"Yes, it is common for investors to make equity investments in technology companies pre-IPO.  There are technology incubators like Y Combinator that exist to make ""angel"" investments, which are early-stage equity investments in private technology companies (these investments are sometimes in notes that are convertible to equity, but are very similar to a stock investment).  Wealthy individuals can also make angel investments (e.g. Peter Thiel made a $500K investment in Facebook in 2004 for 10.2% of the company).  Additionally, venture capital firms exist to make equity investments in private companies.  In the US, you need to be an Accredited Investor to make private equity investments (income greater than $200K or net worth greater than $1 million), but you probably need a lot more money than the minimum and connections to get in on these deals in reality."


Considering I'm putting 30% down and having my father cosign is there   any chance I would be turned down for a loan on a $100k car? According to BankRate, the average credit score needed to buy a new car is 714, but they also show average interest rates at 6.39% for new-car loans to people with credit scores in the 601-660 range. High income certainly helps offset credit score to some extent.  Not every bank/dealership does things the same way. Being self-employed you'd most likely be required to show 2 years of tax returns, and they'd use those as a basis for your income rather than whatever you have made recently. If using a co-signer, their income matters. Another key factor is debt to income ratio, if too much of someone's income is already spoken for by other debts a lender will shy away. So, yes, there's a chance, given all the information we don't know and the variability with lender policies, that you could be turned down for a car loan. How should I go about this? If you're set on pursuing the car loan, just go talk to some lenders. You'll want to shop around for a good rate anyway, so no need to speculate just go find out. Include the dealership as a potential financing option, they can have great rates. Personally, I'd get a much cheaper car. Your insurance premium on a 100k car will be quite high due to your age. You might be rightly confident in your earning potential, but nothing is guaranteed, situations can change wildly in short order. A new car is not a good investment or a value-retaining asset, so why bother going into debt for one if you don't have to? If you buy something in cash now, you could upgrade in a few years without financing if your earning prediction holds and would save quite a bit in car insurance and interest over the years between.


"Alright, a few things:  1. The ""crisis"" is likely a recession type thing. There are arguments to be made for avoiding debt (less ""hurt"" from a downturn in sales), or for taking on the debt (rack up the sales early, take the hit, then press on). I'm in the latter category; everyone's going to take a hit, not everyone is going to have the inertia from previous rounds to sustain themselves through it.  2. ""In that case I might just hold off until before that date..."" This only makes sense if you know exactly when it's going to happen. If you don't, then you're making a large gamble. Even if you do, you're sacrificing growth for security.   3. The balance sheet shouldn't have *too* much of an effect. Debt loads will. Debt coverage and interest coverage will.   4. Debt is a tool. It amplifies losses AND gains. A company with a lot of debt and a good sales year will outperform a company with no debt and an excellent sales year. You're in a closed-system of competition. You need to be hyper-aggressive.  5. **""There are only two things a company does: innovation and marketing. The rest are all cost.""**  6. Assuming this is a manufacturing type of company (i.e. Capsim), pay attention to your R&D acutely, max out your marketing budget, and pay close attention to your capacity and production. Read the rules to ensure they make sense, and make a model/spreadsheet if it makes sense. Coordinate with team members rigorously.   7. **Win.**"


Mhmm, so it's not cheaper... you might want to shoot an email off to the execs at BK, I think they might be interested in your theory that they aren't going to save money in this merger.   They were dying out there (in the states) and they chose a Canadian rescue boat called Tims. Would it have appeased everyone if the US company just went belly up in the long-run?


A few things: time in trade, price maximum move against you during that time, price maximum move for you during that time, Where you got out in relation to maximum of the move (how much of the move did you capture in that trade -- from lowest to highest), what was your risk to return (R) -- return / risk.


"Target Date Funds automatically change their diversification balance over time, rebalancing and reassigning new contributions to become progressively more protective of what you've already earned. (As opposed to other funds which continue to maintain the same balance of investments until you explicitly move the money around.) You can certainly make that same evolution manually; we all used to do that before target funds were made available, and many of us still do so. I'm still handling the relative allocations by hand. But I'm also close to my retirement target, so a target fund wouldn't be changing that much more anyway, and since I'm already tracking the curve... Note that if you feel a bit braver, or a bit more cautious, than the ""average investor"" the target fund was designed for, you can tweak the risk/benefit curve of a Target Date Fund by selecting a fund with a target date a bit later or earlier, respectively, than the date at which you intend to start pulling money back out of the fund."


>If not, why should I subsidize your hobby with my tax dollars?  Well, first off, the roads are more than just hobbies.  They really do go places. A lot of the roads in my area would be unprofitable, and people live down those roads.  What happens when a company decides that road is too expensive to maintain but decides to keep ownership?  The people have to move?    >Not necessarily true. If private corporations can be more efficient than government, it doesn't have to cost more.  It doesn't *have to,* but it's unrealistic to expect that they won't take a profit from it.  but do you really think that if a company has a monopoly, they're going to charge you the bare minimum they can?  If you have no choice but to pay tolls or for driving passes for certain cities, and you can only get them from a single company, what motivation does that company have to keep them affordable and readily available?  They're going to do like any company would and find that point of maximum profitability between cost of permit and number of permits.   Then there's the whole reality that you will STILL pay for roads you don't use.  If one company owns multiple roads, they're going to charge you enough money to expand roads, to fix up other dilapidated roads, etc.  More profitable roads will be used to offset less profitable roads, etc.  Basically, if there's a new neighborhood, and they build a road to it... if you've been paying that company, they're using your money to build that road.  You're not going to pay less for the use of roads, you're going to pay more.


"Generally speaking, the ""we lose good people if we don't pay more"" at organizations where productivity is impossible to measure are usally horsehit.  The actual situation is usually: ""The next person I hire won't do both of our jobs if I can't give them a lot of money, if I have to pay them less I will actually have to work""."


In addition to evaluating the business (great answer), consider the potential payoff. If bonds pay off in the 5-10% range, the S&P500 has averged 10.5%. You should be expecting a payoff of 15-20% to invest in something riskier than the stock market.  That means that if you invest $10k, then in 5 years you'll need to get out $25K (20% returns over 5 years).   If you get less than this much in 5 years, the risk-to-reward ratio probably rules this out as a good investment.


Capital One 360. No minimums balance, no fees. Everything's online. Make deposits using an app or an image of the check. ATMs are free almost everywhere.


snapzsnapz.com is the premier photo booth rental in Fort Worth where you can make your own party pics! snapzsnapz.com offers the highest quality photo booth with modern touch-screen technology and professional lab quality prints in just 12 seconds! Check out http://www.snapzsnapz.com/the-booth/ for further information about their photo booths.


What's easy? Debt, personal, marketing related finance.   What we look for in hires is simple though - modeling skills (everyone thinks they're better than they actually are) and case analysis (same story). If you can get those two under your belt, and a good school under your name you should be good.


"Understand that buying a Starbucks gift card at the grocery store to receive 6% back on your coffee rather than 6% back on your groceries is an exploit of a flaw in the benefits program, not a feature.  It's definitely not a blanket yes or no answer, the only way to find out is to try. Separately, I don't know why you would find this ""concerning.""  This will vary greatly between merchants and cards.  There will always be new points churning exploits, they don't last forever and you can't expect every customer service rep to be well versed in methods employed to juice cardmember programs. Hell, a number of years ago one person figured out that he could buy rolls of $1 coins from the US treasury with free shipping and no additional fees.  This guy was literally buying thousands of dollars of cash each month to deposit and pay his credit card bill; completely against the terms of the treasury program for distributing the $1 coins.  A number of people had their cards and points/cash back revoked for that one."


Verify if a local bank offers to participate in different stock markets - big companies like apple or facebook often gets traded on different markets - like Xetra (germany) or SIX (Switzerland). That being said I'd recommend you to rethink this strategy and maybe using some products offered by your bank - for 1000$ you will quickly drown in fees (my bank requires 40$ for every trade. If you buy and sell them you already lost nearly 10% of your investment)


"Chicken or Egg? -----  Demand alone is not enough.   Else famines would never happen, food would just magically appear in response to people's (overwhelming) desire to consume same.  Likewise, Supply alone is insufficient as well: there are plenty of products and services that are produced, but which are unwanted and go unused.  An ECONOMY is just a conceptual aggregate of countless thousands, millions and billions of individual (and often distinct) acts of matching up Supply WITH Demand.  The fundamental error of aggregate-level ""economics"" is imagining that all of those interactions can be controlled as if they were somehow homogenous when they are everything but."


The investment return for a given strategy is directly proportional to the amount invested. Invest twice as much, profit (or lose) twice as much. It's a straight multiplier. However, there are some strategies which are less risky with a larger investment, and some investments which have a minimum unit of purchase that puts them out of reach of smaller investors.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/08/07/trump-tpp-deal-withdrawal-trade-effects-215459) reduced by 97%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Trump&#039;s decision to walk away from the TPP has stoked uncertainty about U.S. trade policy and, more notably, the president&#039;s commitment to rural America.  > The county&#039;s residents are grappling with life under a Trump presidency and all its unanswered questions: Will the president&#039;s next tweet about trade send commodity prices crashing? Will Trump ever follow through on his promise to create new opportunities through bilateral trade deals? And, even more pressing: Will the new plant that Prestage is building be able to hire a second shift of workers, helping families who have struggled through the recent agricultural downturn?  > Not only did the remaining TPP countries reaffirm their commitment to retain the benefits of the deal, but Chile and its Latin American trade allies in the Pacific Alliance announced their own efforts to advance regional trade integration by pursuing trade deals with other countries.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6s6hxa/trumps_trade_pullout_roils_rural_america_after/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~185408 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **Trade**^#1 **U.S.**^#2 **deal**^#3 **export**^#4 **TPP**^#5"


It really is confusing.  Buffalo Wild Wings is shitty food for too much money in a setting that's uncomfortable to be in (loud open space with too many TV screens) with horrible service.  Are you supposed to be stupid and want that or are you stupid for not wanting that?


