A stop order can be used to both enter or exit a position. A stop loss is used to set the price you want to get out if the price reaches that level. Whilst a stop buy or entry order is used to get into a position if the price reaches your desired level for entry. The stop order just means that you want to place your order at that level, you then need to specify if you are buying to open, selling to open, buying to close or selling to close your position at the stop level.


Pennsylvania allowing gambling now also put a decent dent in the business. Not necessarily the overnight resort stay but the people who used to do day trips frequently are now going to Parx, Valley Forge or Sugar House. Revel in particular would not allow bus trips to drop off there, which for a long time was a staple in AC's economy. That has declined due to what I mentioned above, but to flat out not allow hundreds of old people coming on a bus from the city and suburbs helped to their decline.


"Buy and Hope is a common investment strategy. It's also one that will keep you poor. Instead of thinking about saving money to put against a credit card or line of credit using your own job and hard-earned dollars, why not use someone else's money? If you have enough of a down payment for a property of your own, consider a duplex, triplex, or 4-plex where you live in one of the units. Since you will be living there you only need 5% down as opposed to 20% down if you do not live there. This arrangement gives you a place to live while you have other people paying your mortgage and other debts. If done properly, you can find a place that is cash-flow positive so you basically live rent-free.  This all assumes you have a down payment and a bank that will work with you. Your best bet is to discuss your situation with a mortgage broker. They know all the rules, and which banks have the best deal for you. A mortgage broker works on your behalf and is paid by the lending institution, not you. There are various caveats with this strategy, and they all revolve around knowing what to do and how to execute the plan. I suggest Googling Robert Kiyosaki and reading ""Rich Dad Poor Dad"" before taking this journey. He offers a number of free and paid seminars that teach people how to purchase real estate and make it pay. I have taken the free evening seminar and the $500 weekend seminar on how to purchase properties and make money with them. Note that I have no affiliation with Kiyosaki, and I do find his methods to work."


Yes. You must register for GST as well, if you will be making over the threshold (currently $60,000). That's probably a bonus for you, as your home office expenses will mostly include GST, but your income will most likely be zero-rated. Check with an accountant or with the IRD directly. Just be certain to put aside enough money from each payment to cover income tax, GST and ACC. You will get a very large bill in your second year of business.


Growth and efficiency can occur independently of each other.  For instance, if an economy consists of one inefficient business and then a second more efficient business opens to compete agains the first the overall efficiency increases while the economy grows. New industries tend to be inefficient at the beginning (since initiation is more important than optimisation) and then become more efficient over time.  Agriculture is an amazingly efficient business if you consider how many people now produce the amount of food we consume in comparison to only 100 years ago. Plus, efficiency is not only about producing extra widgets.  You could produce the same number of widgets for lower cost.  Outsourcing to China (taking advantage of their lower cost of production) increases the efficiency of the US economy, but also increases the efficiency of the Chinese economy (since extra work is created producing more things).  Lower costs in the US lead to increased investment in other production.  Increased production in China leads to the rising wages there. Growth can be achieved in both places for very different reasons. So, no, growth doesn't have to come about through less efficiency.


I think it's more good marketing/word of mouth and false hype more than anything. Everyone wants In 'n Out burger to be AMAZING HOLY SHIT BEST THING EVER, but really it's just a bit better than average. But fair enough.


I live in downtown Miami. There's no room for drive thrus. I'd love to have taco Bell but would have to drive out to more suburb areas to get it. And I avoid driving as much as possible. I agree in that pedestrian places not only could it work, but for me, would be welcome.   Edit: spellingz


Tell us up front what you want to pay for the job and that will really expedite the process.  Don't waste good candidates time by stringing them along the interview process if you know (and you DO know) that you're going to try and low-ball them.


>Nobody wants another exclusive platform at this point.   And you know this how?    >An android console was already tried multiple times and failed, nothing revolutionary.  If that was the case then why hasn't Nvidia stop selling Shield yet?  That said the Android consoles that where made where often cheap as hell and made by unknown Chinese companies.  A western company with a better made and supported Android console can work and be successful.


The original note should have had a a clear start and expiration date included with in it (the term).  If it did then the term has likely expired by now (since you said it had been years) and you should issue an amendment to the note that clarifies the new term and also clarifies the interest rate terms.  If the original note did not have an expiration date then that would be unusual and your mom should work with her friend to execute a new note with clear start and expiration dates and that also clarifies the payment and interest terms.  From my experience it is best to include a specific payment schedule within the note as well as very specific and clear terms around how interest will be handled in the event of a missed payment, late payment, or inability to pay the note off in full at expiration.  There are many good examples available online to help you craft the appropriate verbiage for your specific needs: http://tinyurl.com/note-examples


"To put a positive spin on the whole thing, maybe it's a small family shop, and having the check made out to ""cash"" means that your barber can hand it to someone else without the need to countersign. Or maybe his last name is ""Cash"" - there was a pretty famous singer who fit that description. Either way, it's not your place to nanny his finances."


There has been no poaching of employees. The employees are not being hired away- they are being called out for short rides that waste their time. Call for a 1 block lift- it takes a driver out of action for the time it takes to get there, carry the passenger, then get to the next dispatch.  So I retract my statement and replace it with a caution to ensure you comprehend what you are reading before you reply.


Investing for your future through stocks isn’t for the faint of heart. While there are stocks that can withstand our volatile market, there are few that can guarantee their business will still be a business 20 or 30 years from now. [Compound Stock Earnings](http://www.compoundstockearnings.com) Report Benigans would always be with us, but they no longer exist.


