. Sell side analysts are there to get you to buy something, not to make you money.  If they truly believed their analysis was significantly better than anyone else's in the market, they would trade on their own analysis.  No one ever got rich by following analyst recommendations.  Don't believe me? Track the buy/sell recommendations in a spreadsheet for 50+ stocks. I would be shocked if you significantly outperformed the market.


There can be Federal estate tax as well as State estate tax due on an estate, but it is not of direct concern to you. Estate taxes are paid by the estate of the decedent, not by the beneficiaries, and so you do  not owe any estate tax. As a matter of fact, most estates in the US do not pay Federal estate tax at all because only the amount that exceeds the Federal exemption ($5.5M) is taxable, and most estates are smaller. State estate taxes might be a different matter because  while many states exempt exactly what the Federal Government does, others  exempt different (usually smaller) amounts. But in any case, estate taxes are not of concern to you except insofar as what you inherit is reduced because the estate had to pay estate tax before distributing the inheritances. As JoeTaxpayer's answer says more succinctly, what you inherit is net of estate tax, if any. What you receive as an inheritance is not taxable income to you either. If you receive stock shares or other property, your basis is the value of the property when you inherit it. Thus, if you sell at a later time, you will have to pay taxes only on the increase in the value of the property from the time you inherit it. The increase in value from the time the decedent acquired the property till the date of death is not taxable income to you.  Exceptions to all these favorable rules to you is the treatment of Traditional IRAs, 401ks, pension plans etc that you inherit that contain money on which the decedent never paid income tax. Distributions from such inherited accounts are (mostly) taxable income to you; any part of post-tax money such as nondeductible contributions to Traditional IRAs that is included in the distribution is  tax-free. Annuities present another source of complications. For annuities within IRAs, even the IRS throws up its hands at explaining things to mere mortals who are foolhardy enough to delve into Pub 950, saying in effect, talk to your tax advisor. For other annuities, questions arise such as is this a tax-deferred annuity and whether it was purchased with pre-tax money or with post-tax money, etc.  One thing that you should check out is whether it is beneficial to take a lump sum  distribution or just collect the money as it is distributed in monthly, quarterly, semi-annual, or annual payments. Annuities  in particular have heavy surrender charges if they are terminated early and the money taken as a lump sum instead of over time as the insurance  company issuing the annuity had planned on happening.  So, taking a lump sum would mean more income tax immediately due not just on the lump sum but because the increase in AGI might reduce deductions for medical expenses as well as reduce the overall amount of itemized deductions that can be claimed, increase taxability of social security  benefits, etc. You say that you have these angles sussed out, and so I will merely re-iterate Beware the surrender charges.


Miro Zecevic ‘s Tax Advisory Team works closely with you to understand your business and its corporate tax issues by Andrea rubio, the opportunities and risks your business faces. Corporate tax can be a complex issue. Enhanced regulatory and other relevant obligations mean you have less time to focus on the areas of your business that are important to you.


Of course there's nobody selling houses because everybody and their mother is renting them out and using Airbnb to make every room or floor into another source of income. And when large corporations are doing the same, nobody is selling, then who is buying? Well whoever can afford it as prices go up and as urban areas grow. Meanwhile interest rates are high and possibly going higher making it difficult for anybody to get in without large amounts of cash. Who will have this cash? People who make money on their current real estate, who are currently renting them out, and want to buy more to rent out.


How would gold have protected you during the 2007/8 crisis?  In no way, shape or form. The ways to protect yourself at any time are: Boring, huh?


The trader has purchased 1095 options, each of which is a contract which entitles him to sell 100 shares of Cisco stock for $16 a share. He paid $71 for each contract (71 cents a share x 100) which is roughly $78k total. He will get $109,500 for each dollar below $16 Cisco's stock is when he exercises it (he can buy the stock for the going rate and then sell it for $16 immediately), or he can sell the option itself to someone else for a similar gain (usually a little more, especially if the option has a long time until it expires). If the option expires when the stock is over $16/share, he gets nothing; i.e. the original $78k is lost. For reference, Cisco's stock was trading at $17.14/share as of market close on March 18, 2010. The share price had recently been boosted by the recent news that they would be paying a quarterly dividend. It has been heading mostly downward since February 9, after they announced that they're not expecting profits to be as good as the analysts thought they would be: they claim that people aren't buying too much networking equipment just now, and they're also facing mounting competition from the likes of HP and Juniper for switches, and Aruba / HP / Motorola for wireless devices. They may lose market share or need to cut prices, hurting profits. Either way, there's certainly a real possibility of their stock going below $16 in the next few months, so people are willing to pay for those options. (Disclosure: I work for Aruba, who competes with Cisco. I also own shares of Aruba, possess assorted stock options and similar equity grants, and participate in the employee stock purchase program.  I also own shares in Cisco indirectly through various mutual funds and ETFs.)


The company struck a truce with Elliott. They elected 3 of Elliott's nominees to the board, agreed to annual board elections, and placed Elliott on the committee for the firm's CEO search (Elliott targeted their previous CEO trying to push change and he had to resign after sending a threatening letter to Elliott).


If upper and bollinger bands either converge (both bands are getting more and more close together) or diverge (both bands are getting more and more away from each other), does that mean the market is TRENDING? The answer is no. The divergence or convergence of BB-upper & lower band does not indicate if the market is trending or not. It only indicated if volatility is increasing or decreasing. Or is market trending only in case if both bands, upper and lower, are parallel and at the same time NOT horizontal? The answer is yes. To understand the reason consider that BB is constructed from a central Moving Average along with standard deviation. Upper Band=MA+2*SD, Lower Band=MA-2*SD. A moving average is a trend following indicator and volatility has nothing to do with trend (as SD only measures the price movement around the mean). Which essentially means BB has trend following qualities. The upper and lower bands remain more or less parallel in between band contraction and expansion. Refer below:   You shall see distinctly phases when BB bands are not parallel and are parallel and not horizontal. As mentioned above, when BB bands are expanding or contracting they do not give indication of the trend direction. When they are parallel, close or apart and not horizontal, they provide a good directional bias through the general slope. Though a more effective method to determine trend and its direction is the central MA of BB. Again, refer below:  Here you can see that some portion of the bands are parallel and more or less horizontal. The price action would tell you that the stock is now range-bound as opposed to trending. The primary use of the BB bands are to gauge volatility as @misantroop stated. The primary trend direction is usually derived from the central MA.


I never said it would be easy, I said it would be a better solution in that it would *actually* solve the problem.  And if TPTB want a collapsing shit-show, they're perfectly welcome to stay with the existing trading desks, and watch it all fall apart due to their own hubris and corruption. I, for one, have no problem watching arrogance morons lose their money.


">Do you work with low-skilled employees? Specifically, do you ever have to manage them? I am going to make the assumption that you do not based on the comments you are making. It is impossible to say ALL of anything is a certain way. I'm not suggesting that at all. I'm going to specifically talk about averages. It seems like you've never been around the average.  Yes, I have worked with low-skilled employees. Not any more but I definitely did at times as I was working in high school and working my way through college. Also, I'm not from the upper middle or upper class. It seems like you are now trying to pigeon hole me into a box in order to justify your responses to me and paint me as some guy that just ""doesn't understand how the real world works."" But all of this is irrelevant to the discussion, just ad hominem attacks to tear down my credibility.  >If a person refuses to provide more for society, should society fill the gap?  There it is. Here is how you truly feel. So you do look down on these people, cause ""statistics"" or whatever you've made up in your head to justify looking down on them (see I can make ad hominem attacks too).  I'll refer to my earlier argument as a response to this. ""If you have to assume the worst of people to bolster your argument, then you have a terrible argument.""  >You suggest that people who are poor didn't get there because of their own right. Are people who are self-made millionaires (on average) good with finances? Why would that be? If yes, why do you assume those that are successful are so because of their own merit but cannot be blamed for failure?  Your words not mine. Nice straw man though. Honestly I recognize all of the things that lead people to success and failure: work ethic, background (race, gender, social class, connections, etc.), good/bad decisions, receiving help or not, luck, etc. There are definitely people that are stuck in bad positions because they were born into it or they have fallen on hard times outside of their control. There are definitely ""successful"" people because they had a lot of help to get there. There are people that deserve being at the bottom because of their lack of work ethic and poor decisions. There are people at the top because they worked their ass off and made the right decisions.  > My exterior painter is doing a job there right now. It's a 3 month job. He is painting 1,000 apartments. He took 7 guys with him that he pays around $1,750 a week plus room and board. He had to take 7 guys with him because he can't find workers up in Washington. Can you imagine that? People in Seattle have not developed the skill of exterior painting. That's the reality of your job market.  I'm not sure what this has to do with anything. Actually, it's more likely because Seattle is growing and building more buildings than anywhere else because of the recent tech boom. It's most likely that all of the painters are booked up and their is a job shortage for painters, like there a shortage for engineers here.  >should society fill the gap?  Lastly, congrats on owning your own company, but it makes me sad how you look down on minimum wage workers just because they are at the bottom, seemingly finding whatever justification you can for this position. Those are jobs that are needed and just because someone works them does not mean they are lesser or undeserving, or incapable of making good money and life decisions.  Check this article out. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/04/14/when-work-isnt-enough-to-keep-you-off-welfare-and-food-stamps/](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/04/14/when-work-isnt-enough-to-keep-you-off-welfare-and-food-stamps/)  It discusses how working people at the bottom still have to rely on government assistance to make ends meet. You never answered my minimum wage question, but if you are paying people only minimum wage, I want you to know the tax payers are picking up the rest of the bill that you are unwilling to pay in the form of public assistance programs. Do you think that is fair for the tax payers?"