Obviously you don't know the full extent of our company, but I'd be forgoing my salary for a year. Is that worth it to get 10%? I mean assuming it becomes a 1 Million Dollar Idea, I'd get 100k while he gets 700k, working the same amount of time. Then i'd get put on salary.


Adriana Fine Jewelry is specialized in all kinds of customized jewelry for males and females. So we are glad to showcase an first-rate choice of personalized earrings as properly. Hearts are famous in jewelry. The Gold heart necklace is beautifully expressive and is regularly used as Valentine's day items of affection. But the coronary heart shape symbolizes a extremely good deal more than a as soon as a 12 months vacation. It is a time-commemorated expression of love and devotion. Adriana Fine Jewelry has a massive series of Gold studs, silver and diamond jewelry, that can healthy your every price range and opportunity. More than six hundred designs in gold and other high priced earrings with and without diamonds are displayed on our website. For extra data approximately any kind gold earrings, you could visit our website.


He was never good at what he did. He had a lot idiots that would listen though. And that got him swings in the very tiny bio sector. Look at his calls. He was wrong so many times where he was able to pull off a quick trade. He nearly ruined a company saying their drug would never work and crashed their stock. Of course the drug passed approval process the next year.   Let's just wait for his fan boys to bombard here and see how they spin this one!


I see way more Chipotles in places like California than I do in Middle America, where humans also have taste buds. Where I live, most Chipotle patrons are obese Latinos or Armenians who, for some unknown reason, aren't spending half the money to eat a far superior burrito a half-mile away in any direction.   I wonder if Mexican food in all of America will eventually be as bad as Thai food in Los Angeles or Mexican/Chinese food in South Dakota.


Finding a Luxury Property with the Help of G1 Property Mooloolaba is not at all a tough hack to be pulled off as a user friendly interface is provided so that there is a stable and lucid way of communication in between the authority and the clients concerned.


"People in the service industry wouldn't have been able to live even nearby which is part of why it was raised. Greedy bastards almost never come off money they don't have to. There's a minimum wage because without it those bastards would pay even less. We'd have no middle class without a minimum. The ""free market"" is a myth."


Walmart's success is built on the backs of these so called low skill workers. Last time I checked Walmart was making huge profits every quarter so maybe the people who are doing all of the hard work deserve a living wage. Also there are several trained skills Walmart employees have. For example to work in produce and the deli you have to be trained in safe food practices. A Walmart employee also has to have time management skills. Employees are often are assigned multiple tasks in several departments. Also the computer systems must be learned. If I handed you a telzon I doubt you would be able to check to see if an item was in stock and if it wasn't how to order a new one. Also anyone can be a cashier but can anyone be a fast efficient cashier. You are also putting your body at risk especially when you are tasked with unloading trucks or stocking shelves. Several of my ex coworkers have work related injuries the most common are bad knees, backs, and shoulders. In short if every Walmart worker in the nation went on strike Walmart would find it impossible to find enough skilled workers to fill their rolls. Sure they could replace them easily but it would take months for the new employees to learn the necessary skills and while they are learning Walmart would have incredibly long lines and lots of unsatisfied customers.  In an unrelated note please excuse any spelling or formatting errors I am typing this on my phone.


Wal-mart pays their employees so little, many of the workers need to be on foodstamps, in fact, the store has programs helping their workers apply for foodstamps.  Are you ok with that? The only reason wal-mart gets away with paying them so little is because the government is basically propping them up by paying the employees the missing part of their salary that actually allows them to survive on the shitty pay they give....


"Where can I download all stock symbols of all companies ""currently listed"" and ""delisted"" as of today? That's incredibly similar . You can also do it with a Bloomberg terminal but there's no need to pay to do this because he data changes so slowly."


No time for random fights.   I'm busy creating jobssssss.  But snark aside.  How do you fill the gap between what people require to survive and what they actually get.   Clearly it's better for society as a whole that the indigent and poor be taken care of because the alternate is much more costly long term (for profit prison system yea!)  I would posit that you aren't going to do that by raising minimum wage.   It's not the long term course correction that we need.    While you probably have a picture in your mind of me being hard right cheering during Fox news broadcasts that would be incorrect.  I'm still pissed the DNC shafted Sanders during the primaries and we ended up with Trump as a direct result of their arrogance.


re life insurance Multi-purpose vehicles generally don't work as well as just going with single purpose, well except for the person/company selling them.  'whole life' plans are a great deal for the insurance company and agent, not so much for you. The easiest way to prove this to yourself is to get the difference in price between a simple 'term life' product that would be appropriate to provide for your family in the event you die.  Then get the price for a 'whole life' product with the same benefits, and what it would be worth after say 20 or 30 years. Take the difference you would have to pay, figure what it would be worth if invested conservatively over the same period, figuring in some conservative figure for compound growth such as 6 percent (what you could get from a good long term savings bond or index based mutual fund).   The last time I did this, the pure value of the money alone, without ANY interest was within something like 80 % of the value of the whole life policy.. adding in even a conservative amount of interest turned it into a no brainer. the whole life plan was terrible as in investment vehicle.  I was far far better off using term life and investing the difference.


Better suited to /r/personalfinance, but your first step should be to find a new job. Don't wait to get canned in 60 days, do it now.  Other than that, don't spend any money you don't need to. You're in a good spot because not everyone has the luxury of knowing 60 days in advance that their position will be eliminated.


This may not exactly answer your question but, as a small business owner, I would highly recommend having a professional handle your taxes. It is worth the money to have it done correctly rather than doing something wrong and getting audited or worse having penalties assessed and owing more than you thought would be possible. I would recommend this especially if this is how you make your primary income, you can always write it off as a business expense.


"Such economical system is the corporatism (well, a fascist poorly designed version).  It is basically a system between free-market and communism, but in practice it is usually located on the far right, beyond conservative capitalism.  -  In corporatism, the state is seen like ""an organic body"" and the different social classes of citizens and state organizations, as the organs of such body.  It is an planned economy but not egalitarian nor distributional (unlike socialism and communism), also inspired by Marxism.  -  In theory this system should serve to create an equitable and just society, such as socialism and communism, but also libertarian.  And yet it has never been used as originally intended. This variant that has been applied is called ""fascist corporatism"".  In theory there are many more models that could work, and some aren't authoritarian, but none has been applied.  -  As a curiosity, the book ""beyond the brave new world"" shows an authoritarian corporatist system taken to the extreme."


BAM set up HBO GO, and they're still using a flash player... had to enable flash in chrome to watch the GOT premier. BAMtech is bad with the front end, which spells disaster with a kids service. Even with all BAMtech resources firing on all pistons to get the service rolling it's gonna be a slow roll out. Let's not forget that Netflix came to fruition because it was easier than pirating. Different market with children, but so many are content with YouTube. I know this is a land grab, but I would be surprised if this pays off in less than five years.


"As you do not have any relation to your Uncle, It will be treated as ""Gift"" to your uncle. He has to pay a Gift Tax on the amount received.  Under the Gift Tax, if the total value of Gifts [including assets like shares etc or Immovable assets like land / house etc] exceeds Rs 50,000/- for a year, all the amount will be taxable at the income tax slab. If your Uncle has no other source of Income, then in the current financial year, the zero percent slab is till Rs 3,00,000. Hence No Tax."


Yes, I saw that. I completely disagree. The entire concept of trickle down economics is that the money is given to the rich and their spending it will trickle down through the economy. How can you not conclude that is anything other than wealth distribution?


"No, having to borrow money does not necessarily mean a company will have a hard time paying the interest on it. Similarly, having to take out a mortgage on a house does not mean a person will not be able to make their mortgage payments. Borrowing money can be a way to spend future money instead of present money (at a cost, of course). A company might not have all that money at the moment, but that in no way implies they won't have it in the future. And as you allude to in your question where you talk about ""funding some … plans"", a company might be able to grow itself—possibly increasing future profits—by borrowing money."


I mean...Sure, tomatoes are fairly constant, but there is always innovation in supply chain, farming technology, etc. I'm not an expert in the grocery industry, but I would bet that there are many innovations to be made in organic, sustainable farming.  These are all reliant on a thriving grocery market. If there was a total monopoly there would be no incentive to improve how our groceries are produced or delivered.


There will quickly come a time when buying to rebalance is impractical. Consider, you save 10%, and at some point, you have 5x your income saved. (you earn $50K and have accumulated $250K). A simple allocation, 50/50, so $125K stock, $125K bonds. Now, in a year the market is up much over 4%, your $5K deposit will not be enough to balance. Earlier on, the method may work just fine, later on, not so much. Edit - The above is an example, to show that there will come a time when deposits are not enough to rebalance. The above single year produces a 52/48 split, and the rebalance deposits more than 2 years. If the market continues to rise a reasonable amount, 2 years later you are even more out of balance, perhaps 56/44.  I chose reasonable numbers as a starting point, just 5X income saved, and a 10% annual deposit. In the end, you can waive off any divergence from your target. That's your choice.