>Very different. Gas station takes way less time...  I HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED THIS.  Again - as I have pointed out *three* *times* now - this is a tradeoff I accept, because for 90% of my driving, I can charge at home, which takes NONE of my time.     If I add up ALL of my time spent standing around fueling my car, my total time is much LESS than yours, because my car charges while I sleep, I NEVER visit any gas stations, and charge stations are only visited on rare occasions (long trips.)  DO YOU GET THIS POINT YET?    I absolutely, completely understand you don't want to make the same tradeoff I do.  If you don't get this point, or don't care how much total time you spend pumping gas, DON'T BUY AN EV.     Now don't tell me AGAIN how much longer it takes to do a fast charge versus a fillup.  Respond to what I am actually saying.  RE: waiting to charge, this is rare.  Superchargers typically have 6-12 stalls, and Tesla is tripling chargers in the next year.


We are selling world's no'1 fidget spinner through our online store within affordable prices, At fidgetspinnerstar you can buy all types of fidget spinner with genuine quality and our mission is to relieve children from the ADHD.  This toy allows to calm nerves and helps you to relax, it also facilitates ease anxiety. Along with these things we carry vast variety of our latest Fidget spinner collection all toys are available at our online store, For further more information about the how to remove stress from these toys feel free to get in touch with us. The best of these toys are they are too small so you can carry it with and play anywhere anytime.


As a matter of fact, I invest small sums in stable stocks every month (in fact, much lesser than the $50 you are talking about). More than the return on investment, I gained a lot of knowledge keeping track of my stocks and this now helps me pick my stocks better. And the portfolio is doing great too. So, it is a good idea to start small and invest regularly.


Social security was created with just such people in mind. It's a meager living, but it is an income stream that can be supplemented by Walmart greeter income. It probably isn't so dire that it leads to homelessness, but it might mean not having some of the other comforts that we take for granted.


They should be (and are) taxed the corporate rate on the 10 cents.  The company they purchased the coffee grounds from will pay taxes on the 90 cents.  The other alternative you suggested would put an end to most commercial activity. Very few businesses could sustain a 35% (of revenue) penalty to their margins. Society would collapse.


According to the experts, it is not a bad idea to keep a track of how long it takes for the unit to cool the interior of your car. In such situation, you’ll have no other option that going for car air conditioning repairs NSW and get the repair work done before it is too late.


"> In response, Pyongyang promised to accelerate its weapons program.  > “The DPRK will redouble the efforts to increase its strength to safeguard the country's sovereignty and right to existence and to preserve peace and security of the region by establishing a practical equilibrium with the US,” a statement from North Korean Foreign Ministry said, as cited by KCNA news agency.   This is all posturing by North Korea.  If they had capacity to double their military strength, don't you think they would have already done it?  They are actively provoking nations with much larger militaries.  They better have all available resources in their military.  NK is responding like a little kid when the big kid takes their football.  ""I'm going to get big and strong and beat you up one day...""  I'm not saying Trump's actions are the right move, but this reaction could have been predicted by a monkey with slight understanding of international policy.  Doesn't mean it is going to amount to anything."


It depends. There is a *TON* of material out there. Some of the books are straight up amazing. Even better than the films. If they stick to Canon, I'm excited. If they stray off into stupid ass princess kiddie flicks, Star Wars is doomed. :(


"I said the majority, not ALL. (And the vast majority of people -- again even within the ""sciences"" -- are in fact mediocrities).  That doesn't mean it take some ""super-genius"" to see past the fraud, but it does take a sharp mind, AND it then takes an interest and time to look into the evidence (what little there actually is).  Many people within the hard sciences are more than capable of seeing through the fraud and foolishness of psychology/psychiatry.  Indeed, many *have* done so. (Cf [Feynman](http://www.rationalskepticism.org/psychology/richard-feynman-briefly-on-psychology-t967.html), and of course the aforementioned [John Ioannidis](psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2010/10/19/what-research-can-you-believe/) who has debunked a LOT of so called ""research"" in both psychiatry and other medical ""science"" research).  But far more often those with sharp minds are busy with a lot of other endeavors, and so long as they have no driving need, they do not really examine other fields to much dept (in most cases they do not investigate other fields at all).  What is more is that psychologists & [psychiatrists themselves know](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-P6_FwpVo_s) (and [when put on the spot will admit that there is no real science behind the malarkey](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atsCp2SErog) or the drugs) that they sell -- not that they really care of course."


"I have personally invested $5,000 in a YieldStreet offering (a loan being used by a company looking to expand a ridesharing fleet), and would certainly recommend taking a closer look if they fit your investment goals and risk profile. (Here's a more detailed review I wrote on my website.) YieldStreet is among a growing crop of companies launched as a result of legislative and regulatory changes that began with the JOBS Act in 2012 (that's a summary from my website that I wrote after my own efforts to parse the new rules) but didn't fully go into effect until last year. Most of them are in Real Estate or Angel/Venture, so YieldStreet is clearly looking to carve out a niche by assembling a rather diverse collection of offerings (including Real Estate, but also other many other categories). Unlike angel/venture platforms (and more like the Real Estate platforms), YieldStreet only offers secured (asset-backed) investments, so in theory there's less risk of loss of principal (though in practice, these platforms haven't been through a serious stress test). So far I've stuck with relatively short-term investments on the debt crowdfunding platforms (including YieldStreet), and at least for the one I chose, it includes monthly payments of both principal and interest, so you're ""taking money off the table"" right away (though presumably then are faced with how to redeploy, which is another matter altogether!) My advice is to start small while you acclimate to the various platforms and investment options. I know I was overwhelmed when I first decided to try one out, and the way I got over that was to decide on the maximum I was willing to lose entirely, and then focus on finding the first opportunity that looked reasonable and would maximize what I could learn (in my case it was a $1,000 in a fix-and-flip loan deal via PeerStreet)."