Our Website : http://www.usaccidentlawyer.com/anaheim-auto-injury-attorney/ Competent lawyers analyze the events that lead to accidents and establish the viability of the victim's case. At The Law Offices of Daniel Kim, we offer generous free consultation services to all potential clients to help you learn more about your legal options. They discuss with their client in order to draft correct procedures to handle court proceedings and as well as contact insurance companies to seek compensation that is commensurate with the losses incurred and injuries sustained. In doing so, the lawyers save their clients from the complicated processes of filling forms and other tedious paperwork.


Well yeah. I agree with that. I just thought the distinction should be made that BK didnt just close and fire a ton of people. They just delegated out who is responsible for them. Sure some people were probably fired, but it wasnt BK that fired them.


"I'm not downvoting you because I can relate, in a way, to your post and I think this is a good topic to have on this site.  We had a question a couple weeks ago where someone, like you, took some friend's money to trade with but didn't know how to give the money back or calculate the net-return.  It is not smart to take and invest other people's money when you have zero industry experience and when you do not understand the legal requirements of handling someone else's money. Within the first 12 months of my brokerage account I had returned something like 150%, I doubled my money plus a bit.  The next year was something like -20%; if I remember correctly the next year was worse, then up again for year four.  Year 1 I thought I was a genius and had figured this whole thing out, year 2 put me in my place and year 3 kicked me while I was down. You have 6 months of pretty solid returns, good for you.  I don't think that means it's time to set up shop.  Really, I think you need to sit down and think long and hard about the implications, legal and otherwise, of holding other people's money.  Running a fund is significantly different than trading your own money.   Retail investors don't, typically, have a good memory.  Great, you made me 17% last year, and 25% the year before but right now I'm down 10%, so give me my money back because I would have been better off in an savings account this year.    This is why index funds are in vogue right now.  Lots of people have had money in active funds that have trailed or matched the ""safe and passive"" index funds, so they're angry.  Retail folks get jittery the instant they lose money, no matter how much.  You need to be ready to contend with ""What have you done for me lately?"" the instant something turns negative, no matter how positive your returns have been. At your stage in the game you should get a job and continue putting your own money in to your own system and be ready to lose some of it.  I doubt there is anyone outside your immediate family who will hand a random 18 year-old kid any significant amount of money to trade their system based on 6 months of success; certainly not more than you have in there currently."


Right... so the question is why does Chipotle sell you a meal that is clearly too high in calories and then try to put a healthy spin on it?  Because people don't give a shit about healthy food or where it comes from. They want a three meals rolled into one for 6-8 dollars.  Chiptole is just the flavor of the week, once you've had their 5 menu items once you realize the burrito is all that's worth getting and then it's kind of like going to subway but with fewer options and a higher price tag (i dont like subway either)


Yes -- you can refund the sales tax and adjust your return. Make sure you have a copy of your customer's reseller permit on file. If the item sold was for their own use (instead of resale), then sales tax is due, so you might want to check with the customer and ask them what they want to do.


They don't need to accept deposits from normal persons, but that's how they make lots of money.  Banks make money off the fees they charge retailers when those folks swipe their debit cards at the retailer.  It's their bread and butter.  In order to facilitate you accruing swipe fees for them, they need to allow you to make deposits, on which they can charge the retailers swipe fees.


They want people who continuously pay the minimum monthly payment on time not people who pay late. This is how they make their money, so a good credit score is important.


You should apply for 83(b) within 30 days. 10 months is too late, sorry.


Securities or quite a few negotiable instruments can change title of ownership without any issue. Many at times the owner ship in implicit if you are holding a certain instrument. So for example in Stock its a fractional ownership in a company, this ownership transfers to the buyer from the seller without requiring any permission from the company.   In case of say Loans, One cannot transfer the loan to some one else without the Banks permission.


Oh I wasn't arguing with you, just trying to expound upon what you said because. The title makes it sound like GE would just have $7 billion in cash in a single bank account it could use instantly.  Bro, calm down!  Ya, if you're an accounting major, you probably have more valid input on why taking a $7 billion loan is better than touching it's cash and cash convertibles.


If you deposit an amount greater than S$50,000, it's only insured up to S$50,000. In the event that the bank fails or is declared insolvent, the SDIC will pay deposit holders their total balance in all accounts with that bank, up to S$50,000 in aggregate per depositor per Scheme member by law. In other words SDIC will only pay S$25000.00 and not S$50000.00, even though your deposit with that bank is insured up to S$50000.00 Please clarify this point as most banks are unaware of this aspect of the payout.


"I'd suggest you start by looking at the mutual fund and/or ETF options available via your bank, and see if they have any low-cost funds that invest in high-risk sectors.  You can increase your risk (and potential returns) by allocating your assets to riskier sectors rather than by picking individual stocks, and you'll be less likely to make an avoidable mistake. It is possible to do as you suggest and pick individual stocks, but by doing so you may be taking on more risk than you suspect, even unnecessary risk.  For instance, if you decide to buy stock in Company A, you know you're taking a risk by investing in just one company.  However, without a lot of work and financial expertise, you may not be able to assess how much risk you're taking by investing in Company A specifically, as opposed to Company B.  Even if you know that investing in individual stocks is risky, it can be very hard to know how risky those particular individual stocks are, compared to other alternatives. This is doubly true if the investment involves actions more exotic than simply buying and holding an asset like a stock.  For instance, you could definitely get plenty of risk by investing in commercial real estate development or complicated options contracts; but a certain amount of work and expertise is required to even understand how to do that, and there is a greater likelihood that you will slip up and make a costly mistake that negates any extra gain, even if the investment itself might have been sound for someone with experience in that area.  In other words, you want your risk to really be the risk of the investment, not the ""personal"" risk that you'll make a mistake in a complicated scheme and lose money because you didn't know what you were doing.  (If you do have some expertise in more exotic investments, then maybe you could go this route, but I think most people -- including me -- don't.) On the other hand, you can find mutual funds or ETFs that invest in large economic sectors that are high-risk, but because the investment is diversified within that sector, you need only compare the risk of the sectors.  For instance, emerging markets are usually considered one of the highest-risk sectors.  But if you restrict your choice to low-cost emerging-market index funds, they are unlikely to differ drastically in risk (at any rate, far less than individual companies).  This eliminates the problem mentioned above: when you choose to invest in Emerging Markets Index Fund A, you don't need to worry as much about whether Emerging Markets Index Fund B might have been less risky; most of the risk is in the choice to invest in the emerging markets sector in the first place, and differences between comparable funds in that sector are small by comparison.  You could do the same with other targeted sectors that can produce high returns; for instance, there are mutual funds and ETFs that invest specifically in technology stocks. So you could begin by exploring the mutual funds and ETFs available via your existing investment bank, or poke around on Morningstar.  Fees will still matter no matter what sector you're in, so pay attention to those.  But you can probably find a way to take an aggressive risk position without getting bogged down in the details of individual companies.  Also, this will be less work than trying something more exotic, so you're less likely to make a costly mistake due to not understanding the complexities of what you're investing in."