If you start measuring deficits as a percentage of GDP, by the time a President actually signs off on a budget, the Dems are far better at managing to reduce deficits than Republicans.  If however you count the deficits commonly left to Presidents in their first year, the dems are only moderately better at reducing deficits.


I was with you until you started talking about the state doing this. How about we repeal some of the regulations you cited, and we allow more competition. The natural monopoly bullshit is exactly that. Before the governments started granting monopolies, there were multiple electric companies in each major city. This is EXACTLY what is need in telcos. Lift the monopolies and let people compete. If the government lays the fiber, they will almost certainly grant a monopoly ( do you remember AT&T ).


"It's called extracting consumer surplus. Basically I have a bunch of movie goers (who have paid a lot for their tickets). Some of them don't like popcorn, and some do. Of the people in the latter group, there are some who are willing to pay a lot for it. That's partly because I have a select group (rich movie goers) and partly because some of these people would be willing to pay more for popcorn with a movie than without. If I were just selling ""popcorn,"" I'd have to charge a competitive price. But I'm really selling movies, which have more than covered my costs (rent, heat, etc.) So my costs of selling popcorn are less than that of a non-movie popcorn seller, and I don't really ""need"" to sell it. Ironically, it means that I can ""take my chances"" and sell a relatively small amount at a high price, thereby maximizing my UNIT profit. I don't mind having people NOT buy popcorn because I've already made my profit from them with the movie. From the point of view of the consumer, most consumers see popcorn as an ""afterthought."" They will seldom  think, ""I can buy popcorn $2.00 cheaper at Theater A than Theater B, and there's a 20 percent chance that I will want to buy popcorn, so Theater A is 40 cents ($2.00*.20) cheaper than Theater B."" Instead, most make the decision to buy the popcorn after they've arrived at Theater B, because it as ""impulse item.""  And even if they do the ""40 cents"" calculation, Theater B might be selected because other factors (convenience, location, etc.) outweigh the 40 cent extra cost of popcorn (purchased ""sometimes""). Put another way, the cost of popcorn is (usually) heavily discounted because of its ""remoteness"" to other facets of the decision."


One thing that really russles my jimmies is bullshit statistics spewed by the lazy.    > ...without permanent employment for three years, which, according to a recent analysis by economists from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, means the chance of her finding work this month or next month or in five months is slim.   * So we're quoting banking economists on matters of employment standards?    > On the flipside, just one out of 10 long-term unemployed people will find a job in a given month, the study shows.   * They did it again.    > “If you look at people who have been unemployed for a year, they had the bad job prospects in the first place   * And again    > We have huge numbers of unemployed and a slow rate of hiring...   * Finally, a light seems to be dimming.    > On average, unemployed people in the 55-plus age group are ...according to recent data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.   * Oh dear, fell back on old statistical data again.  Well, that helps the article to write itself.


No, you and some of us wouldn't.  Most would though. Delivery(food) drivers, couriers, most, if not all, people on deadlines.  Until recharge time is as brief as refuel time it will be a deal-breaker for most drivers.  EDIT: Downvote is disagree button.......got it!


My first thought is: email? Are you sure it is legitimate? Verify everything. Assuming it is legitimate:


Banks consider investment mortgages (and any mortgage where you don't live in the property), as a riskier investment than an owner occupied, home collateral mortgage. The sources of increased risk range from concerns that you will screw up as a landlord, your tenants will destroy the place, you won't have tenants and can't afford to pay the bank, and/or you'll take out several other investment mortgages and over extend yourself. All of these risks are compounded by the fact that it is harder for the bank to convince you to pay when they can't put you out on the street if you default. Banks lend and invest in money, not real estate, so they would much rather have a paying loan than a foreclosed house, especially with the modern foreclosure glut. The increased risk means the bank will charge higher interest for the loan, may require a higher downpayment, and will require higher lending standards before issuing the loan. A new housing investor can get around these higher prices by living in the home for a few years before renting it out (though your lender could possibly require you to renegotiate the loan if you move out too soon).


Aside from the market implications Victor and JB King mention, another possible reason is the dividends they pay. Usually, the dividends a company pays are dependent on the profit the company made. if a company makes less profit, the dividends turn out smaller. This might incite unrest among the shareholders, because this means that they get paid less dividends, which makes that share more likely to be sold, and thus for the price to fall.


The amount that a UBI would be would be set by those same rich who control everything. They have never been benevolent, and they never will be. It would be an absolute pittance, and the vast majority of all wealth would still be in their hands.


I'll extend an olive branch here and concede that we have a lot more luxuries which is why we have more to work and pay for. But my point is we could have more or less the same amount of stuff by working 3 days a week.   I've heard that millenials are less materialistic than previous generations, so it will be interesting to see the effects of that.   Also, we need to take into account that AI likely will replace a large amount of jobs in the future as well. Maybe it will be even more plausible for most people to only work 3 days a week on average.


In its most basic form, the losing trade, made by the bank’s chief investment office in London, was an intricate position that included a bullish bet on an index of investment-grade corporate debt. That was later combined with a bearish wager on high-yield securities.  http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/06/28/jpmorgan-trading-loss-may-reach-9-billion/


"The key phrase in your post is that the options are ""in a good position now"".  They may be worthless in three months or a year.   If I was you I would cash in the options and pay off the debt.  Cash in enough to also cover taxes.  You may want to cash them all in."


What is my best course of action, trying to minimize future debt? Minimizing expenses is the best thing you can do. The first step to financial independence is making do with less. Assuming I receive this $3500, am I better off using the bulk to pay off my credit cards, or should I keep as much cash available as I can? This would depend on the interest rate that is associated with the credit cards and the $3500. If the $3500 has a higher interest rate than your credit cards, then do not use any of it to pay your credit cards. Paying back the money you borrow hurts but it's the interest rate that does you in. If the interest rate for the $3500 is lower than the credit card interest, then placing some of it on the credit cards may be a wise course of action. But this depends on how long you are out of work. If you could be out of work for an extended period of time, I would recommend holding on to all of the funds. Note on saving I know this goes against the grain, but I would actually not recommend saving several months worth of funds (maybe one month though). Most employers offer some type of retirement savings account (401(k), Thrift Savings Plan, etc.). I contribute 5% to this fund instead of putting the money in savings. This is an especially effective strategy if your employer offers matching contributions such as mine. Because the divedends for a savings account are so low, it is not a wise place to store your money in the long run. If I had placed my Thrift Savings Plan contributions in a standard savings account, I would now be $12,000 poorer. In addition to this, most long term investment accounts allow you to withdraw the money early in case of emergency, such as being without work. (I also find it too temping to have huge amounts of funds on hand).


"Despite Buffett's nearly perfect consistent advice over the past few decades, they don't reflect his earliest days.  His modern philosophy seemed to solidify in the 1970s. You can see that Buffett's earliest days grew faster, at 29.5 % for those partners willing to take on leverage with Buffett, than the last half century, at 19.7%. Not only is Buffett limited by size, as its quite difficult to squeeze one half trillion USD into sub-billion USD investments, but the economy thus market is far different than it was before the 1980s.  He would have to acquire at least 500 billion USD companies outright, and there simply aren't that many available that satisfy all of his modern conditions. The market is much different now than it was when he first started at Graham-Newman because before the 1960s, the economy thus market would collapse and rebound about every few years.  This sort of variance can actually help a value investor because a true value investor will abandon investments when valuations are high and go all in when valuations are low.  The most extreme example was when he tried to as quietly as possible buy up an insurance company selling for something like a P/E of 1 during one of the collapses.  These kinds of opportunities are seldom available anymore, not even during the 2009 collapse. As he became larger, those investments became off limits because it simply wasn't worth his time to find such a high returner if it's only a bare fraction of his wealth.  Also, he started to deviate from Benjamin Graham's methods and started to incorporate Philip Fisher's. By the 1970s, his investment philosophy was more or less cemented.  He tried to balance Graham's avarice for price with Fisher's for value. All of the commentary that special tax dodges or cheap financing are central to his returns are false.  They contributed, but they are ancillary. As one can see by comparing the limited vs general partners, leverage helps enormously, but this is still a tangent. Buffett has undoubtedly built his wealth from the nature of his investments.  The exact blueprint can be constructed by reading every word he has published and any quotes he has not disavowed.  Simply, he buys the highest quality companies in terms of risk-adjusted growth at the best available prices.  Quantitatively, it is a simple strategy to replicate.  NFLX was selling very cheaply during the mid-2000s, WDC sells frequently at low valuations, up and coming retailers frequently sell at low valuations, etc. The key to Buffett's method is emotional control and removing the mental block that price equals value; price is cost, value is revenue, and that concept is the hardest for most to imbibe.  Quoting from the first link: One sidelight here: it is extraordinary to me that the idea of buying dollar bills for 40 cents takes immediately to people or it doesn't take at all. It's like an inoculation. If it doesn't grab a person right away, I find that you can talk to him for years and show him records, and it doesn't make any difference. They just don't seem able to grasp the concept, simple as it is. A fellow like Rick Guerin, who had no formal education in business, understands immediately the value approach to investing and he's applying it five minutes later. I've never seen anyone who became a gradual convert over a ten-year period to this approach. It doesn't seem to be a matter of IQ or academic training. It's instant recognition, or it is nothing. and I'm convinced that there is much inefficiency in the market. These Graham-and-Doddsville investors have successfully exploited gaps between price and value. When the price of a stock can be influenced by a ""herd"" on Wall Street with prices set at the margin by the most emotional person, or the greediest person, or the most depressed person, it is hard to argue that the market always prices rationally. In fact, market prices are frequently nonsensical. and finally  Success in investing doesn’t correlate with I.Q. once you’re above the level of 25. Once you have ordinary intelligence, what you need is the temperament to control the urges that get other people into trouble in investing. There is almost no information on any who has helped Buffett internally or even managed Berkshire's investments aside from Louis Simpson. It is unlikely that Buffett has allowed anyone to manage much of Berkshire's investments considering the consistent stream of commentary from him claiming that he nearly does nothing except read annual reports all day to the extent that he may have neglected his family to some degree and that listening to others will more likely hurt performance than help with the most striking example being his father's recommendation that he not open a hedge fund after retiring from Graham-Newman because he believed the market was topping, and he absolutely idolized his father."