My brokerage account (E-Trade) automatically spreads cash balances that exceed the FDIC insured amount into several partner banks, so just about any amount gets insured.


I'm sure they're not even in the running then. Amazon is definitely looking for tax breaks, and that's not unreasonable given how many jobs they'll be bringing to the table, along with the talent that will move there as well.


I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole -- it's definitely too far gone. People who have not gotten out yet are crazy.  Their physical presence is no match for Wal-Mart, and their online presence is no match for Amazon (nor Wal-mart at this point). How often do people under 35 go to Sears for something? And when do people go to Sears.com as a first resort to buy something? I'm going to guess almost never for both.


"If anything, this makes their salary even more stupid, in light of the fact that we already have a system that does their job.  We don't pay people to dig tunnels by hand anymore.  We don't pay people to taste the Queen's food to make sure it isn't poisoned.  If a job is dangerous and can be automated, it is stupid pay for the hazard of doing the job.  Now, I am not crying for the automation of all menial jobs.  People need to work and not everyone can do educated labor.  It's just that certain jobs are better suited to automation.  We should not pay out the ass for the hazard, insurance, and lawsuits that result from such jobs.  It's like paying a human 500k to perform the job of ""suspicious bomb parcel opener.""  Sit back and let the robots breathe the fumes, get blown up, get crushed, etc."


That's how my power company does it. You authorize them to direct debit recurring monthly. If they screw up and withdraw $1000, you're out until it gets fixed.   But it varies from company to company. Not everyone's situation is like your online banking.


Check with local mechanics which cars they drive and dealers the buy from. Tell them your budget and needs and you'll find they're pretty consistent in their recommendations. Also, don't overlook dealers in favour of buying direct from owners, both have pros and cons.  Dealers have to allow you to return the vehicle within a certain time frame, their name is also on the line. Some offer warranties to fix anything that goes wrong in the first x years. Do your research, but for old cars this can be a valuable saving. Also, some dealers offer to provide you with parts at cost for the life of the vehicle, also potential savings. Don't go in on a Saturday, do go in near the end of the month. Go back several times, compare, negotiate.


We are one of the guaranteed web based business online store in the United States, where you can purchase any wellbeing items skin inside moderate costs. Envyzen offers you universes best clench hand class abstains from food supplement and Diet pills on the web, which gives you muscle body and decreased, increment vitality. In the event that an all-characteristic thing, for example, Envy Instant Face Lift is truly normal, it will likewise be more conservative. This is on account of those 100 % normal parts are promptly accessible, and there is no assembling procedure locked in.


Make it phase out slowly. Not unlike the EITC. First, Start with a flat 7% tax that's not refundable. That's 1.26-trillion.   There's 325-million people are in America, but 75-million of those are children.   There's enough money there to give a parent, for every child they have, $3500 a year, regardless of that parent's income AND give half the adults remaining(125-million) an average of $8000 a year. Have that slowly fade from $12,000 for the lowest earners to $4,000 for those that are earning the median income.   $12000 is 102% of the poverty line. So a single person with nothing still lives above the poverty line  With this model, 61.5% of households are receiving some kind of UBI aid, the most desperate are receiving the most, and the bottom half of earners are guaranteed to get something. For only 7% of GDP.


In general, the higher the return (such as interest), the higher the risk. If there were a high-return no-risk investment, enough people would buy it to drive the price up and make it a low-return no-risk investment. Interest rates are low now, but so is inflation. They generally go up and down together. So, as a low risk (almost no-risk) investment, the savings account is not at all useless. There are relatively safe investments that will get a better return, but they will have a little more risk. One common way to spread the risk is to diversify. For example, put some of your money in a savings account, some in a bond mutual fund, and some in a stock index fund. A stock index fund such as SPY has the benefit of very low overhead, in addition to spreading the risk among 500 large companies. Mutual funds with a purchase or sale fee, or with a higher management fee do NOT perform any better, on average, and should generally be avoided. If you put a little money in different places regularly, you'll be fairly safe and are likely get a better return. (If you trade back and forth frequently, trying to outguess the market, you're likely to be worse off than the savings account.)


Have her pay something like a friendly monthly rent. This should be less than half of the monthly mortgage cost, since you are assuming the risk (and benefits) of a mortgage and closer to the rent of similar places near you. For when you get married and she is to have half the apartment, have a pre-agreed way to calculate a lump-sum that she needs to provide to match your own contributions up to that time, as if you two had equal contributions from the beginning. The financially precise way to do it would be to have her pay more than the mere sum of the amount (since she will be providing the amount at a later time than you), but I would be generous and skip this in your place if the difference is not too big. If you break up, she will have payed what would be a fair amount of rent, as if you two were renting, so, in this sense, it is fair that she would not have a claim on the apartment. In case that you two would like that she keeps the apartment, you can just sell it to her, having her pay this same amount as above and assume responsibility for the rest of the mortgage.


A share is more than something that yields dividends, it is part ownership of the company and all of its assets. If the company were to be liquidated immediately the shareholders would get (a proportion of) the net value (assets - liabilities) of the company because they own it. If a firm is doing well then its assets are increasing (i.e. more cash assets from profits) therefore the value of the underlying company has risen and the intrinsic value of the shares has also increased. The price will not reflect the current value of the firms assets and liabilities because it will also include the net present value of expected future flows. Working out the expected future flows is a science on par with palmistry and reading chicken entrails so don't expect to work out why a company is trading at a price so much higher than current assets - liabilities (or so much lower in companies that are expected to fail). This speculation is in addition to price speculation that you mention in the question.