"The general answer to any ""is it worth it"" insurance question is ""no,"" because the insurance company is making a profit on the insurance.* To decide if you want the insurance, you need to figure out how much you can afford to pay if something happens, how much they cover, and how badly you want to transfer your risk to them.  If you won't have trouble coming up with the $4000 deductible should you need to, then don't get this extra insurance.  * I did not mean to imply that insurance is always a bad idea or that insurance companies are cheating their customers. Please let me explain further.  When you buy any product from a business, that business is making a profit. And there is nothing wrong with that at all. They are providing a service and should be compensated for their efforts.  Insurance companies also provide a service, but unlike other types of businesses, their product is monetary. You pay them money now, and they might pay you money later. If they pay you more money then you spent, you came out ahead, and if you spend more money then they give you, it was a loss for you.  In order for the insurance company to make a profit, they need to bring in more money than they pay out. In fact, they need to bring in a lot more money then they pay out, because in addition to their profit, they have all the overhead of running a business.  As a result, on average, you will come out behind when you purchase insurance. This means that when you are on the fence about whether or not to purchase any insurance product, the default choice should be ""no.""  On average, you are financially better off without insurance.  Now, that doesn't mean you should never buy insurance. As mentioned by commenter @xiaomy, insurance companies spread risk across all of their customers. If I am in a situation where I have a risk of financial ruin in a certain circumstance, I can eliminate that risk by purchasing insurance. For example, I have term life insurance, because if I were to pass away, it would be financially catastrophic for my family. (I'm hoping that the insurance company makes 100% profit on that deal!) I also continue to buy expensive health insurance because an unexpected medical event would be financially devastating. However, I always decline the extended warranty when I buy a $300 appliance, because I don't have any trouble coming up with another $300 in the unlikely event that it breaks, and I would rather keep the money than contribute to the profits of an insurance company unnecessarily.  In my original answer above, I pointed out how you would determine whether or not to purchase this particular insurance product. This product pays out a bunch of relatively small amounts for certain events, up to a limit of $4000. Would this $4000 be hard for you to come up with if you needed to? If so, get the insurance. But if you are like me and have an emergency fund in place to handle things like this, then you are financially better off declining this policy."


Stay in school, learn everything you can, and spend as little money as possible.  And realize that the chances of you dropping out and becoming a millionaire are much lower than the chances of you staying in school and becoming a millionaire.  You're unlikely to be a good investor if you make bets with negative expected payoffs.


I've done a lot of gov contracting, the IT/software side of most of these gov organizations is very very disappointing.  Then again I'm breaking my own pet peeve about google employees in these news articles here. They're not all engineers.


"This is my two cents (pun intended).  It was too long for a comment, so I tried to make it more of an answer.  I am no expert with investments or Islam: Anything on a server exists 'physically'.  It exists on a hard drive, tape drive, and/or a combination thereof.  It is stored as data, which on a hard drive are small particles that are electrically charged, where each bit is represented by that electric charge.  That data exists physically.  It also depends on your definition of physically.  This data is stored on a hard drive, which I deem physical, though is transferred via electric pulses often via fiber cable.  Don't fall for marketing words like cloud.  Data must be stored somewhere, and is often redundant and backed up. To me, money is just paper with an amount attached to it.  It tells me nothing about its value in a market.  A $1 bill was worth a lot more 3 decades ago (you could buy more goods because it had a higher value) than it is today.  Money is simply an indication of the value of a good you traded at the time you traded.  At a simplistic level, you could accomplish the same thing with a friend, saying ""If you buy lunch today, I'll buy lunch next time"".  There was no exchange in money between me and you, but there was an exchange in the value of the lunch, if that makes sense.  The same thing could have been accomplished by me and you exchanging half the lunch costs in physical money (or credit/debit card or check). Any type of investment can be considered gambling.  Though you do get some sort of proof that the investment exists somewhere  Investments may go up or down in value at any given time.  Perhaps with enough research you can make educated investments, but that just makes it a smaller gamble.  Nothing is guaranteed.  Currency investment is akin to stock market investment, in that it may go up or down in value, in comparison to other currencies; though it doesn't make you an owner of the money's issuer, generally, it's similar.  I find if you keep all your money in U.S. dollars without considering other nations, that's a sort of ignorant way of gambling, you're betting your money will lose value less slowly than if you had it elsewhere or in multiple places. Back on track to your question: [A]m I really buying that currency?  You are trading a currency.  You are giving one currency and exchanging it for another.  I guess you could consider that buying, since you can consider trading currency for a piece of software as buying something. Or is the situation more like playing with the live rates? It depends on your perception of playing with the live rates.  Investments to me are long-term commitments with reputable research attached to it that I intend to keep, through highs and lows, unless something triggers me to change my investment elsewhere.  If by playing you mean risk, as described above, you will have a level of risk.  If by playing you mean not taking it seriously, then do thorough research before investing and don't be trading every few seconds for minor returns, trying to make major returns out of minor returns (my opinion), or doing anything based on a whim. Was that money created out of thin air? I suggest you do more research before starting to trade currency into how markets and trading works.  Simplistically, think of a market as a closed system with other markets, such as UK market, French market, etc.  Each can interact with each other.  The U.S. [or any market] has a set number of dollars in the pool.  $100 for example's sake.  Each $1 has a certain value associated with it.  If for some reason, the country decides to create more paper that is green, says $1, and stamps presidents on them (money), and adds 15 $1 to the pool (making it $115), each one of these dollars' value goes down.  This can also happen with goods.  This, along with the trading of goods between markets, peoples' attachment of value to goods of the market, and peoples' perception of the market, is what fluctates currency trading, in simple terms.  So essentially, no, money is not made out of thin air.  Money is a medium for value  though values are always changing and money is a static amount. You are attempting to trade values and own the medium that has the most value, if that makes sense.  Values of goods are constantly changing. This is a learning process for me as well so I hope this helps answers your questions you seem to have.  As stated above, I'm no expert; I'm actually quite new to this, so I probably missed a few things here and there."


Passive implies following an index. Your question seems to ask about a hypothetical fund that starts, say, as an S&P fund, but as the index is adjusted, the old stocks stay in the fund. Sounds simple enough, but over time, the fund's performance will diverge from the index. The slight potential gain from lack of cap gains will be offset by the fund being unable to market itself.  Keep in mind, the gains distributed each year are almost exclusively long term, taxed at a favorable rate.


Nah, you're thinking top 0.1% - they are very different than the top 1%.  Top 1% tends to be salaried professionals who work hard every day - doctors, lawyers, accountants, etc.  Top 0.1% makes their $$ off interest, dividends, etc., and these people own more wealth than the bottom 90%.  I'm on vacation, so all you're gonna get is a google link, but here's lots of sources of info on it: https://www.google.com.mx/search?q=top+1%25+vs+top+0.1%25&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari&gfe_rd=cr&ei=daSDWb7dEZL08Aeg55bQDw


Thanks for replying. I think we are talking at cross purposes, though. In your original example you were talking terms of a promise to pay at a future time. In that example the asset might be destroyed but the promise to pay would still be binding (under typical laws of obligations) and so a court could enforce the obligaton to pay - unless perhaps the promise was itself nullified eg by being contingent on the asset (the apples) being harvested (ie not being destroyed). So, my question was really whether such a contingent promise really amounts to creating new money (as is suggested by the original example). I don't see a promise of this nature can be akin to creating money - it is a new bargain entered into by two (or more) parties


"What you're looking at is something called ""Bridge-Financing"".  Essentially, it allows you to borrow your down-payment from the bank, using your old home as collateral.  The interest rate varies, but if you get the bridge from the same institution as your new mortgage, they will often be a bit flexible.   You take possession of the new home, and begin mortgage payments on it normally.  When the old home is sold, the bridge is paid off.   Note that the deposit on signing for the new house will still have to be cash.  All bets are off if you are talking about a NEW new home, as builders usually require advance payments during the build."


Remember that these are accusations coming from a competitor, and Uber has already returned the same accusations but with a bigger number. It's virtually impossible to prove these claims, unless a company is stupid enough to send an official memo or something like that.


"I'm not sure these are all good e.g. ""Facebook: A Friendster for college students"".  What's the point of describing one company with another? Especially one that is smaller? And it used to be just college students, but not any more."


It seems to me that the study fails to adjust for the fact that if the UK became a US state, UK taxes would be removed which would probably result in lower living costs, higher incomes, more investments..and shittier healthcare... etc etc.


You are wildly over-estimating your taxes.  First, remember that your business expenses reduce your gross income.  Second, remember that taxes are progressive, so your flat 35% only applies if you're already making a high salary that pushed you into the higher brackets of US and CA. I think the deeper problems are: 1) you are expecting a super early start-up (with no finished product) to pay you the same as a steady job, including health insurance, and 2) you are expecting Kickstarter to independently fund the venture. The best source of funding is yourself.  If you believe in this venture and in your game design abilities, then pay for most of the costs out of your own savings.  Cut your expenses to the extent you can. You may want to wander over to startups.SE to get more perspective and ideas on your business plan.