">> Boy, you are so disappointed that Trump cut the debt more than any other president in this short time... because ""it not enough""?  > What are you talking about? Did you read what I said at all or are you just projecting your insecurity?  Yes I read what you wrote, including the example with the cookies.  But the correct example here and what's happening with Trump, is that he DID enact fiscal changes, he DOES fight corruption and waste, he does invest, and you can ALREADY see the results."


401(k) contributions are pre-tax dollars, but at the cost of locking the money up.  So you wouldn't have to pay taxes on it, but the funds wouldn't be available either.


"You did not answer my question: Where's my advocate in the negotiations? Why should I believe the negotiators have my best interests at heart?  What's the point of negotiating a treaty that doesn't have the people's interests at heart?  You can't just say ""The US Gov is doing it and they have the US Citizens interest at heart""--the whole point of the US Constitution is that citizens of the USA do not trust people in positions of power, and want to make sure those people's interests are aligned with the interests of the population without needing to believe in their benevolence.  Every US publicly traded company, for example, holds their shareholders and executives interests far above those of their employees.  So giving the companies I mentioned the ability to ""work deals with those jobs on the table"" doesn't sound like it is much of a benefit to those (far greater in number) employees.  Do those people get a chance to affect policy decisions too?"


That's a common misconception about capitalism. Capitalism, as defined in works of free market scholarship, says those who earn the most money through voluntary exchange (not through deceit or force), have the most merit, and this is correct.  The problem we have is that the standards against deceit and force have ceased to be effective.  Someone needs to create and offer the goods and services we all take for granted. Without the profit motive, there would be no reason to risk starting a new venture.   Government can't do it, because that's been tried, and that always leads to severe shortages and mass starvation.


This comes back to the money deal. You have to pay people and pay for supplies (jet fuel is expensive, quite literally each airlines highest expense is fuel). Government paying for flights would be met with stiff resistance. Carrying it out would be difficult. People have to go to airports, park cars somewhere, how many planes are we diverting to help with evac? How many people are we diverting? How many flight plans have to change? Other routes may experience issues. There is so much planning that goes into this. It would be a nightmare to do in the short term.


> Have you made the effort to even look?   Actually yes, I did. I came up empty. The only things that come up are biased propaganda blogs. Wow, you're really holding onto this misconception with all your might aren't you?


> Taxation is theft.  Using society-financed infrastructure without paying taxes is theft. If you don't like it, then feel free to leave the country. Just don't take anything that you got as a result of those society-financed resources, otherwise you're a thief.


I don't know much about Amit Mehrotra individually, or much about Deutsche Bank's equity research division. I was just trying to point out that the source of this information is a corporation that does not have stock in the debate between Amazon, WalMart, and the Trucking Companies, and is a company that doesn't really have an interest in this debate as a whole, because Deutsche Bank isn't involved in the US consumer products market, the US shipping market, or the US trucking market. It is secondhand knowledge at best, and secondhand knowledge from a totally disinterested party at that.


How are any of us actually supposed know the difference when he's making a light hearted joke, and when he's being serious?  When it's *comical?* Because none of the 'jokes' he's made have been funny. It sound more like a convenient way for him & his administration to disavow any responsibility for what he says, when it turns out to be ridiculous.


If you are worried that it will hamper your business in any away, then you can choose mortgage marketing tools to deal with the situation. If you decide to implement all these things for your business improvement, you need a tool for quick and better mortgage management. Use Unify’s CRM for mortgage software and let it make your task easy.


There is no benefit in life insurance as such (ie, death insurance.) There is a great deal of value in other types though: total and permanent disability insurance, trauma insurance (a lump sum for a major medical event), and income protection insurance (cover against a temporary but disabling medical condition).  If you don't have that, you should get it right now. This is about the most important insurance you can carry.  Being unable to work for the rest of your life has a far larger impact than having, say, your car stolen. ...  If, later on, you acquire dependents, and you feel you ought to have life insurance, then you will have a relationship with a life insurance company, and maybe they will let you upgrade from income/TPD to income/TPD/life without too much fuss or requalification.  Some do; whether yours would I don't know.  But at least you have a toe in the door with them, in a way that is infinitely more immediately useful than getting life insurance that you don't actually need.


The idea is that the premiums (or costs) associated with the plan are a business expense, you know that already.  The distinction here is that employees don't pay premiums, they elect to contribute. The company sponsors a plan, the employees then choose to accept less salary in order to participate in the employer's plan.  The idea is that you're foregoing income. Why is the employee not taxed on this cost?  One major reason is that the employee has no say in, and often no idea, what the gross costs are (some find out if they ever receive COBRA election paperwork). There are more benefits than strict healthcare that are Section 125 eligible.  The government has a vested interest in keeping the population healthy, and when the ERISA laws and Section 125 were written it was (and still is) a pretty low friction way to get health insurance out to more people.  At this point, taking away the tax break from the employees would be a huge government take away from most of the population.  Try to get a politician to take something away from taxpayers. Why doesn't the deduction exist in kind to people buying individual coverage?  Ask your legislators.  There are thousands of preferential tax treatment oddities, where some industry will get some sort of benefit or break.  I'm not sure what leads you to think there needs to be some supremely logical reason for this oddity to exit.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.cato.org/blog/labors-share-gdp-wrong-answers-wrong-question) reduced by 93%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Labor&#039;s share of the CBO&#039;s broadly-defined household income also fell because the share devoted to transfers rose, but also because the share moved from corporate to household accounts also rose.  > Business income counted within CBO&#039;s household income has increased its share of such income since the Tax Reform Act of 1986, but that just reflects a change in organizational form from C-Corporation to pass-through status.  > Labor&#039;s share of personal income fell mainly because the share devoted to government transfer payments rose.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/79ph4o/labors_share_of_gdp_wrong_answers_to_a_wrong/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~237805 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **income**^#1 **Share**^#2 **Labor**^#3 **GDP**^#4 **capital**^#5"


You can hire a builder to build for you on a lot that you would be happy to live on with utilities already connected. Subdividing a large piece of land gets a little more complicated. What easements exist, and what new easements would need to be created when connecting utilities? Would all of the lots already have street access, or do you need to dedicate some of the land to building a new road in the subdivision? Also, I edited your post because 83,000sqft is 1.9 acres. Building homes on .19 acre parcels (assuming no need for a road to take another 15% of the lot) reduces the value of the homes that you are building. You should run the numbers with 6 houses and see how attractive the math looks. Also, you should look for updated numbers on cost to build. Custom homes are likely closer to $275-$350 (where an architect is involved with drawing the plans).


Urban doesn't have their own logo though does it? Or do you mean you can just tell when a kid is wearing an outfit straight off the rack from that store?  I kinda dig some of their stuff but I do agree that it can get over the top.


I think we should re-think about paying taxes. If they don't have to pay income tax. It is just one way: to minimize the revenue and maximize their expense. As you know, profit (or loss) = revenue - expense. If they want to reduce their income tax. They have to do this. We can't say anything about the income tax that G.E must pay. They maybe have some rights to encourage their business by being decreased some kinds of taxes. It's very normal. If you have some knowledge about tax and accounting, audits, You will have a clearly point about it! I'm not native speaker. I might not understand your tax rules. But they have all general standards all over the world. If I use wrongly grammar or misunderstanding, pls forgive me. Thank you!


If your SIMPLE IRA is over two years old then you can roll your money to another qualified account such as a rollover IRA. The usual rollover rules apply. You have 60 days to deposit the funds in another qualified account and you are only allowed one such rollover in a 12 month window. If you are still within two years of opening your SIMPLE IRA, you can roll your funds to a SIMPLE IRA with another vendor, but you would then have to wait until that account is two years old before rolling it elsewhere. If you roll the money another type of IRA before your SIMPLE IRA account is two-years old, and under 59 1/2 years old, you will be subject to a 25% penalty (which is much higher than for other types of accounts). Many of the early distribution exceptions apply such as disability, etc. Edit: The first document linked above covers rules for running a SIMPLE IRA. All the specific regulations linked in the second document apply to all IRAs of all types. There is no specific prohibition from rolling only a portion of the money to another qualified account. There are prohibitions against rolling money more than one time in a 12 month period. The usual obstacle to rolling money from a retirement account--like a 401(k)--is that the 401(k) plan is written to prohibit withdrawals while the employee is still employed at the company.