"A substantial portion of Native American poverty is ""reservation poverty."" It is influenced by historical US Indian policy, reservation policies and deals, and certain cultural idiosyncrasies. For example, Cherokee are poorer than the people who reside in the land they were expelled from on the trail of tears. That was an interruption of capital accumulation. The distribution of proceeds of casino, oil, and other land deals wasn't exactly perfect welfare policy. Finally, in some communities there are harmful institutions such as arranged marriages of teen girls.   African American poverty has an almost entirely separate history, and is concentrated in different areas."


Ask for at least 10 references.  Ask for 10 because it will be harder for them to refer you to ringer references like their family or friends.


I don't see how allowing usage of your vehicle is less support than giving money to buy their own vehicle. If that's the only vehicle your mother has - then you're supporting her. Quantifying that support may be difficult though, but if you are providing her all of her needs - it doesn't matter. If she does have income of her own, I do not think that you can put the actual amount you're paying as part of the calculation towards the 50% rule since she would otherwise have bought a much cheaper car. But if you pass the 50% threshold even without the car payments - then you're fine either way.


> Try it! Deposit a check or buy with a credit card and scribble something unrelated as a signature! The deposit or credit card transaction will go through.  About that you are correct, however during any sort of forensic investigation they are going to ask to see a signature receipt if one is available.  > For decades, retailers never compared signatures on credit cards to the person's signature.  No that isn't true. Retailers are required by many card processing vendors to send in a signed receipt. This is changing, because employees are lazy, and retailers don't care about their customers at all so they don't bother enforcing any standards on their minimum wage register jockeys. However many of them are still required to send signed receipts in. When I was younger I worked at a store that would not get paid by the bank if it did not send in a signed receipt for every transaction.  Go on, try walking away without signing your credit card receipt at stores where they present it for signature, and see what happens.  > I know what I am talking about because I deal with credit cards a lot, professionally, in IT.  You and everyone else. Big deal. Different credit card processors have different requirements for their customers (merchants).  > The credit card companies don't really care.  I think the real lesson here is **nobody cares**. Not the banks, not the credit card companies, and not the merchants. The only thing any of them give a fuck about is keeping the money flowing, especially into their own wallets, and if that means customers get ripped off sometimes because of inadequate protections, so what.  My only point is, if I have one at all, **merchants _should_ care** about protecting the customer, and **customers _should_ care** about what protections are in place to prevent fraud. **PIN numbers are fine** as an authentication method, **but they should be completely shielded from view** by people standing in line or cameras overhead.


Coffee is much popular and cheaper here. I can get a can of coffee for under 100yen (about 1 dollar) if I buy it at the right place, a little more if it's from a vending machine or convenience store. Monster is twice that price, and red bull is 3 times (the size of drinks are smaller too). There are many brands of canned warm and cold coffee.     Many cans are in a bottle shape, and have a screw top lid. Really convenient to carry around.


No, I really do.  Things break at least once a month, and never get fixed.  The worst one was the bathroom window that broke from opening it...3 weeks later, and several pieces of cardboard and duct tape later, it finally got replaced.  And the slumlords I rent from now are no where near the neighborhood that I moved out of when I could no longer afford my house.  The cost of living went up, and our pay went down.  That is not the specific lending bank's fault, indeed.  But the economy is crap, and crap runs downhill.  I didn't know how bad the schools were in the place we lived formerly until she'd been there for a couple years.  The schools here...despite the neighborhood...are excellent.  Tldr:  We were making more when we bought the house.  But it was a 50,000 house that someone stuck a 100,000 price tag on.  Lots of hidden problems that got glossed over in the home inspection.


">It can be argued that retarding the economy was a major goal of the Fed in the first place. To prevent the unrestrained runs that 1913-1929 saw which resulted in thousands of investors losing everything.   The Fed was the underlying *cause* of the 1913-29 era.   The ""Panic of 1907"" was really just a ""rich man's panic"" -- few people in the general population were invested in the stock market at that time -- and few businesses were listed either (the vast majority were privately owned, operated on a cash {i.e. not ""leveraged debt""} basis, and were substantially unaffected).  The whole point of the Fed was to save the ""rich men's arses"" from their own screwups -- to ""socialize"" their losses.  Which is exactly (and only) what it is doing.  About the general welfare of the overall population... they couldn't give a rat's tail (other than some minimal concern over whether and how they will be able to milk & bilk the population again)."


The deadline for contributing to a 401K is the last paycheck paid in December. That may not be the last pay period that ends in December. For example if the last pay period ends on Friday the 30th and you get paid on Thursday January 5th, that check is the first in the new year.  The US government has rules regarding how quickly the money needs to be sent to the 401K trustee. It is possible that the money may get there after the first of the year, but the important date for you is the date of the last paycheck in December. The company form to set the contribution rate (it could also be on a website) will have a deadline to determine if the rate makes the next check or the one after that. The form will also have a maximum amount as a percentage of the check. Some could allow up to 100% but yours might not. So how much you can put in with the last paycheck or two is up to company policy and your pay rate. The company forms or website will describe how the company match works. If you were try and put as much as possible into a few checks, it is possible to hit the $18,000 yearly limit in just a small part of the year. In some companies that would mean that you could miss out on company match money, because that would never be more than x% of each check. For example if you were to put $3,000 per check with a base pay of $5,000 every two weeks and if the maximum company match was 5%. After 6 checks you would be done: you would have put in $18,000 and the company would have put in $250 x 6 or $1,500. If you were to spread the money over all 26 checks you would still put in $18,000 but the company would have put in $6,500.