While some of that money was made overseas, in many cases half or more was made domestically. I'm not pretending that a company should have any obligation to pay taxes to America on money earned abroad, but I am saying they have an obligation to pay taxes to America earned at home.  If an American company cannot discern between domestic and foreign sales, that sounds like a them problem, not a me problem, and we'll assess the full amount. Something tells me they'll be able to report the portion they made domestically.


His logic was basically that if the banks went bankrupt and didn't get a bailout, all of society would collapse ala Great Depression. So from a risk reward standpoint it was an easy decision. Iirc he made his investment just a couple weeks before TARP, and he himself admitted he didn't think they would be bailed out as quickly as they were.


The penalty is 10% regardless of the tax. If your marginal rate is so low, I'd consider converting some to Roth each year, and not touching it for tuition.


"I looked into the ""We buy houses"" people when I was trying to sell my house a few years back.  The amount they are normally willing to pay is far below value.  If I was going to take that little, I would just set the price at that amount and sell it to somebody, maybe making a young couple really happy getting into a house they couldn't otherwise afford."


Well the product is the Snoppa M1 gimble which had a successful indiegogo campaign a while back.   www.snoppa.com/mone.html (product page)  I don't want to share to much on the pricing, but I have a lot of room with pricing as I'm friends with the founder here in China. As for customer support and guarantee they cover everything with a 12 month warranty, and will be offering customer service/support directly. So it isn't something I need to be to concerned with.


"Once again, this depends entirely on your definition of ""rational"" as it comes to money. The idea that the ""rational"" thing to do with more money than you can spend is to maximize the amount of money you make that you still can't spend is arbitrary, and really comes down an expression of personal values rather than any kind of rationality.  It's not at all inconsistent for Mayweather to feel that the value of making good investments is to demonstrate his ability to make good investments. Again, not about some utility function to maximize value, but about power, success, and telling the world to fuck itself.  Look at the top-voted comment in this thread.   > I have a feeling its because he doesn't know what he's supposed to do with checks.  Then look at this one, down in the middle somewhere below yours:  > Like most fighters, before 2006, he fought under a promo company, Top Rank. He would get his guaranteed purse for fights and that was that. Instead of taking an $8M payday, he decided to cut out the middle man (Bob Arum) and bought out his contract for ~$750K and decided to promote the fights himself (Mayweather promotions). Instead of just getting his purse, he now got a cut of every revenue stream involved in a fight (PPV, Tickets, broadcasting rights, etc.).  Mayweather is saying to the world: ""You look at me and you see some guy who can't even read a cheque. But the joke's on you. I know what I'm doing so much that I can throw away more money than you'll ever make just by not cashing a cheque, and I don't give a fuck.""  He's also a woman-beating asshole, of course."


"> Such other departments as were present in Iraq to do whatever they do were there as a means for the military to get out.  No, they were there as a means to (attempt) the implementation of foreign policy objectives.  >I’d limit it to say it’s the military which is mostly wasteful (I’m not among those who don’t believe government can ever do anything right).  I've worked for multiple branches of the government. They are all incredibly wasteful.  >But whether it’s measured in manpower or dollars, the fact remains that security functions are being outsourced.  Right, but ""amount of personnel"" is not a serious indicator of it's scope.  > Is there any reason to think this will not continue?  It will depend on the type of environment."


I don't need to be a civil engineer to tell you that building high in areas prone to earthquakes are more expensive. While a wooden frame house is cheap and fairly earthquakes resistant.  Most houses in Auckland are detached houses. You can put a lot more townhouses in the same area, and there's no restriction in doing that in Auckland. So clearly something else is going on.


It will definitely be added to your AGI, but not necessarily bump your ordinary income tax bracket. You will have to use the Capital Gains Computation worksheet (that uses the general Tax Computation Worksheet) to figure out your tax liability. You might also be subject to the AMT. See the instructions to form 1040, line 44 (page 38) and line 45.


The Evostfitness launch a new Exercise Equipment shoulder press E-1006 works several muscles of the upper body and offers a host of benefits that improve daily functioning. This exercise can be performed with Shoulder Press E-1006 Strength Gym Equipment, resistance bands or a machine.and Intelligent ergonomic design features comfortable, oversized grips with multiple positions, adjustable seat pad for desired start position.An important benefit of the shoulder press exercise, as well as any other strength-training exercise, is increased bone strength. During the lift, the load placed on your bones by the weights stresses them and causes them to adapt, just like your muscles.   For More Information visit on:-www.evostfitness.com For any Queries kindly contact us at:-support@evostfitness.com


Yes, the choice of some of the base stats to use is pretty interesting. I'm not an expert in using FRED, but I think there are better numbers for a lot of those. Mostly it's about things like the origin of the graph though - look how many of the graphs on that page start in the mid fifties, not zero, thus magnifying things drastically. Also graphing numbers that aren't calculated the same way on the same graph - FRED does not fix your poor assumptions.


Get a decent job while at university - it will make all the difference. And calculate your budget and don't spend more than your budget allows Worked for me. That was the time when I had the greatest disposable income - all gone downhill since :-)


The best thing is to diversify across multiple currencies. USD and EUR seem reliable. But not 100% reliable to keep all your investments in this types of currencies. Invest part of your savings in USD, part - in EUR, and part in your home country's currency. Apart from investing I recommend you to have certain sum in cash and certain on your bank account.


Time Tracker I'm a software engineer and have been using this tool. It is free and has a good user interface. I believe it can very well be used by professional of other areas too. It does support the features that you're looking for regarding project and task tracking.


So what's the point of this update? Only a complete idiot like the people who fell for the Fyre festival can't see it  Also, you wouldn't be calling someone a shill if you helped broker the deal and pocketed a % or got $1000 for posting a one day ad


Here's an Irish government publication that should give you some background information to get you started. In a nutshell, you get tax benefits, but cannot withdraw money without penalty until you reach retirement age.


> creating goods and services people are willing to pay for.  Let's get real here: you are using terms like 'economic rich' and 'political rich' so that you can ascribe to them whatever meaning you like.  They are both perfectly cromulent phrases, but I don't see how 'value investing' == 'creating goods and services people will pay for'.      I think you just like to imagine these big, strong entrepreneurs who make a buck while making the world better, and over *there* are these leeches that suck at the government teat.     Things aren't that simple, and yes, the overlap is significant.  Essentially, the policy-makers in America work for the rich.  All this decrying of regulation? Totally misguided, which lobbyists do you think asked for that, and in some cases actually wrote the legislation for the lawmakers?  It wasn't my lobbyist, and it wasn't yours, it was the lobbyist employed by the economic elites.  Every regulation serves as a barrier to entry for smaller, newer competitors.       For whatever historical reason, that's the case today in the USA. If we want it changed, we gotta strip political power from all economic elites. Build a wall between the two worlds that is so broad, so firm, that nobody tries to breach it.


">Every word is true.  No, really, none of it.  >Taxpayers get tax credits for buying them. If taxpayers didn't get those tax credits then TSLA would have to lower the price of the car and they would be a loss.  In what world is $7,500 26.9% of $100k (their ASP, something close to 100k)?  Please, show me the math on that.  >See above.  See *what* above?  You picked that number out of your ass.  >I said competition is ""coming"", not that it's here.  Yeah, and name one that's coming.  Go ahead.  Nothing?  Thought so.  Not to mention, of course, that Tesla's company mission statement is to get other cars to compete with it.  That's literally the entire purpose for the company's existence.  And they recently told everyone else they can use their patents if they want to.  >TSLA has worse battery tech than the cutting edge battery companies whose batteries are coming in the new competition  Oh, the competition which is coming, which you seem to know everything about and yet can't name?  Of *course* the current battery technology is worse than the technology of the future, no shit.  That's because battery tech improves at 8-10% per year.  It's been doing this for decades."


Never co-sign a loan for someone, especially family  Taking out a loan for yourself is bad enough, but co-signing a loan is just plain stupid. Think about it, if the bank is asking for a co-signer its because they are not very confident that the applicant is going to be paying back the loan. So why would you then step up and say I'll pay back the loan if they don't, make me a co-signer please. Here is a list of things that people never think about when they cosign a loan for somebody.  Now if you absolutely must co-sign a loan here is how I would do it. I, the co-signer would be the one who makes the payments to ensure that the loan was paid on time and I would be the one collecting the payment from the person who is getting the loan. Its a very simple way of preventing some of the worst situations that can arise and you should be willing to make the payments anyway after all thats what it means to cosign a loan. Your just turning things around and paying the loan upfront instead of paying after the applicant defaults and ruins every ones credit. (Source: user's own blog post Never co-sign a loan for someone, especially family)


> We were talking about net taxation, not some ratio of gross income on a per family basis.   I was rebutting your claim that the top 1% pay 50% of all taxes.  > The bottom 40% of American are net beneficiaries of taxes anyway.  I disagree.  Welfare programs in the US total a little over $200B, just above 5% of the federal budget.  Meanwhile military spending is about 25% if you count the VA.  Military spending is much more valuable to the rich since they can earn the contracts and have much more to defend.