"First of all, the numbers you give are most probably nowhere near the total expenses you have/need to budget:  Maybe you should have a look at the expenses you had over the last years (look at how much money came in and how much went to the savings and compare this expenses to the sum of all the expenses you have on your list of expenses as plausibility check. Just starting on some numbers you give and assuming the house is the main goal.  House of 300 - 500 k€, assuming downpayment of 30 - 40 %, i.e. somewhere between 90 and 200 k€. I'll go on calculating with 150 k€ which would be 50 % of 300 k€ or 30 % of 500 k€. You want to be there in 8 - 15 a: this means saving 10 - 19 k€ per year. 19 k€/a is clearly impossible with 20 k€ net wage.  10 k€ with 20 k€ net wage means a savings quote of 50 %, so for each € you spend, one goes towards the house. This is doable in the sense that if you continue with 4 k€/a for rent plus a Harz 4 (= 400 €/month) style of life, that would put you to 9 k€ expenses/a, thus 1 k€ saving for unexpected disaster (I'd actually first get a couple of k€ together for such things, and then go as much as possible towards the house). Still, this is not the life style the rest of your goals sounds like.  (You can update this somewhat with the expected income of your girlfriend/wife. But remember that she needs food and clothes as well and you assume she'll need a car of her own) Let me rephrase the savings goal of 150 k€: you'd try to save 3 times the median German household equity within 8 to 15 years. This should tell you that it is a very steep proposition. On the other hand, e.g. Slowakians manage to have a median household equity of ca 60 k€ out of a median income that is roughly half the median income in Germany. So again it is somehow possible, but it will be really tough to live a life style like a Slowakian or Harz 4ler between peers that spend roughly everything (good approximation as we're talking about savings rates above 50 % of net income) they earn.   I think the ""easiest"" way to get your savings going is to postpone lifestyle upgrades.  On the other hand, around Waldeck, 150 k€ would buy you a complete new house of the same size that costs 300 - 500 k€ around Darmstadt. So if you really want to go for the house, I'd recommend not only to save as hard as you can*, but also to look out for possibilities to relocate to a cheaper area. 8 - 15 years should be enough time to decide what area you'd like and then to look for an opportunity without too much pressure. And actually this should be enough time so that also your girlfriend/wife could get herself transferred to another Bundesland. * In reality saving as hard as possible will probably get you nowhere near 150 k€ (there are very few people who manage to do this - though they exist), but if you get to 75 k€ that would mean a reasonably good position for both starting negotiations with the bank about buying a 150 k€ house plus the corresponding payment of the mortgage. If you get there within less than 15 years that would also leave some air in case you change opinion with regard to kids and then leaves a reasonable amount of time to put together your pension.  Consider your psychology about saving towards the house. Even if both of you know that you want it really hard, it may be good to enter a building savings contract (15 years should be reasonable for that way) which will enforce you to keep up the savings rate and also does not allow you to divert money for other purposes. However, I'd say that 6 months into the first job it may be a bit early to fix such savings rates. Maybe for the beginning a savings account that includes some hassle to get the money out again (set low limit and allow any outgoing money to go only to another account of yours) with an automatic savings deposit every month is a way how to safely determine the savings rate you can manage. Maybe you can use this to first put together your new emergency savings which should be first priority anyways.  If you want to cut expenses in order to save, look at the recommendations for people who try to get out of debt: budget your expenses, cook yourself and enjoy this (maybe taking a cooking class together with your girlfriend is a lot of fun, leads to food that may even be more to your taste than restaurant stuff - and is much cheaper), keep book, pay in cash (not by card) and so on.  If you're not a DIY person, try whether you could enjoy becoming one - no magic involved there.  I guess the most important point is to find out how much you want the house and then how hard you are willing to save. This is something only you and your girlfriend can decide (together!).  IMHO you really don't need to invest (unless you drop the house plan), you need to save towards your goals. You may decide to invest a small part of the money while saving in order to learn slowly how that works, but if the house goal is already kind of fixed in time, you don't want to find yourself in the situation that you have to get out of investments at a bad time in order to be able to buy the house. Even if you consider 15 years long enough to do some investing now and then get out some time during the next 15 years, you don't have any money to invest now. Later, the risk posed by the fixed point in time when you need the money is too large: Considering the rather steep saving propositions, the marginal costs of having less money are really large. This means you don't want to go for risky investments => plain old saving is what you need. Consider also that low house prices tend to come during economic crisis (people cannot pay mortgage and have to sell) so within the time window, you want to have your money for anticyclic buying if possible."


I've seen these headlines for the past year and have heard people saying this. It may be true but they always conveniently leave out that it only applies to the Fresca menu which is priced in line with other cantina places like chipotle and salsaritas.


"In addition to all the points made in other answers, in some jurisdictions (including the UK where I live) the consumer credit laws require the lender to allow the borrower to pay off the loan at any time. If the lender charges interest and the borrower pays off the loan early then the lender loses the interest that would have been paid during the rest of the loan period. However if the actual interest is baked into the sale price of an item and the loan to pay for it is nominally ""0%"" then the borrower still pays all the interest even if they pay off the loan immediately. If you think this game is being played then you can ask for a ""cash discount"" (or similar wording: I once had problems with a car salesman who thought I meant a suitcase full of used £20s), meaning you want to avoid paying the interest as you are not taking a loan."


This is great news.  EVs are growing so fast.  Their reduced fuel and maintenance costs will be a great boon to the economy.  I wouldn't be surprising to see EVs take a significant share of the auto market in the coming years (they were ~1% in 2016).  Innovation drives economic growth.  It's also good for the environment (the electricity used is much cleaner than gasoline/diesel) and electrical grid (increased demand that's potentially responsive to system load helps finance smart grid improvements).


> Please provide specifics how and when all of these things will help the economy.  Why won't you give specifics on how and when all these things will NOT help the economy. Please!  > spoiler alert: they won't, at least not a positive one  Please spoil it for me and tell me how removing illegal aliens does not help the economy.  Please tell me how NAFTA helped the USA economy.  Please tell me how TPP will help the USA economy.  **Please tell me why the stock market is going up, if Trump is ruining the economy.**


Well people get excited all the time and try everything they can to get on the train that they think it will make them millioner, no matter what the consequences are. It is a natural things. thats why we do have laws.   If the people who were in charge of making sure that the right people get the right amount of loan, even with all the excitement, none of those sub-prime loans would be issued and we wouldn't have this problem. So if you ask me I would say fraud caused free cheap money flooding the system, which increased the prices rapidly, created more excitements, which again caused more fraud, until the point that there were no money!


"As others have said, if the dealer accepted payment and signed over ownership of the vehicle, that's a completed transaction. While there may or may not be a ""cooling-off period"" in your local laws, those protect the purchaser, not (as far as I know) the seller. The auto dealer could have avoided this by selling for a fixed price. Instead, they chose to negotiate every sale. Having done so, it's entirely their responsibility to check that they are happy with their final agreement. Failing to do so is going to cost someone their commission on the sale, but that's not the buyer's responsibility. They certainly wouldn't let you off the hook if the final price was higher than you had previously agreed to. He who lives by the fine print shall die by the fine print. This is one of the reasons there is huge turnover in auto sales staff; few of them are really good at the job. If you want to be kind to the guy you could give him the chance to sell you something else. Or perhaps even offer him a $100 tip. But assuming the description is correct, and assuming local law doesn't say otherwise (if in any doubt, ask a lawyer!!!), I don't think you have any remaining obligation toward them On the other hand, depending on how they react to this statement, you might want to avoid their service department, just in case someone is unreasonably stupid and tries to make up the difference that was."


Wasn't a bailout, it was a stick up. GSEs have paid back $130 billion over the original loan amount (which was around $180 b iirc). Gov't took them over under false pretenses, and implemented the net worth sweep under even falser pretenses.


>The internet tells you so much about a person these days.  The internet will tell you that I'm a brilliant OS/X programmer, and have been very successful in that endeavor. I'm sure I could score a job based on that alone.  Except that's *not me*. That's some other guy with my name. I'm a developer, too, but I'm not *that* developer - I've fooled around with OS/X a *tiny* bit, but not at the professional level.  I'm not really *on* the internet under my real name, because I don't feel like splattering every trivial detail of my life all over the 'net. So I'll stick to the resume, thanks.


This whole article sounds like it was paid off by cable and internet providers. Don’t get me wrong these web companies definitely need to be hammered down on specially after what happened this past election.  However this article is trying to make a point that getting rid of net neutrality is the right thing to do. Net neutrality is the rule that prevents cable/internet companies to charge you more for access to certain websites than others, in a similar way they do with television today. The same cable/internet companies that lobbied and won the right to sell your browsing history the same way these web companies do.  And if we talk about monopolies we should also be looking at AT&T, Comcast, Verizon and various other companies that have a strong hold on today’s consumers.


I've noticed that some stores have the rubber bumpers around the PIN pad, so that part is better at least.   Speaking of the NRF, they're [not a fan of PCI compliance either](http://www.csoonline.com/article/3091820/data-breach/the-national-retail-federation-is-dead-wrong-about-pci.html), which mainly came into being because merchants will give the minimum amount of shit legally/contractually possible about security.