In a word, no. Diversification is the first rule of investing.  Your plan has poor diversification because it ignores most of the economy (large cap stocks).  This means for the expected return your portfolio would get, you would bear an unnecessarily large amount of risk.  Large cap and small cap stocks take turns outperforming each other.  If you hold both, you have a safer portfolio because one will perform well while the other performs poorly.  You will also likely want some exposure to the bond market. A simple and diversified portfolio would be a total market index fund and a total bond market fund.  Something like 60% in the equity and 40% in the bonds would be reasonable.  You may also want international exposure and maybe exposure to real estate via a REIT fund. You have expressed some risk-aversion in your post.  The way to handle that is to take some of your money and keep it in your cash account and the rest into the diversified portfolio. Remember, when people add more and more asset classes (large cap, international, bonds, etc.) they are not increasing the risk of their portfolio, they are reducing it via diversification.  The way to reduce it even more (after you have diversified) is to keep a larger proportion of it in a savings account or other guaranteed investment. BTW, your P2P lender investment seems like a great idea to me, but 60% of your money in it sounds like a lot.


I guess, psychologically speaking, that motivations in war are different than motivations in peace. The people with the money were 100% fine with throwing it in bomb form at the Japanese, but now that peace has engulfed the world for the most part, they want returns


"Ally Bank $0 - from their website (emphasis mine): To receive a wire transfer from a non-U.S. bank: Incoming wire transfers from a non-US bank are processed by our   designated receiving bank, JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. You'll need to provide the following information to the person or   business sending the wire transfer to you: Receiving Bank: JP Morgan   Chase Bank, N.A. ABA/Routing Number: 021000021 Address: 1 Chase   Manhattan PLZ, New York, NY 10005 SWIFT Code or Bank Identification   Code: CHASUS33 Beneficiary Account Number: 802904391 Beneficiary Name:   List 'Ally Bank' since the wire is being processed by JP Morgan Chase   Bank, N.A. Further Credit: Your Ally Bank Account Number and your name   as it appears on your Ally Bank account. Note: We won't charge you to receive a wire transfer into your Ally   account. https://www.ally.com/help/search.html?term=SWIFT&console=false&context=Help&domain=www.ally.com&section=Help+%26+FAQs Alliant Credit Union $0 - from their website (emphasis mine): Direct international wire transfers  International wire transfers are   handled through our correspondent bank for processing. International   wires can take up to 10 business days to be credited to the receiving   institution. Funds should be wired to: Northern Trust ABA# 071000152 ""Note: US   Banks do not use SWIFT codes. This ABA # is used in place of SWIFT   codes for US Banks."" 50 South La Salle Street, Chicago, IL 60603 For further credit: Alliant Credit Union Account Number 35101804 11545   W. Touhy Avenue, Chicago, IL 60666 For final credit: Member’s name and complete address (No P.O. Box)   Member’s 14-digit account number Destination of funds (checking,   savings or loan number)  Incoming wire transfers: Wire transfers received Monday - Friday,   7:00am - 3:00pm, CT, will be credited to your account the same day.   Wire transfers received after 3:00pm, CT, Monday - Friday and on the   weekend will be credited the next business day. Fees:   We do not charge a fee to receive incoming wire funds. However, the financial institution wiring the funds may charge for this   service. http://www.alliantcreditunion.org/help/receiving-a-wire-transfer-to-your-alliant-account"


"The bottom line, is that you are doing the right thing now:  correcting your past indiscretions.  Get those collections taken care of, then start saving for a down payment.  Of course, during this time, you should pay your bills early or on time. During that time your credit will improve dramatically. I bet that this will not be an issue once you have your down payment saved, so the point is moot.   However, with outstanding collections it is very unlikely you will get a loan.  In my own case, I had to pay a collection, that I did not owe, in order to obtain a mortgage.  It was for a small amount and the loan officer told me that ""it is the cost of doing business"".  Ship $150 and my loan when through free and clear."


I think a lot of people should just forego college altogether. To be clear, there are lots of valuable degrees out there. We can also always use some English and history majors, but we should make sure we get just enough to satisfy the demand. We wouldn't have engineers who could communicate without English majors who become teachers to them. But we have far too many people blindly picking majors and then realizing they are competing with a million others for a handful of available jobs.


You don't work in the corporate world, do you? At least not in a place where decisions are made.   > If they followed standard best practices and were hacked, then would you still want them put out of business?   The answer to this is always yes.  Someone has to be blamed. That person or persons is nailed to the wall.  If they aren't, you are.   > Should airlines fold if one of their planes crashes?  Someone will take the blame, and that person or persons could be jailed.  The corporations responsible would be sued into bankruptcy.  In the real world, this translates to corporations shutting down and starting up under another name, or some combination such as firings, fines, etc..  In corrupt areas, those fines may come in the form of lobbying.   > Now if they were negligent, that's another story. You can read my other comment down the thread but shutting down Equifax is only going to hurt innocent people who had no say in the matter. Personally I don't think that is going to do the most good after the fact.  You can't give a corporation immunity because you're afraid of hurting individuals who work for that corporation.  The corporation is not afraid to hurt them, and that will only cause more harm as other corporations realize their power.  A corporation exists for one and only one purpose.  That is to make money.  It's not to make a product.  It's not to employ people.  It's not to change the world.  It's to make money for itself and its shareholders.   The minute you let something like this slide, you've suddenly lost power with every single corporation out there.  Everyone will do it because it's now more profitable than not.  Those that don't cut this corner will not be able to compete.  Heads must roll on something this large or you're going to hurt every citizen of your nation.