>Restaurants and hotels are posting new job openings faster than they can fill them. This is a promising sign for the economy. Many jobs in the hospitality industry have low pay but don't require specialized skills. So they often serve as a stopgap for people between jobs. In periods when the broader job market is bleak, jobs in this sector tend to get snapped up quickly.  What utter bullshit. We are progressively turning into a low wage country and NPR wants to trump this as good for the economy.


I use it for work to automatically fill in building features which are spelled differently and are classified differently by architects (for some reason). It's mainly vlookups, I'm not sure if it'll solve your problem but that's how I solved my problem. The only problem this creates is that the master list is pretty long and that you'll need to update your sheets when you open 'em.


eSalesData allows to reach the right prospects for every B2B campaign that you launch, with extensive apparel executives lists. By targeting the upper echelons of management in various clothing enterprises, you target the real decision makers who sign off on the largest purchases within their respective organizations.


You are conflating genetic manipulation in a laboratory with something done by hand by a farmer. It is not remotely credible to equate the two processes.  Also, please do not quote some blogger in defense of your argument. This discussion deserves a lot better than that. The guy is using *his own blog posts* for citations. That's bush league.


Dogma always disappoints.  The notion that an index fund is the end-all, be-all for investing because the expense ratios are low is a flawed one. I don't concern myself with cost as an independent factor -- I look for the best value.  Bogle's dogma lines up with his business, so you need to factor that in as well. Vendors of any product spend alot of time and money convincing you that unique attributes of their product are the most important thing in the world.  Pre-crash, the dogmatics among us were bleating about how Fixed-date Retirement Funds were the new paradigm. Where did they go?


Bad bad analogies.  No offense sorry, I make bad analogies too.  Tinkering with income inequality will not get in the way of overall wealth creation.  Go check out the income gap of the US vs any other industrialized nation.  Many have lower debt and lower unemployment than we do now, and have a lower income gap, which is caused by laws set up by society, not by some magical force.  People think it is just natural that some countries have a higher income gap than others.    It actually is NOT fact that increasing everyone's wealth helps society more.  if you look up any study done that measures happiness in a society, it shows many countries have happier people than the US does.  The US has more crime, mental illness, etc. than any other industrialized country.  if wealth creation were the solution to our problems, why isn't the US even keeping up with other countries when it comes to measurements that involve a society's success?    The key is that wealth creation only helps a society to a certain point, beyond that it doesn't make people happier.  When you said 'helps society more', you obviously meant people in it being happy, right?  having iPhones doesn't 'help society more' if everyone is miserable.  Anyway, once you get to where basic needs are met, more wealth doesn't really make people any happier.  But there is a mountain of evidence that a high income gap makes people miserable.


Two reasons why I think that's irrelevant: First, if it was on 3/31/2012 (two other sources say it was actually 4/3/2012), why the big jump two trading days later? Second, the stock popped up from $3.10 to $4.11, then over the next several trading days fell right back to $3.12. If this were about the intrinsic value of the company, I'd expect the stock to retain some value.


I disagree. I think the motivation to automate is to run a safer, more consistent operation and provide better (e.g. Faster) service to its customers. I agree, fewer employees will be needed but I could argue that the new jobs being created--likely as equipment operators--is a higher skill job (than sorting shelves) and will likely pay more.


"(Note: out of my depth here, but in case this helps...) While not a direct answer to your question, I'll point out that in the inverse situation - a U.S. investor who wants to buy individual stocks of companies headquartered outside US - you would buy ADRs, which are $-denominated ""wrapper"" stocks.  They can be listed with one or multiple brokerages. One alternative I'd offer the person in my example would be, ""Are you really sure you want to directly buy individual stocks?""  One less targeted approach available in the US is to buy ETFs targeted for a given country (or region).   Maybe there's something similar there in Asia that would eliminate the (somewhat) higher fees associated with trading foreign stocks."


True story: Had a fire in our store, extension cord got hot and set carpet on fire. Employee put it out in 30 seconds, no big deal.  Store manager came in, bitched about having to pay to refill the fire extinguisher. That's how executives are, at least where I work. Complains about needing people to do the work, and then demands a huge bonus.


"Your questions seek answers to specifics, but I feel that you may need more general help. There are two things, I feel, that you need to learn about in the general category of personal finance.  Your asking questions about investing, but it is not as important, IMHO, as how you manage your day-to-day operations.   For example, you should first learn to budget.  In personal finance often times ""living on a budget"" equates to poor, or low income.   That is hardly the case.  A budget is a plan on how to spend money.  It should be refreshed each and every month and your income should equal your expenses.  You might have in your budget a $1200 trip into the city to see a concert, hardly what a low income person should have in theirs. Secondly you need to be deliberate about debt management.  For some, they feel that having a car payment and having student loans are a necessary part of life and argue that paying them off is foolish as you can earn more from investments.  Others argue for zero debt.  I fall in the later.  Using and carrying a balance on high interest CCs and having high leases or car payments are just dumb.  They are also easy to wander into unless you are deliberate.   Third you need to prepare for emergencies.  Engineers still get laid off and hurt where they are unable to work.  They get sued.  Having the proper insurance and sufficient reserves in the bank help prevent debt. Now you can start looking into investments.   Start off slow and deliberate with investing.  Put some in your company 401K or open some mutual funds on the side.  You can read about them and talk with advisers, for free, at Fidelity and Vanguard.  Read books from the library. Most of all don't get caught up in too much hype.  Things like Forex, options, life insurance, gold/silver, are not investments.  They are tools for sales people to make fat commissions off the ignorant.      You are fortunate in that Engineers are very likely to retire wealthy.  They are part of the second largest demographic of first generation rich.  The first is small business owners.   To start out I would read Millionaire Next Door and Stop Acting Rich.  For a debt free approach to life, check out Financial Peace University (FPU) by Dave Ramsey (video course).  His lesson on insurance is excellent.   I am an engineer, and my wife a project manager we found FPU life changing and regretted not getting on board sooner.  Along these lines we have had some turmoil, recently, that became little more than an inconvenience because we were prepared."


Im gonna make up some numbers for this teaching moment.  2011: $60,000  2012: $50,000  2013: $100,000  2014: $70,000  2015: $60,000  2016: $75,000  2017: $90,000  2017 is the highest number since 2013. But before we had 2017 data, we only had up to 2016 data. In 2016, 2016 was the highest number since 2013.   We couldn't say the same about 2015 though. In 2015, 2014 was the highest number since 2013.   Such short timetables are kinda ridiculous to even claim. This type of number is only meaningful if its a big number of years like biggest deficit since 1953 (60ish years ago)


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.npr.org/2017/05/24/529852301/boom-time-again-for-u-s-oil-industry-thanks-to-opec) reduced by 79%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Oil producers across the country are watching to see what OPEC does at its meeting in Vienna this week, since the cartel of oil-exporting countries has recently played a big role in turning around a two-year U.S. slump.  > There are more than twice as many U.S. rigs drilling for oil as a year ago, a turnaround that&#039;s felt keenly in places like the Bakken oil patch in North Dakota.  > In the dizzying boom-bust cycle of the oil industry, things were crazy busy here a few years back, when a barrel of oil was around $100. But that led to a surge in production that flooded the market, pushing the price of oil down.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6ejcc3/boom_time_again_for_us_oil_industry_thanks_to_opec/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~133536 tl;drs so far."") | [Theory](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31bfht/theory_autotldr_concept/) | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **Oil**^#1 **Dakota**^#2 **price**^#3 **U.S.**^#4 **Job**^#5"


Some (most) credit cards have a way to get a one-time use number. If that is an available option for one of your cards, that is probably the way to do the very risky transaction. These numbers can be good for only one purchase, or for multiple purchases with a single vendor. This will limit your exposure because they won't have access to your entire account. Also review your fraud protections with your credit card. With the single use number, it won't matter if you use the electronic form or the email. Just make sure you keep the confirmation email or a screen capture of the form.