"Liquid cash (emergency, rainy day fund) should be safe from a loss in value.  Mutual funds don't give you this, especially stock funds.  You can find ""high yield"" savings accounts that are now at around .8% to .9% APY which is much better than .05% and will hopefully go up.  Barclays US and American Express are two big banks that normally have the highest rates. Most/all Savings and Money Market accounts should be FDIC insured.  Mutual funds are not, though the investment IRA, etc. holding them may be."


> With a $2.2B investment in a massive, gleaming structure almost twice as tall as the next biggest casino tower, plus exclusive restaurants, Revel seemed to have all the ingredients to cater to the high money Vegas crowd.  So Facebook could have built 8 high-end casino resorts for the price of WhatsApp?


I guess I meant shitty in that we the people are losing money due to an overly complex and loophole riddled tax code.   I certainly am agreeing with you about the waste of spending so much money blowing people up and spying on citizens.


I've done it in smaller forms (I'm not OP) in video games.  Particularly a video game called Call of Duty: Black Ops. There's a zombie mode in this game.  Each time you shoot a zombie, you get 10 points pet bullet, 30 points per headshot.   The zombies come in levels, with level 1 having 10 zombies. And each new level having more zombies.  The kicker: with each new level, the zombies get stronger, and take more bullets to kill.   Level 1, everyone starts with a handgun; this handgun becomes useless in later levels and you're required to buy better weapons with better firepower and more bullets.   It's competitive while also being co-operative, like capitalism.  There have been plenty of games where I let other players do the work for the first 10 levels.   Almost all of those times, I end up never getting to their level and I'm always dying. (If you die, you don't respawn until the next round AND you lose some of your points, which means less bucks to get a better weapon).   This creates a system where the rich get richer, and those that start late, never catch up.  No matter how hard I work, what strategy I try, I never catch up to the levels of fiscal wealth that the other players do.   And this is me actually knowing how to play and game the system (which usually involves not-spending points early in-game, and upgrading only in intervals according to level-needs and saving up for when you die).   If I had more time and patience, it would make a great documentation.


Ethnic-Rack great Festival Sale Offers Oct 7th 2017- Oct 22nd 2017. Diwali Offers Deals, Sale, Discounts & Online Shopping offers on wide range of products on women clothing such as Lehengas, sarees etc with Free Shipping. For more details: https://www.ethnic-rack.com/lehenga-choli


It appears that co-signing does impact your debt-to-income ratio, at least in the US.  An article on Kiplinger says: An article on Forbes agrees saying: There is a similar question here.


That's not what is happening here. The companies are focusing on retained earnings, which are on their books on a global basis.   Robbing Peter to pay Paul would be true if the money was funneled from one company to another, to the complete exclusion of shareholders. That kind of behavior has been seen too and that too is unethical and deemed illegal in most jurisdictions. In those maneuvers, management transfers money from shareholders to their own pockets. Stock options issued by tech companies is a good example, though the behavior was far more rampant before they had to declare diluted earnings.  The solution is to have a populace much more involved in its country's politics, far lower taxes and a strong streak of independence, libertarians like Ron Paul or Gary Johnson ;)   In the current structure of apathy and ignorance, it is the cunning and the sociopaths who rise to the top.


Hi guys, have a question from my uni finance course but I’m unsure how to treat the initial loan (as a bond, or a bill or other, and what the face value of the loan is).  I’ll post the question below, any help is appreciated.  “Hi guys, I have a difficult university finance question that’s really been stressing me out....  “The amount borrowed is $300 million and the term of the debt credit facility is six years from today  The facility requires minimum loan repayments of $9 million in each financial year except for the first year.  The nominal rate for this form of debt is 5%. This intestest rate is compounded monthly and is fixed from the date the facility was initiated.  Assume that a debt repayment of $10 million is payed on 31 August 2018 and $9million on April 30 2019. Following on monthly repayments of $9 million at the end of each month from May 31 2019 to June 30 2021.  Given this information determine the outstanding value of the debt credit facility on the maturity date.”  Can anyone help me out with the answer? I’ve been wracking my brain trying to decide if I treat it as a bond or a bill.”  Thanks in advance,


"US based so I don't know how closely this translates to the UK, but generally speaking there are three things that contribute to a strong credit score. Length/volume of credit history. This is a combination of how many accounts appear in your history along with how long they have been open.  Having a series of accounts that were maintained in good standing looks better than only having one.  Maintaining an account in good standing for a prolonged period (3+ years) is better than a bunch of short term items.  ""Ideally"" your credit history should contain a mix of term loans that were paid per contract and a few (1?) revolving account that shows ongoing use.  The goal is to show that you can handle ongoing obligations responsibly, and manage multiple things at the same time. Utilization. Or how much you currently owe vs how much people have agreed to lend you.  Being close to your limits raises questions about whether or not you can really handle the additional debt.  Having large availability raises questions about whether you would be able to handle it if you suddenly maxed things out.  Finding the correct middle point can be challenging, the numbers I have seen thrown around most by the ""experts"" is 20-30% utilization. Recent Activity. Or how much new debt have you taken on?  If someone is opening lots of new accounts it raises red flags.  Shopping around for a deal on a auto loan or mortgage before settling on one is fine.  Opening 5 new credit lines in the past 6 months, probably going to knock you down a bit.  One of the concerns here is have you had the accounts long enough to demonstrate that you will be able to handle them in the long term. One route that was suggested to me in my early years was to go take out a 6mo loan from a bank, and just place the money in a CD while I made the payments.  Then repeat with a longer term.  Worst case, you can cash out the CD to pay off the loan in an emergency, but otherwise it helps show the type of history they are looking for. All that said, I have to agree with Pete B's answer.  Don't play the credit game if you don't really need to.  Or play it just enough to stay in the game and plan your finances to avoid relying on it.  (Advice I wish I had taken long ago.)"


Depending on the Price of the ETF and the hedging you may well simply be guaranteed to make a small loss.


> I work in strategic finance for a major tech company in Silicon Valley.  That would explain why you're such a self-absorbed douche.  LOL.  I can't take you seriously anymore.  You probably take it up the ass too and wear pink sunglasses.  Fucking reject.  Stay out there in CA.  You're a giant joke.  I'm blocking you so I don't have to see your responses.  You're a pathetic child and you know it.


Here is an article that claims to know something about it. Here are a selection of quotes: The IRS says there are several ways a return can be selected for audit and the first is via the agency's computer-scoring system known as Discriminant Information Function, or DIF. The IRS evaluates tax returns based on IRS formulas, and DIF is based on deductions, credits and exemptions with norms for taxpayers in each of the income brackets. The actual scoring formula to determine which tax returns are most likely to be in error is a closely guarded secret. But Nath, a tax attorney in the Washington, D.C., area, says it's no mystery the system is designed to screen for returns that could put more money in the government Treasury. So what is likely to trigger a discriminant information function red flag?


"> That, and the fact that being a ""desirable job"" (in the form of ""playing with gadgets"") there is an apparently endless supply of applicants...  I've seen a similar dynamic in the video game design industry, which has a tendency for treating skilled and dedicated employees like complete dogshit."


I'll try just about anything generic.  I haven't had the best luck with off-brand coffee, though. One thing to check side-by-side is the ingredient list.  My wife is sensitive to some ingredients so that plays into what we buy.  Sometimes the generic brand has ingredients that she can have, but the name brand doesn't.


Our founding fathers were not stupid enough to use empty land on a map to claim how great the president is based off sq miles under control of a party. Trump got the minority votes and won. That's what matters not empty land.


So a significant portion of that money went to the financial clusterfuck he inherited.  But in an effort of make sure we don't get ourselves back into that mess, he initiated Dodd-Frank.  What are your thoughts on the current administration's effort to reverse it?


When I put it on the credit card, I haven't paid for the product or service yet.  If there is a dispute, then I have the upper hand because the cash is still in my pocket.


Okay but still three people at $12/hr is $16 more per hour than one person at $20/hr. And if anything paying taxes and benefits for one employee is cheaper than doing so for three. I still don't see how u/NEVERDOUBTED asserts that the three at $12/hr cost less. Where's the math, man???


I'd open the Roth IRA account and fund for 2015 and 2016. For the very long term, I'd learn about index funds, specifically a low cost S&P mutual fund or ETF.


Exactly. There's not unlimited points out there. Classic innovation cycle where at the end the returns are ultimately directly correlated to capital and it is not particularly profitable for most market participants.   Incidentally, never understood why retail investors care about HFT. IF they squeeze a few basis points out of you getting in and out of a position, it's still way less than what brokers are taking you for. And if you're wearing it for years, should be basically noise relative to the overall performance.


"By issuing additional equity. In this case, the pie isn't ""fixed,"" it's getting bigger. Now, to avoid lawsuits and other potential issues (some of which may be unavoidable), the owner will likely need to subscribe for additional equity himself.  Example:  100 shares outstanding. 51 to owner, 49 to 2 others.  That 49 will have to equal 20%, as none of their shares are being sold (likely). This means total shares will need to be increased to 245.  Subtract 49 from that number: 196  Marcus gets half of that at a determined price. 98  Owner must increase his stake from 51 to 98 shares. To do so, he'll need to contribute additional cash for the same price Marcus gets in on. That could be expensive."