The number of days you could sustain your current lifestyle if you stopped working for money today


You don't have to make the repairs, if they're just cosmetic. The insurance company doesn't care if your house looks good or not. On the other hand, if the repairs are structurally necessary to prevent water damage to the house, not making them may result in the company raising your rate or not renewing the policy due to the increased risk. You can try asking your agent if you can get a ruling on that now, before deciding whether to spend the money. And of course if you don't do it, they may not count this damage toward your deductible for future damage this year.


This isn't including revenue for SP3, it's probably including operating expenses for production of SP3, and Microsoft also overproduced SP1. It's not a terrible loss and probably looks worse than it is. Xbox division lost far more too, but it's a necessary cost to break into new markets and work towards their vision.   I'm not a fanboy by any means, but I think Microsoft have hit the money with the *idea* of the Surface Pro, and Apple are going to be playing catch up, which is going to look dire. Especially if iWatch is their upcoming innovation.


You can do this with no problem. What you want is a direct transfer style of rollover. This is simply where the money is transferred from your 401(k) custodian directly to your new IRA custodian. This will ensure there are no taxes or penalties on the balance.  The key is that the money is moving directly to the new account without you having direct access to the balance. This keeps the money out of your hands in the eyes of the IRS. The process should look something like this: A few notes:


Some builders -- if given the first chance to deal with the problem, instead of being presented with a bill after the fact -- will fix the problem at no charge to the homeowner.  Good faith matters. My house was built by such a builder.  If I have a problem that I am competent enough to diagnose and fix, I fix it myself, at my cost.  If I have a problem that that I cannot diagnose and fix myself, but that I think the builder (or his subcontractor) is competent enough to diagnose and/or fix, I contact the builder (or subcontractor directly).  I am willing to pay for the diagnosis and/or fix, especially if it is an aging or wear-and-tear issue, or the logical consequence of a cost-saving measure that I voluntarily chose when the house was being designed. If the problem is a plumbing problem, I contact my preferred plumber for a diagnosis and/or repair.  I pay for my preferred plumber's work.  On two occasions, my preferred plumber was unable to fix the problem.  Both problems turned out to be installation (or testing) errors related to work done specifically for building inspections.  In both cases, I paid for my preferred plumber's diagnosis, and the builder (and/or his subcontractor) fixed the problem at no additional cost to me. The diagnosis and repair work that you describe seems like a similar situation to me.  (In fact, I had my builder's subcontractor replace a few prematurely damaged shingles on my roof.  This repair prevented a roof leak.  I noticed the problem while trimming a tree back from the roof.  The shingles were damaged because the building permit implied that the tree could not be trimmed back.  I'm spotting a pattern with these problems…) In my opinion, the alleged problem with the roof pitch seems like a design flaw that should have been obvious at the time you chose the house design.  I expect that any corrections of this design flaw will need to come out of your remodelling budget.  In the absence of further details, I doubt that either the builder or the homeowners' insurance company is responsible for it. Some builders make a point of minimizing the warranty work they pay for, regardless of its effect on the builder's reputation.  I do not know which kind of builder you have. The lawyer has probably told you whether the relevant statutes of limitations have lapsed.  (The statutes of limitations vary from state-to-state, and vary depending on the alleged tort.)  Starting a lawsuit is likely to further damage your relationship with your builder. Homeowners' insurance companies now share the number of claims that have been made historically at each property address.  Most insurance companies now use this cumulative number of claims when setting rates, even if the claim(s) were made against a different insurance company, or by a different homeowner.  I do not know whether any insurance companies ignore claims older than a certain number of years, or ignore the first claim.


First off, putting extra cash toward a mortgage early on, when most of the payments are going to interest, is the BEST time. If you pay an extra $1 on your mortgage today,  you will save 30 years worth of interest (assuming a 30 year mortgage). If in 29 years you pay an extra dollar, you will only save 1 year worth of interest. That said, there are lots of things that go into a decision like this. Do you have other debts? How stable is your income? What is the interest rate on your mortgage compared to any other debts you may have or potential investments you might make? How much risk are you willing to take? Etc. Mortgages tend to be very low interest, and, at least in the U.S., the interest on them is tax-deductible, making the effective interest rate even lower. If you have some other loan, you are almost always better to pay the other loan off first. If you don't mind a little risk, you are usually better off to invest your money rather than pay off the mortgage. Suppose your mortgage is 5%. The average return on the stock market is something like 7% (according to my buddy who works for Wells Fargo). So if you put $1000 toward your mortgage, you'd save $50 the first year. (Ignoring compounding for simplicity, changes the exact numbers but not the basic idea.) If you put that same $1000 in the stock market, than if it's a typical year you'd make $70. You could put $50 of that toward paying the interest on your mortgage and you'd have $20 left to go on a wild spending spree. The catch is that the interest on a mortgage is fixed, while the return on an investment is highly variable. In an AVERAGE year the stock market might return 7%, but this year it might return 20% or it might lose 10% or a wide range of other possible numbers. (Well, you might have a variable rate mortgage, but there are still usually some defined limits on how much it can vary.)


Term life insurance is just that - life insurance that pays out if you die, just like car insurance pays out if you have an accident. Like car insurance, it's easy to compare amongst term life insurance policies - you can even compare quotes online.  Whole life insurance is life insurance plus an investment component. The money that you pay goes to pay for your life insurance and it also is invested by the insurance company. Insurance companies love whole life because it is not a commodity; they can come up with a large variety of variants, and that fact plus the fact that it combines insurance and investment means that is very difficult to compare policies. Not to mention that fact that none of the companies - as far as I can tell - publish their whole life insurance rates, so it is very difficult to shop around.