You should pull your credit report from all the credit reporting agencies annually to make sure only the accounts you know of are being reported.


CitiBank offers a chip card.  It's not a chip and pin, but a chip and sign, however it worked well for my all transations.  Just call and ask for a 'world credit card' with a chip. https://creditcards.citi.com/credit-cards/citi-thankyou-premier-card/


"This is a funny article.  This kid is riding around talking to people who don't want to sell.  If they wanted to sell, they'd call a realtor.  Sounds like he can't afford what's already on the market. 23-year-olds typically don't own.  This is the flip side of the ""wealth effect.""  The middle class housing has appreciated so much, millennials can't afford to buy them.  I think there's quite an overhang, and prices should fall as the boomers need to sell, and millennials have more resources."


Dollar cost averaging is an great way to diversify your investment risk.  There's mainly 2 things you want to achieve when you're saving for retirement: 1) Keep your principal investment; 2) Grow it.  The best methods recommended by most financial institutions are as follows:  1) Diversification;  2) Re-balance. There are a lot of additional recommendations, but these are my main take away.  When you dollar cost average, you're essentially diversifying your exchange risk between the value of the funds you're investing.   Including the ups and downs of the value of the underlying asset, may actually be re-balancing.  Picking your asset portfolio: 1) You generally want to include within your 401k or any other invest, classes of investments that do not always move in total correlation as this allows you to diversify risk; 2) I'm making a lot of assumptions here - since you may have already picked your asset classes.  Consider utilizing the following to tell you when to buy or sell your underlying investment: 1) Google re-balance excel sheet to find several examples of re-balance tools to help you always buy low and sell high;   2) Enter your portfolio investment; 3) Utilize the movement to invest in the underlying assets based on market movement; and 4) Execute in an emotionless way and stick to your plan.  Example -  Facts 1) I have 1 CAD and 1 USD in my 401k.  Plan I will invest 1 dollar in the ratio of 50/50 - forever.   Let's start in 2011 since we were closer to par: 2010 - 1 CAD (value 1 USD) and 1 USD (value 1 USD) = 50/50 ratio 2011 start  - 1 CAD ( value .8 USD) and 1 USD (value 1 USD) = 40/60 ratio 2011 - rebalance - invest 1 USD as follows purchase .75 CAD (.60 USD) and purchase .40 USD = total of 1 USD reinvested 2011 end - 1.75 CAD (value 1.4USD) and 1.4 USD (value 1.4 USD) - 50/50 ratio As long as the fundamentals of your underlying assets (i.e. you're not expecting hyperinflation or your asset to approach 0), this approach will always build value over time since you're always buying low and selling high while dollar averaging.  Keep in mind it does reduce your potential gains - but if you're looking to max gain, it may mean you're also max potential loss - unless you're able to find A symmetrical investments.  I hope this helps.


Well, to be fair, they weren't really being patent trolls, which I understand to be entities that sit on patents for stuff that was never produced, just waiting for someone to produce it so that they can sue them.  LEGO may have been unjustified in trying to hold onto their designs (I'm guessing through trying to justify it as a trademark thing and not a patent), but they weren't trolling.


The Coinage Act of 1792 of the Continental Congress established that the lowest money of account for the United States is one-thousandth (1/1000) of a dollar. This sub-unit is the mille (also written mil, mill). Other sub-units  given by the act are the disme for one-tenth (1/10) of a dollar (for which, etymologically, is the origin of the word dime), and the cent for one-hundredth (1/100) of a dollar. The ten-thousandth of the dollar value is taken on account by a few financial organizations, but has no official given term. For the monetary value of USD 27.4955, it may be quoted as twenty-seven dollars, forty-nine cents, and five-and-a-half milles.


"It's all about access to capital: You can borrow against 401ks up to an extent. You can borrow against CDs outside of tax sheltered retirement plans. You can't borrow against an IRA, although there is a situation with a very small time frame that would still be state sanctioned with no tax penalties. I wouldn't recommend it. Annuities come with penalties. I've looked at many possibilities of accessing retirement capital without penalty, and 401k's offer that ability, but its also good to just have savings accounts and investments that are not tax-deferred. Borrowing against 401k pros: http://www.ehow.com/how_2075551_borrow-money-from-401k.html  cons: http://www.investopedia.com/articles/retirement/06/eightreasons401k.asp#axzz29TtJPoXO Outside of your general expenses and play money, money you put toward - say... - a house should be non-tax deferred. Because if you like borrowing, you can always borrow against the house, or any property. The root of the problem is liquidity and access to capital, understanding those fundamental concepts will answer most questions. ""Am I liquid? Yes/No"" ""Can I be liquid without losing money? Yes/No"" As usual, more is more, adjust your priorities accordingly."


Didn't a recent UW study show exactly the opposite? And another from UC Berkeley found the unemployment rate was lower because of the law?  I mean, the seattle area has a 3.3% unemployment rate and restaurants employment, which was supposed to be hardest hit, is up.


What value?  It's bits and bytes.  It's a mechanism for exchange, but so were beaver pelts.  There's literally zero value because it's backed by absolutely nothing other than the full faith and credit of... what, the internet?  It's a huge joke.  People are putting their stock in it, but there was a front page story just yesterday about another crypto currency that went from $300 to $0.10 with a single transaction.  Go ahead, put your life savings in it if you love it so much, but it's insignificant, and it's a joke.  Someone's making money off of selling the shit... if that's not you, you're the fool.


There's an excellent new service called SelfScore that offers US credit cards to international students. They work with students without a credit history and even without an SSN by using other qualifying factors such as major, financial resources in their home country, and employability upon graduation. Worth clarifying: it's neither a secured credit card nor a prepaid card. It's a proper US credit card with no annual fees and a relatively low APR designed to help students build US credit. The spending limit is relatively small but that probably doesn't matter for just building a credit history.


This creates incentive for the employee to contribute more and increases the funds under management of the 401(k) plan. The size of the plan influences the fees that are charged in each of the funds offered. (The more assets under management, the better for those in the plan.) More importantly, 401(k) plans are not allowed to discriminate in favor of highly compensated employees. That discrimination is determined by calculating the average deferrals by your lower compensated employees and comparing them to the average deferrals of your highly compensated employees. If highly compensated employees are saving too much compared to the rest of the pack, they will have some of their contributions returned the next year (with all the tax implications of that). Forcing everyone to contribute 6% to get the full match helps the plan to not fail the discrimination test and protects the highly compensated employees from losing some of their tax deferrals.


"This question was asked over at wilmott.com which is a site for quantitative analysts. Some of the finest minds in the business (I am serious here) pondered the question. the best answer was along the lines of: ""A Gambler generally gambles their own money, a derivatives trader gambles using someone else's"".  There is an important legal difference is that a gambling dept is normally considered a ""debt of honor"", that is not enforceable in a court of law whilst a derivatives contract is considered legally binding. This last bit gets a bit interesting under some jurisdictions because only derivatives contracts involving the delivery of something physical are enforceable, whilst contracts involving settlement with financial instruments are not, so a stock index future would not be recognized."


"How on earth can you possibly know what is going on in individual company X?  The sole exception is if it is your own company. The stock markets of the world are in fact a nest of sharks.  The big sharks essentially make money out of the little sharks.  Some little sharks manage not to be eaten, and grow bigger.  Good luck with that. ""Insider trading"" is, when found out, a crime these days.  But ""insider knowledge"", ""insider hints"", ""knowledge of market sentiment"" and indeed just rumours about a given company are the kinds of things you won't particularly get to hear of in the fog of disinformation, and don't particularly want to waste your time with for a very uncertain loss or gain at the end of the year. The thing I find annoying about mutual funds is that they can be very stupid, and I speculate that it may be the consequence of the marketing on the one hand, and the commission structure on the other.  I started cashing in my funds in late 2007, following the collapse of Northern Rock here in the UK.  The ""2008"" crisis was in fact the slowest economic car crash in history. But very very few mutual funds saw, or seemed to see, the way the wind was blowing, and switch massively to cash. If the punters had the courage to hang on, of course, mostly stocks bounced back in 2009 and 2010.  Moral: remember you can cash your stuff in any time you want."