I currently have a T-Mobile and Verizon phone.  Dropped calls are a much bigger issue with T-Mobile than Verizon.  However, the Verizon line is significantly more expensive.    The other big variance is customer service: T-Mobile's never seems to want to help; about 1 in 4 calls to them is pleasant.  However, Verizon's is a bit better.  I know Verizon has a terrible rep about customer service, but I haven't had a terrible time (maybe I'm just lucky).


I think he's talking about having a psychological investment in your dream. A truly devoted and obsessive leader will only be thinking about moving forward, not trying to work on getting out.   I don't think it's a fair thing to expect, however. I think a lot of prudent leaders will want to know how to exit gracefully. That doesn't mean they can't be risk takers, but they're smart.


While most all Canadian brokers allow us access to all the US stocks, the reverse is not true.  But some US brokers DO allow trading on foreign exchanges. (e.g. Interactive Brokers at which I have an account).  You have to look and be prepared to switch brokers.  Americans cannot use Canadian brokers (and vice versa). Trading of shares happens where-ever two people get together - hence the pink sheets.  These work well for Americans who want to buy-sell foreign stocks using USD without the hassle of FX conversions.  You get the same economic exposure as if the actual stock were bought.   But the exchanges are barely policed, and liquidity can dry up, and FX moves are not necessarily arbitraged away by 'the market'.  You don't have the same safety as ADRs because there is no bank holding any stash of 'actual' stocks to backstop those traded on the pink sheets.


Your math shows that you bought an 'at the money' option for .35 and when the stock is $1 above the strike, your $35 (options trade as a contract for 100 shares) is now worth $100. You knew this, just spelling it out for future readers.  1 - Yes 2 - An execute/sell may not be nesesary, the ooption will have time value right until expiration, and most ofter the bid/ask will favor selling the option. You should ask the broker what the margin requirement is for an execute/sell. Keep in mind this usually cannot be done on line, if I recall, when I wanted to execute, it was a (n expensive) manual order. 3 - I think I answered in (2), but in general they are not identical, the bid/ask on options can get crazy. Just look at some thinly traded strikes and you'll see what I mean.


Its less about retail investors and more about the large institutions. Harvard's endowment for example, is held in trust. So is the endowment for every university, charity, and foundation.   In terms of retail investors its probably much less than 50%. Its just that the massive amount of wealth in the wealthiest people tips the balance drastically.   The top 20 wealthiest people in the world have ALL of their assets in trust. They probably dont have much personal ownership in anything and they hold more money than almost everyone else combined.


"I would advise against ""wasting"" this rare opportunity on mundane things, like by paying off debts or buying toys - You can always pay those from your wages. Plus, you'll inevitably accumulate new debts over time, so debt repayment is an ongoing concern. This large pile of cash allows you to do things you can't ordinarily do, so use the opportunity to invest. Buy a house, then rent it out. Rent an apartment for yourself. The house rent will pay most (maybe all) of the mortgage, plus the mortgage interest is tax-deductible, so you get a lower tax bill. And houses appreciate over time, so that's an added bonus. When you get married, and start a family, you'll have a house ready for you, partially paid off with other people's money."


you *can* get the guys in india for pennies on the dollar, but then you get what you pay for. I was told on upwork that I didn't get picked because I was too expensive, but then he went on to say that their proposals are usually garbage and wanted to pay me a little to look them over and make sure they weren't full of shit.  Upwork should be called UpOffShoring.  wtf?


That depends on your bank. My credit union clears intra-account transfers immediately. The delay therefore is based on bank policy. It is possible that in the system the accounts are not really linked and so it treats transfers between accounts that you own and accounts between people the same. And further in the case of your bank that they decided to have s one day hold. I believe that'll have heard some banks advertise that you can electronically transfer money to another account holder at the same bank in just 15 min.  I would also make sure that you are selecting immediate transfer instead of a future date transfer. Mine has those as two different options and if you select the other, you just select the date of action to be at least one in the future.


Zero positive feedback (except my performance review), cold attitude (friendly with others), regularly does not invite me, and only me, to meetings that affect me, etc.  Outside of work, makes it really uncomfortable to talk to him, but is great to everyone else.  It seems more personal than professional, and he just comes off as cold to only myself.  I really just want to bring this up to make work more pleasant; it's not really a 'hostile work environment'.


I believe that it's largely irrational, fueled largely by foreign investors that are afraid to invest anywhere else. There are a few people out there right now who are writing about this: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-treasuries-largest-bubble-in-world-history-says-nia-2011-08-30 http://articles.businessinsider.com/2010-08-25/markets/30080511_1_fed-first-yields-mbs As to why would you invest in long-dated versus short? Probably to chase yield. The 30 year yields 30x more than the 1 year. It's also easier to buy on the long end if you believe that the economy will remain slow for another decade or two and therefore the central banks will keep rates low for a very long time. Of course, at the moment, long-dated treasury prices are artificially high because of operation twist.


"America is a really fucked up place. When I was a small child, we were told horror stories about the workers in Japan. They couldn't take vacations, because if they did, they'd find someone else in their job when they got back. They had to work super long hours, and spend 90 minutes commuting each way, on a train packed tight with people.  America has taken a leaf from Japan's 1970s playbook: Allow employers to give employees no paid vacation time at all, and employment ""at will"" where an employer can march someone off the premises for any reason. Make workers do 60 hour weeks while paying them for a 40 hour salary. Reduce effective incomes by inflation over decades, and smaller wage increases.  Americans have forgotten that you work to live, *you don't live to work*."


"The dow jones is an index of 30 stocks that's weighted based on the price per share of these stocks. To calculate the DJIA, the sum of the prices of all 30 stocks is divided by a divisor, the Dow Divisor. The divisor is adjusted in case of stock splits, spinoffs or similar structural changes, to ensure that such events do not in themselves alter the numerical value of the DJIA.  Prices are the result of supply and demand. Demand is defined as simply as ""I want this badly enough to pay cash for it"", ""supply is ""I own this and don't want to own it, therefore I'll sell it""  When investors go about deciding they'd like to buy some stock from people who own it and are wanting to sell it, a market is generated and a price both are willing to sell/buy at is found. If the price is too high/low, you won't sell or buy. The price has to be ""right"" based on your own personal valuation.   Since these trades are done through an exchange and are so common, literally millions of shares are traded per day, you get the best price available at that moment for your shares. If person A is only willing to give you 100 dollars and person B is willing to give you 100.01, screw person A. I'm selling shares to person B.  When this done on a macro-level (millions of shares traded per day) the exchanges will track and make public the ""price movement"" of what the market is willing to give for each and every publicly traded stock.  TLDR: SUPPLY AND DEMAND. DOW USES THEIR OWN METHODS."


We all buy stuff from time to time that only satisfies us for a short time. I was able to locate a few expenses that fall under that category. I see a lot answers that focus on not getting these things. I'm going to tell you how to at least attempt to have your cake and eat it too. If you can get these things without paying for them, or by paying pennies on the dollar for them, you'll no longer want to buy them at full price. Begin by making a list of the items you can't stop thinking about.  Go to your local library and look for relevant items that are on your list. If they are not yet available, request that the library purchase them, and reserve them for when the items come in.  Yes, libraries are usually tax-supported, but to give back, if you can't afford to contribute to the Library immediately, you can still promote their fund-raising or book/media-drive efforts. If you don't mind buying things that may be second hand, thrift stores and garage or yard sales can have anything. The ones near you may have one or two items on your list of things you were looking for - for pennies on the dollar.  Other items might be things you can share with friends. Borrow or swap things until you get bored of them. If you don't have a network of friends with shared interests, there may be a local freecycle or relevant meetup group you can join.  The key here is to try to contribute more than you take (and you probably have things you don't need that you can start with trading), and don't keep careful score. The upshot is you'll not only save money but make friends while doing it. You can sometimes have your cake and eat it too. These recommendations can get you the short-term happiness you were looking for, without spending the money. And when the happiness is gone, you won't feel like you need to hang on to the item indefinitely - you can pass it on for others to enjoy.


I don't think its just artificially increased wages. Its also the fact that the people at the top are siphoning off more and more of the pie.  There is only so much to go around and as the top 1% pulls more and more of it off, it leaves less for the rest.


Long-term bonds -- any bonds, really -- can be risky for two main reasons:  return on principal, or return of principal.  The former is a problem if interest rates are low (which they are now in the US) because existing bonds will fall in price if interest rates rise.  The second is a problem if the lender defaults: IOU nothing. No investment is riskless.  Short-term bonds command a lower interest rate than long-term bonds (usually) because of their quicker maturity, but short-term bonds carry risk just like long-term bonds (though the interest rate risk is lower, sometimes quite a bit lower, than for long-term bonds).


Getting the right diversity of investments helps buffer you from some of the short term market swings. If you need advice it's worth spending a small part of that money on a consultation with a financial adviser, who can talk to you about your goals, your time horizon, and your risk tolerance and recommend a good starting distribution. (Free advice from brokers risks being biased by their commissions.) Once you have that plan, uou need to decide how to execute it. Low-fee index funds are a good way to get started until you learn more, and for many of us that's all we ever need. Then you need to decide whether to invest it all at once or dollar-cost average. I've heard arguments both ways; DCA does mean you risk missing some immmediate gains, but also reduces your risk of buying at a temporary high and taking some immediate losses. For me DCA seemed to make sense, but that's another decision for you to make.