Depended on your peer performance. While 70 is a good score if your school average is around that then its not that great.Check online to look up the average.You might get contacted if its in the higher teirs. I know a few people who have as a result from taken bat


A perpetuity in the mathematical context is the equation in your link. A perpetuity in the legal sense is a liability that never matures, presumably paying endlessly, except for a banknote that pays nothing.  An example would be UK war bonds during WWII. Real estate can be modeled like a perpetuity for convenience, but it is not a legal obligation to pay forever if one excludes taxes. If one starts with capital and ends with a perpetuity, one has bought a perpetuity.  If one starts out with nothing and ends with capital by way of a perpetuity, one has sold a perpetuity.


Not into a lot of beef offal, but that's about it. It's the ammoniating that's gross, as well as the need for ammoniating in the first place.    Beef liver's pretty gross to me though. Of course, some people love it, which is fine. Or better than fine when I was trying to sell it.


"The biggest disadvantage to you is that your tenant now knows your bank information, which means he can easily identify your source of money in the event he wins a lawsuit and wins a judgement.  He will be able to have a court marshall freeze your account. However, if you deposit your tenant's check into your account as opposed to an EFT, then your tenant can basically still obtain your bank account information and freeze your account, it would just take him a bit longer to get that information. I am definitely anti-landlord in these situations because I've had to deal with so many bad ones here in NYC, but as a landlord, the best thing you can do is to create a ""buffer"" account for you to deposit tenant rent money into, then transfer the money from the buffer account to your regular account.  This would prevent the tenant from knowing your personal bank information and greatly delay the tenant receiving his judgement from an assumed court win against you. My source:  I had to take my landlord to court, and after obtaining a judgement, I got a court marshall to begin the process of closing access to her account (she couldn't access the money in that account).  The process resulted in her sending me a check (assuming from her other account) for the judgement since her account was frozen and she couldn't access any of her money."


To be fair, Trump doesn't wear a hairpiece.  It is, in fact, his real hair.  That's why it looks so hideous - it's a combover.  With his money, if he wanted to buy fake hair it would look a heckofalot better than that.