Basically, any time someone claims they put money into your bank account, or send you a check, or something similar, and then asks you to send money to someone else, it is a scam. What you need to do: 1. Under no circumstances whatsoever must you ever send money to anyone. 2. Talk to your bank and ask them for advice.  The money that gets put into your bank account isn't real. It has been paid with a forged check, or a stolen credit card number, or a hacked or faked bank account. Your bank will figure this out eventually, and then they will take that money away. It may take many weeks, but the money will disappear.  Meanwhile, any money that you send to someone is real. It's your money. When you send it, it is gone. Your bank will hold you to that.  So in your case if they say they pay you $6,000 for a job, but put $10,000 into your bank account and ask you to pass $4,000 on to someone, the $4,000 you pay comes out of your bank account, a long time later the $10,000 comes out of your bank account, and you owe the bank $4,000. Plus sometimes the job involves real work that obviously doesn't pay.  An alternative is that this is money laundering, in which case you would become a criminal by being involved.


It is not the requester's responsibility to guaranty that the bidders make a profit.  Masdar is sovereign wealth money and their interests are not 100% aligned with the profit motive. Winning big projects, keeping the pipeline full and having sufficient market penetration in their backyard is important too.


Every time you buy or sell a share for some price, somebody must have thought that that was exactly the right moment to sell or buy that share at that price (and to trade with you). Every time a trade is made, both sides think they are doing the smart thing. Most of the time, one will turn out to be wrong, the other right. Nothing in your proposed method of trading explains why you would be the side that was right more often. So they'll probably even out. Or maybe there are people in the market who actually do have a slightly better than average method, and you'll be wrong somewhat more often than right. Each trade has transaction costs. If you simply hang on to your shares, that's more or less the same as evening out good trades and bad trades, but without the transaction costs.


Here are the general guidelines on what you should report and pay - but the overall rule is that if it's not a business-related cost then you can't claim it. In your example, a client meeting may warrant a claim for 'entertaining clients' which could be claimed as a business cost - but buying yourself a coffee to get out of the house isn't a business cost.


Because more than a few utility companies have overcharged me in the past, and with online banking they can automatically deduct from my account. With a check I can control how much I pay them. It's much easier to fight a charge when they don't already have your money.


Subprime Auto Loan Defaults on the Rise  [https://youtu.be/4XrdNmgon2c] Jul 30, 2017  Bill Black the white collar criminologist says It is a very severe problem for consumers who are going to lose not only their cars, but their credit ratings


I wasn't going to come out and say that, but you're right. We all know if he does come out with something it will be that we need to make it cheaper to hire people. Now we'll have a bunch of people who have jobs, but are still below the poverty line.  He's replacing one problem (unemployment) with another (even more rampant poverty). Not only that, it's unlikely that it will even have an overreaching impact. The unemployment rate in India is 10% and they have very little rules and regulations regarding workers.  Borrowing at low rates and investing in infrastructure worked out really well in the past. Both Democrats and Republicans have done it, and it always works out well.  I don't know why it's completely off the table right now for them.


Don't overthink it. As an employee, whether of your own corporation or of someone else, you get a salary and there are deductions taken out. As the owner of a business you get (hopefully) business profits as well. And, in general, you often have other sources of income from investments, etc. Your estimated tax payments are based on the difference between what was withheld from your salary and what you will owe, based on salary, business income, and other sources. So, in essence, you just add up all the income you expect, estimate what the tax bill will be, and subtract what's been withheld. That's your estimated tax payment.


Trade work has a stigma associated with it. Many millenials believe that a college degree is required to get a decent salaried job in this market.   That mindset is understandable. After all, why would you voluntarily pay tens of thousands in tuition and tens of thousands more in loans if it didn't lead to getting a higher paying job?


As much as people on the internet and ZH-like blogs like to harp on auto deliquencies and other narrow metrics as broader statements about how life around us is all a sham, I feel this article does a good job at discussing the mitigants here.  Notably: 1) that the sub-prime auto market is rather small, so while delinquencies may rise it won't represent a catalyst for a broader financial crisis.   2) The securitized products Santander and others are putting together are structured in a way to account for these defaults and loss rates, so while the relative uptick in default rates is interesting to note, it doesn't necessarily spell doom in absolute terms.   3) The fact that many auto dealers don't verify income isn't uncommon and in fact an industry standard practice due to point #2 above. The statement these dealers have been lying about incomes and/or is not verifying incomes certainly pulls at the heart strings of the 2008 Housing Crisis, but when discussed within the context of how the auto lending market works, it isn't nearly as scary as those statements would suggest in isolation.


One possibility that I use: I set up an LLC and get paid through that entity. Then I set up a payroll service through Bank of America and set up direct deposit so that it is free.  I pay myself at 70% of my hourly rate based on the number of hours I work, and the payroll service does all the calculations for me and sets up the payments to the IRS.  Typically money is left over in my business account. When tax time rolls around, I have a W2 from my LLC and a 1099 from the company I work for. I put the W2 into my personal income, and for the business  I enter the revenue on the 1099 and the payroll expenses from paying myself; the left over in the business account is taxed as ordinary income. Maybe it's overkill, but setting up the LLC makes it possible to (a) set up a solo 401(k) and put up to $51k away tax-free, and (b) I can write off business expenses more easily.


Custom baby boxes are available in the market because people like to have customizable baby packaging for keeping the various goods. You can have packaging of various sizes, styles and shapes such as polka dot boxes are considered best for this purpose because these provide soothing effects to the eyes and look decent and appealing as well.


Despite a fair number of views, no one besides @mbhunter answered, so I'll gather the findings of my own research here. Hopefully, this will help others in similar situations. If you spot any errors, please let me know!


This thread just depressed the hell out of me.  I'm a junior year finance major in college.  And I was barely able answer half these questions.  Can someone enlighten me to some resources I can study so I don't embarrass myself during my upcoming summer internship interview.  Maybe with a little bit of preference to venture capital?


"It is not clear when you mean ""company's directors"" are they also majority owners.   There are several reasons for Buy;   Similarly there are enough reasons for sell;   Quite often the exact reasons for Buy or Sell are not known and hence blindly following that strategy is not useful. It can be one of the inputs to make a decision."


"Let's talk  innovation. You say that 80% of people will provide 100% of societies needs. Perhaps. But what about society's desires? Why, some of the finest minds in business are working and investing right now to exploit the natural resources of outer space. Tourism, mining, transport, why the sky is no longer the limit! See Spacex, Virgin Galactic, etc. You can't tell me you wouldn't go on a space-cation. Well, I'll bet that would be a great source of jobs that NO ONE does right now. Space valet, space bellhop, space waiter, space hotel manager, PLUS we need pilots to get people up and down, engineers to build the hotels, etc. etc. etc.  Edit: As to your point about wealth flowing upwards, that's just a problem with laissez-faire capitalism in general: if left to their own devices, wealthy people tend to hoard wealth imo. I think tax and spending reform would go a long way to allieviating the ""upward"" flow of capital over the last few years."


Yahoo Finance provides the proper closing price.  HP's historical data around the split date can be found here. The open, high and low of the day are wrong prior the split, but the closing price is right and for HP, it was $26.96 USD.  The next day the closing price was $13.83 USD.


"I've only really seen the social network so i'm no expert.  Didn't he only get noticed because he made the other website, so in a roundabout way he only get ""lucky"" because he did something out of the normal.  If he didn't do that other website he'd never have been noticed, so i guess we need to ask is it luck that he made that website, luck that he was noticed or was there an element to skill.  If you want to call it luck then almost everything ever done comes down to luck, lucky my teacher had a good day when they mark exams, luck that i got a question i knew the answer to.  What is luck in this sense?"


In the UK we've been able to order groceries online for years. Its always surprising when otherwise forward countries can't.   We have two systems, straight to our door; or, click and collect where you choose a pick up time and go to the store where they hand you your shopping. The second one is useful for me so I can grab anything else I've forgotten


The Dems use to use fiscal years (October 2008 through september 2009) to put all the big first year Obama expenses under bush (tarp but not the tarp repayment, the bailouts, and stimulus).  Now that they want to show decline, they must be including the bailouts and stimulus under Obama.


"One problem is the ""apple"" or ""PC"" solutions that exist now... you must be on the net to use system A or B or it stops working  You have to subscribe to get system A or continuously use lube A+(ala printer fluid) for your cyberlimbs...  You can only use amazoon net to read your daily new/upgrades/required.  You are connected to a permanent ""plan"" with minimum lien on your internal organs if you dont keep up payments  There would be other major problems like rejection or die off, then you are left with a septic mess and less quality of life or you become a permanent junky of anti rejection drugs.  Massive opportunities, we are in the business reddit after all, for the near future.   The question then starts to be does enhancement become a necessary  evil, when does it stop being a tool and become a part of you.  Some scientists already consider owning an Iphone as being enhanced cyber beings, when is the last time you remembered a phone number for instance.  Remembered someone's birthday lately or did FB or your calendar on your pc remind you, this means you are already enhanced!  Messing with the meat is a barrier but we already sculpt and ""enhance"" with surgery, use antibiotics and artificial insemination.  This is another step and each one will seem more momentous as we go to the old people but future generations will not even care we were worried."