The way it is handled with ETF's is that someone has to gather a block of units and redeem them with the fund. So, with the mutual fund you redeem your unit directly with the fund, always, you never sell to another player. With the ETF - its the opposite, you sell to another player. Once a player has a large chunk of units - he can go to the fund and redeem them. These are very specific players (investment banks), not individual investors.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://thenextrecession.wordpress.com/2017/06/23/europes-crisis-the-cluj-debate-with-mark-blyth/) reduced by 97%. (I'm a bot) ***** > If profits are the result of the exploitation of labour power and not merely the result of the distribution of production between wages and profits, then it is profits that matters for capital, not wages.  > Rising profit margins show capital is making bigger profits; but that can still mean overall profitability is falling.  > If the euro crisis and the Great Recession were the product of wage compression and too much credit, then the solution for the EU project may just be better taxation of profits, more wage increases and public spending.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6m5rme/europes_crisis_the_cluj_debate_with_mark_blyth/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~162726 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **profit**^#1 **wage**^#2 **capital**^#3 **profitability**^#4 **Euro**^#5"


"> It just has to finish below the strike price of the short (which can be higher than the stock's current price).  You're talking about a put option.   That's one ""short"" strategy, but it's not shorting a stock, so the terminology is a little jumbled.   There are reasons to not do straight options, because they can be quite risky, and you have to get the time frame correct."


>He stood there for an hour, his flesh burning inside the heated press. When emergency crews finally freed him, his right hand was severed at the wrist  No hands on training.  /r/osha  Jesus these fines are nothing. Let them add another 2 zeros to this and maybe something will actually get done.


Audating Sites provide the best Offer and Wide Variety of believable Partners. In the world,  people have different tastes and at our website is a wide variety of potential partners to choose from. If you are looking each other for Sex meet in the Australia, then you can get more of registered contacts. Getting your choice and a perfect match for yourself becomes easier. When you are signing up on our website.


That's why it can't be left for taxpayer to decide. Everyone follows their narrow personal interests, even if that means the downfall of society. That is what governments are for, to watch out for the public interests of society as a whole.


The economy stinks because the government targets a straight line rate of NGDP growth that is ever diverging from the rate of sustainable economic growth which has been flattening since the 1970s when the cost of energy sustained significant rises in price and never looked back. The only way to make the economy not stink is to find a miraculously cheap energy source that is as cheap as fossil fuels were before the 1970s.  Since the possibility of this is practically zero, the best we can do is make the economy stink less in the long run by intentionally flattening the rate of NGDP growth by gradually pulling back on massive debt spending and tightening loose monetary policies. If we don't do this, we are just setting ourselves up for a future economic correction whose amplitude will not only be bigger than the Great Recession but will also be relatively bigger than the Great Depression.


Pretty soon southerners proud of their heritage will need to be a protected class.  They didn't choose to be southern.   Their parents inculcated pride in their heritage while they were young.  They didn't choose that either.  They can't help but leak a tear when Dixie plays.  Its just how it is.


"Hi, I'm not sure what you're looking for, but I'll assume you are just looking for some distinguishing characteristics of an infra deal.  Infra deals are typically:  - Project financed meaning that a Special Purpose Company (SPC) is established to build and operate the asset. Project finance means that the SPC is quarantined from any party and is backed by the cashflows of the project and not by the balance sheet of some parent entity  - The SPC's cashflows are backed by a lengthy concession agreement (e.g. a government body provides a concession to a private party to operate the infrastructure asset for *say* 30 years). The concession agreement can best be thought of as a form of guarantee provided by the government body. The exact terms of the agreement will vary but something like ""you can operate this toll road for 30 years and charge $x per vehicle, indexed at y% p.a."" should give you the idea of what a concession agreement is.   - Because the concession agreement acts a bit like a guarantee over the cashflows of the SPC it makes longer term and higher leveraged financing more plausible. Imagine a national tollroad asset where the AAA-credit rated government body guaranteed 20m cars a year for 30 years with a $5 toll charge. Your tollroad SPC now has $100m of cashflow every year for 30 years which is AAA-credit rated. This should enable you to get competitively priced long term capital and to gear the SPC at much higher rates than non-infra deals.  - At the end of the concession period the SPC hands the asset back to the government completely unencumbered (debt-free)  So in a nutshell, a government body grants a concession to a SPC that guarantees its cashflows over a long term. The SPC is then financed based purely on this guarantee. The SPC then Builds the asset, Operates it and then at the end of the concession period Transfers it back to the government (google Build-Operate-Transfer or BOT for more detail if curious).    There are plenty of other distinguishing characteristics and a truck-load of detail that I have completely skipped/ignored so others may want to jump-in/ridicule me.  Good luck with your interview.  edit: formatting"


"And what evidence do you have for that statement? History tells us to expect a very different outcome.   When factory jobs were initially outsourced to Asia where costs were a fraction of domestic production, the ""savings"" went directly into the pockets of CEOs. Not only is there little to no evidence that any substantial cost reductions were being passed along to consumers, pricing and [cumulative inflation trends from 1970 - 2010](https://inflationdata.com/Inflation/Inflation/Cumulative_Inflation_by_Decade.asp) consistently increased precisely when the outsourcing of manufacturing/factory jobs was at its height and the differential savings were the greatest.  I highly doubt that anyone is thinking about lowering burger prices as a result of this innovation."


"Generally speaking you are not allowed to falsely represent models in a material way with a general model release. For example, you can't take a stock photo and put them in an ad that says ""I support puppy mills,"" making it look as though the model in question holds such a political view.  Sexual misrepresentation is covered under this as well, so this model definitely has a case that her image was misused. (The same would not apply to statements generally not considered sensitive like ""Shop at Safeway!"" or ""Dr. Gavrys gives great smiles!"" as long as they do not appear to be quotes from the model.)   Beyond such legal shenanigans, however, a large multinational corporation such as Burger King should really be hiring their own model for an ad campaign such as this, who knows exactly what she is getting into, simply as a matter of responsibility and good taste. It isn't good PR to choose some poor individual and misuse them in a way they find humiliating, since you can certainly find a model who would sign on for such a campaign in good faith."


If you earn money while in the US or from renting your US house - you have to pay taxes to the US on that income. If you become US tax resident - you have to pay US taxes on your worldwide income. Whether or not you're in the US illegally or receiving income while breaking any other law - doesn't matter at all.


"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/ontarios-basic-income-pilot-will-discourage-work-and-encourage-dependency) reduced by 87%. (I'm a bot) ***** > A basic income for the entire population would make many Ontarians, currently ineligible for social assistance, eligible for the basic income transfer.  > Another experimental program in British Columbia and New Brunswick in the 1990s, designed to encourage single parents to transition from dependency on welfare to employment, showed that an income transfer conditional on work can reduce dependency on government.  > While Ontario&#039;s basic income pilot program may shed new light on the issue, it won&#039;t &quot;Help more people in our province get ahead and stay ahead,&quot; as the premier suggests.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6o80ch/ontarios_basic_income_pilot_will_discourage_work/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~170468 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **income**^#1 **work**^#2 **government**^#3 **transfer**^#4 **Basic**^#5"


"If you receive a 1099-MISC from YouTube, that tells you what they stated to the IRS and leads into most tax preparation software guided interviews or wizards as a topic for you to enter.  Whether or not you have a 1099-MISC, this discussion from the IRS is pertinent to your question. You could probably elect to report the income as a royalty on your copyrighted work of art on Schedule E, but see this note: ""In most cases you report royalties in Part I of Schedule E (Form 1040). However, if you ... are in business as a self-employed writer, inventor, artist, etc., report your income and expenses on Schedule C or Schedule C-EZ (Form 1040)."" Whether reporting on Schedule E or C is more correct or better for your specific circumstances is beyond the advice you should take from strangers on the internet based on a general question - however, know that there are potentially several paths for you.   Note that this is revenue from a business, so if you paid for equipment or services that are 100% dedicated to your YouTubing (PC, webcam, upgraded broadband, video editing software, vehicle miles to a shoot, props, etc.) then these are a combination of depreciable capital investments and expenses you can report against the income, reducing the taxes you may owe.  If the equipment/services are used for business and personal use, there are further guidelines from the IRS as to estimating the split. These apply whether you report on Sch. E, Sch. C, or Sch C-EZ.    Quote: ""Self-Employment Income It is a common misconception that if a taxpayer does not receive a Form 1099-MISC or if the income is under $600 per payer, the income is not taxable. There is no minimum amount that a taxpayer may exclude from gross income. All income earned through the taxpayer’s business, as an independent contractor or from informal side jobs is self-employment income, which is fully taxable and must be reported on Form 1040. Use Form 1040, Schedule C, Profit or Loss from Business, or Form 1040, Schedule C-EZ, Net Profit from Business (Sole Proprietorship) to report income and expenses. Taxpayers will also need to prepare Form 1040 Schedule SE for self-employment taxes if the net profit exceeds $400 for a year. Do not report this income on Form 1040 Line 21 as Other Income. Independent contractors must report all income as taxable, even if it is less than $600. Even if the client does not issue a Form 1099-MISC, the income, whatever the amount, is still reportable by the taxpayer. Fees received for babysitting, housecleaning and lawn cutting are all examples of taxable income, even if each client paid less than $600 for the year. Someone who repairs computers in his or her spare time needs to report all monies earned as self-employment income even if no one person paid more than $600 for repairs."""