I am assuming you are an NRI from tax perspective. Any income NRI earns is non-taxable in India. It is irrelevant whether the funds were transferred to India or not and whether they were transferred to NRO or NRE account is not relevant.


Really?  Care to back up your claim there?  Most employers are looking for MBAs.  Please explain why - although the competition is doing EXACTLY THAT! you wouldn't want to be on the same level.  I got it dude, you may have graduated a few years back (like me) when things were different and they wanted experience first, but that's not the case today.  Things have changed, and every Tom, Dick, and Harry has an MBA, so if you don't have one, it's kind of like not having any education.  Remember how it used to work if you didn't have a Bachelor's?  Same for an MBA these days.


Will 2 millions dollars check to be cash? Will a bank convert a check to cash?  In my experience, no.  Even for small checks.   Unless you happen to have a VERY good relationship with your banker (read as: have an existing large bank balance.)   The exception is if you go to the bank the check is drawn on.   But even then, I doubt they'll cash a $2M dollar check. Can you deposit a $2M dollar check?  Most definitely. How long will 2 millions dollars check to be cash? Depends on your bank's policies, relationship with you, and the origination of the check.  You'll need to talk to the exact bank in question to find out.  Some guidelines from my own experiences: Out of country checks will take quite awhile, say 4 weeks, even for trivial amounts.  I'm not sure what a $2M size would do.   Beyond that situation, it will likely depend on whether you have more money than the check's worth in your bank accounts.  If so, they may be willing to give you cash in a few days.  Or if you only want some of the money as cash in a few days, that might be possible. If the bank couldn't cash for him, will the bank give him some of cash   for example, $500,000 for now, and the rest wait to be cash at later   time like 24 hours or 1 week? Unless you already have a lot of money in your relationship with the bank, I think it is HIGHLY UNLIKELY they will let you have ANY of the money in 24 hours.  You MIGHT get some of it in a week.   The issue will be that such a large check will be viewed as having a high chance of being fraudulent, so they will want to be exceptionally conservative.


I sell electricity. When I send you a bill, my actual profit makes up a tiny portion of the bill - but I've already paid the four other groups (G, T, D, Gov) and my other costs are what they are. If I don't get paid, that's my problem - the generator got paid, the transmission and distribution companies get paid, and the government sure as hell gets paid. So I'm easily out $99 on a $100 bill.


Perhaps your view of the world should be *more* calloused? It seems like you think the world owes you something...it doesn't owe you shit.  You could die in a ditch and the world wouldn't give 2 shits.  Maybe the world IS calloused; has that crossed your mind?  Have you traveled outside of the college campuses in Northeast US?  Shit can get pretty crazy out there in the real world.    And you still haven't even put forth an argument, or idea, or verbalized what you are pissed about.  Are you just mad at the world?  Think the system is unfair?  Just want other people's stuff?  What change would you make in the world?  . .    >I hope that you never have to face adversity in your life.  I did.  >I hope they tell you to just simply get a better job, I hope they tell you to take responsibility for your own life  They did.


Everyone likes to hate on AT&T, but really, all the major four brands are the same. I get the same amount of dropped calls on both Verizion and AT&T to be honest.  I feel like Sprint charges a bit more, but they don't have a cap on their data plans, so if you do multiple GB per month they are the best choice.  Otherwise, just go with whichever carrier is the best in your area. It varries from state to state, but generally AT&T is great is most mid-sized cities, and Verizon is great in the suburbs or country.   I can't speak about T-mobile since I don't know anyone with it


I'd add that bigger banks tend to have experience doing more complicated things. As an example, my local credit union (~12 offices), simply didn't have the software to wire money to a Canadian bank, as where Chase did.  The Canadian routing number wasn't in the format of a US institution, and their software user interface just didn't allow for that number to be entered.  Also, most smaller banks don't have international toll free (in-country) numbers for foreign access. Smaller banks also tend to have less sophisticated business banking tools and experience. If you take a Treasury bond approval to a small bank, they'll generally look at you like you have three heads. So the international side of things is definitely in the favor of big banks; they have a lot more money to dump on services.


I don't think you can always assume a 12-month time horizon.  Sometimes, the analyst's comments might provide some color on what kind of a time horizon they're thinking of, but it might be quite vague.


The fifth in our series of blogs on what keeps retail CIOs awake at night focuses on the big question of ’out of the box’ or customisation.  The classic question for an Retail IT Director a generation ago was whether to buy or build a retail software solutions. Traditional IT departments were structured typically with large development teams who were quite capable of developing large scale applications as well as modifications to existing systems.  The classic question for an Retail IT Director a generation ago was whether to buy or build a retail software solutions. Traditional IT departments were structured typically with large development teams who were quite capable of developing large scale applications as well as modifications to existing systems.  Moving forward to the present and the recent history of apps, out-sourcing, agile methodology, off-shoring and near-shoring and the question has changed more into whether it is better to deploy a ready built solution in ‘vanilla’ flavor, i.e. as it comes out of the box. Or whether it is preferable to take the application in standard form and customise it to meet the particular needs of our business.


One of the main tax loopholes more readily available to the wealthy in the U.S. is the fact that long-term capital gains are taxed at a much lower rate. Certainly, people making less than $250,000/year can take advantage of this as well, but the fact is that people making, say, $60,000/year likely have a much smaller proportion of their income available to invest in, say, indexed mutual funds or ETFs. You may wish to read Wikipedia's article on capital gains tax in the United States. You can certainly make the argument that the preferential tax rate on capital gains is appropriate, and the Wikipedia article points out a number of these. Nevertheless, this is one of the main mechanisms whereby people with higher wealth in the U.S. typically leverage the tax code to their advantage.


"You are confining the way you and the other co-founders are paid for guaranteeing the loan to capital shares. Trying to determine payments by equity distribution is hard. It is a practice that many small companies particularly the ones in their initial stage fall into. I always advise against trying to make payments with equity, weather it is for unpaid salary or for guaranteeing a loan such as your case. Instead of thinking about a super sophisticated algorithm to distribute the new shares between the cofounders and the new investors, given a set of constraints, which will most probably fail to make the satisfactory split, you should simply view the co-founders as debt lenders for the company and the shareholders as a capital contributor.  If the co-founders are treated as debt lenders, it will be much easier to determine the risk compensation for guaranteeing the loan because it is now assessed in monetary units and this compensation is equal to the risk premium you see fit ""taking into consideration the probability of default "". On the other hand, capital contributors will gain capital shares as a percentage of the total value of the company after adding SBA loan."


The CBOE had a great article on this. I will search for it and edit. The normal dividends are not adjusted. Which is why you see early exercise of just out of the money options sometimes. To get that dividend. A special dividend, say a $50 stock with $1/yr dividend but now has a $3 one time dividend would likely result in an option strike adjustment.


Company culture is about the employees, not objects or events. If you look for good, friendly co-workers who can communicate, you'll have less problems with mean people who make work suck. If work doesn't suck and you enjoy being there, then it'll seem like less of a chore and you'll want to spend time there and be creative.


"Just to add about using debit card as ""credit"" vs ""debit"" way: In addition to the difference of having to enter the PIN when using ""debit"" mode (vs having to sign in ""credit"" mode), for stores that offer cash back (i.e. get cash out of your account at the same time as paying), you can only get cash back when using ""debit"" mode."


This is either laundering money or laundering non-money.  All the other answers point out how a cheque or bank transfer will take days to actually clear.  That is a red herring! There are lots of ways to illegally transfer real money out of existing accounts.  Stolen cheque books, stolen banking details (partly in connection with stolen smartphones and credit cards) and cards, money transfers from other people duped in a similar manner as you are: it is much easier to steal money than invent it, and it takes quite longer until stolen rather than invented money will blow up at the banks. All of those payments will likely properly clear but not leave you in actual legal possession of money.  People will notice the missing money and notify police and banks and you will be on the hook for paying back all of it. Cheques and transfers from non-existing accounts, in contrast, tend to blow up very fast and thus are less viable for this kind of scam as the time window for operating the scam is rather small. Whether or not the cheque actually clears is about as relevant of whether or not the Rolls Royce you are buying for $500 because the owner has an ingrown toe nail and cannot press down the accelerator any more has four wheels. Better hope for the Rolls to be imaginary because then you'll only be out of $500 and that's the end of it.  If it is real, your trouble is only starting.