">My father and my grandfather and my great grandfather could all sustain their families on a single middle class income  Well, depends on what you define as ""middle class income"".  Some of it is a **rising expected standard of living**:  What size house did they have?  How many automobiles did they have?  If you go back to your great grandfather's time, he probably had far fewer sets of clothing.  They probably didn't have the television, telephone, and air conditioning services that I expect most middle-class people expect.  My dad ate fruits and vegetables only in season; you didn't get to have strawberries in the middle of winter or avocadoes shipped in from Chile.  I expect to be able to travel via air to visit relatives; go back to the 1960s or even into the 1970s, and it was considered something that only the well-to-do would expect to be doing.  My father didn't have video game consoles available to him.  Some of these are driven purely by technology, of course, and someone can manage to pay no larger a chunk of change than they did before.  We eat more meat, if I remember a lecture on this correctly.  My parents had a lot more casserole and spaghetti (inexpensive foods) than I do.  But some of it is also adjusting norms.  Reading about the sort of house that a farmer lived in a few hundred years back would make me think of horrible poverty by modern standards...  Most women seem not to have wanted to remain housewives when women started going out and doing men's historical work.  So if they go out into the workforce, then keeping up with the Joneses, doing what's considered middle-class requires doubling income, and downwards pressure on some fixed costs (like, say, utility costs or gas costs) is lessened; that makes things tough on the few holdout families who want to have a single-income standard.  Sure, maybe a small percentage of people out there want less-expensive beef, but its the bulk of people who get catered to...  **Automation** has greatly decreased demand for some types of jobs; performing a repetitive, pre-defined task on an assembly line has fallen dramatically in value as the need for more people to do this sort of work has fallen off.  Wages for a particular job are a function of how many people are available to do them relative to how many are needed.  Every ATM is one less bank teller, every e-commerce website fewer retail workers.  That increases the productive capacity of society, but whereas before there might be tremendous demand for someone to perform a repeated task on an assembly line (which it was easy to train people to do), many of the types of labor that are currently under-supplied are things that take longer to train people to do and require more specialization.  **Debt Service**.  Any debt that someone has that doesn't have a positive return-on-investment (an engineering degree would probably have a positive ROI, a large television probably a negative) winds up making them poorer in the long run.  Any debt at *all* (barring investors making bad pricing decisions and hitting default or unexpectedly low returns) means transfer of wealth from people without money to people with money.  The more (non-defaulted-upon) debt, the more people with more wealth make more wealth from lending.  People have vastly more *personal debt* than they once did.   Compare the amount of debt that someone has today with the amount of debt that they typically had in your great-grandfather's time, in the 1930s.  There's a constant *drain* of wealth towards the lenders.  This is one of Elizabeth Warren's favorite grousing points — people take out a *lot* more debt, particularly on housing, than they ever did in the past, and so a lot of their income is eaten year-by-year on debt service.  There are lots of factors that make it easier to take out more debt.  The biggest source of personal debt is [by far mortgages](http://www.utahfoundation.org/img/pdfs/rr689summary.pdf), and this is where the largest increases have taken place; policies to try to encourage people to go into debt to take out larger and larger mortgages have been steadily ramped up over this time, with the government subsidizing and taking on risk for insurance liability on mortgages to keep encouraging ever-larger amounts of debt.  Lenders have computers and much more information and sophisticated systems for evaluating risk of default, which permits lending out more wealth.  So there are technological changes driving this.  The government has more *public debt* which means more such payments, even if they don't show up on your personal checkbook and are only seen by an increasing disparity between what you pay in taxes and the services you get back.   Here's a chart of [inflation-adjusted debt per capita](http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/07/chart-of-the-day-americans-income-and-the-us-debt/241463/) in the United States.  That means that there's a constant increasing in the siphoning off of taxes as well to pay for the government having purchased a good or service without having actually paid for it at the time it was ordered.  That decreasing green line means not that personal debt is falling (well, most of the time) but that the government is taking out debt on your behalf even faster than private debt has been going up.  **The rest of the world catching up and breaking a temporary limited monopoly on certain goods**.  China and India were not industrialized (and the former stuck under Maoism and not trading much with the rest of the world), so there were fewer people available to do this sort of work.  Europe rebuilt from World War II, so it didn't have to purchase from the overseas US manufacturing industry.  What could change?  Well, standard-of-living is a cultural thing; that seems hard to manipulate.  I'm sure that it's possible to change that, but I have a hard time suggesting how.  Automation would be an across-the-board good thing if workers could be efficiently shifted into fields which currently have more demand; it's only an issue for workers if they stay in a field that has falling demand.  I'm sure that our mechanisms for re-educating workers are not terribly good.  Today, our education system still involves having a person stand up in front of a lot of other people and talk at them, then have those other people go and repeat some rote tasks to try and hammer something into their brain; it's the same mechanism that the wealthy used hundreds of years ago to tutor their children, but ramped up on a larger scale.  If it were cheaper and easier to learn a new trade, it'd be easier to enter lucrative fields.  College costs in particular are ridiculous.  When you take college classes, you're basically getting a reading list, a very few limited slots to ask questions, and a set of predefined tasks plus some grading.  That can be done far less-expensively than it is provided today.  I personally have high hopes for online courses as a start here, though I'm sure that there will be stumbling blocks.  Ditto for things like Wikipedia; using hypertext means that I can skip over things I already know and focus on what I don't understand, and electronic, automatic distribution means that it can be done far less-expensively than having some guy with a PhD stand up in front of a room and read some lecture notes aloud.  Instead of answering questions generation after generation, *those* people should be polishing databases of *answers* to questions so that every subsequent human being can quickly and easily refer to their answer, and so that we can direct people to the best explanation easily.  It's possible to adopt some measures that would reduce debt service by reducing public debt, but the public debt has been growing for a long time, and it seems very clear that people are much more willing to take out debt than to cut into *their* favorite concern (low taxes or lots of services) in the immediate future.  As for reducing debt service via reducing private debt, most of the policy and technological factors that drive private debt seem unlikely to change to me.  Maybe if we see some sort of cultural change, an aversion to taking out debt with a negative ROI, but all of the information I'm giving here has been public for a long time and people haven't changed, so I doubt that we'll see any kind of a reversal or social movement against taking out lots of debt.  You'd have to have the equivalent of a [Great Awakening](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_awakening) with respect to debt...and given that attempts to excite interest in the matter have generally not gone anywhere thus far, I suspect that this is human nature and doubt that things will change.  You can always change *your* personal debt decisions, but society as a whole?  As for the temporary monopoly...well, I think that it's pretty much inevitable that the rest of the world catches up to a great degree.  Asia will catch up, even Africa will eventually get there.  I think that that would be a pretty difficult thing to stop, and I think that most of the world would object to someone attempting to stop it."


The GOP is in power and have an opportunity to build policy around taking care of the poor. Which is demanded by scripture in every corner that you look. So I have no trouble calling a Christian republican a hypocrite if they choose to use their power to build and propose legislative action which will do nothing to help the poor and will very likely make them more vulnerable. They have agency and they're using it to selfish ends contrary to the tenants of the faith. No where does the Bible equate taxation with theft or force, in fact paying taxes is expressly condoned and expected. Matthew 22:15-22


Look, if you think you're differentiating yourself by filling out an application online... like every other person out there, you're kidding yourself.  I have some sympathy for your position, but you need to show some initiative.  Pick up the phone and call these people.  Go meet with anyone that will let you come see them and ask for a mock interview.  Or, ask them if there's anyone in their organization that you can talk to that needs help at the entry-level level.  It's time to get creative.  It's not time to cross your fingers and hope something happens, you have to make your own luck.  Finally, you're going to need to broaden your search.  I got it - you want defense finance... welp... try something else.  There are TONS of entry level finance jobs all over the country.  Go work for a restaurant, a clothing store, a grocery store, a bank... ANYTHING to get 1-2 years of experience... and keep cold calling.  Talk to people - build a network.  Get good at your job and then move - ask for more money somewhere once you qualify.  If you want someone to review your resume, PM me, I'm glad to look it over.  Oh, and you should be sending a custom cover letter for every position.  Hope this helps... be creative.  Successful people are successful because they are willing to do the things unsuccessful people aren't!


Travel Squire, a digital travel magazine and travel therapist brings insights into food culture from different parts of the world. Get insight into the Le Cordon Bleu, one of the most prestigious hospitality institutes. Learn interesting things about the place and the famous cuisines. From mastering the culinary skills to choosing a new career path, get every detail you need on Le Cordon Bleu with Travel Squire. http://travelsquire.com/category/food/


"From the HLSS 1st quarter 10Q: ""Match funded advances on loans serviced for others result from our transfers of residential loan servicing advances to SPEs in exchange for cash. The SPEs issue debt supported by collections on the transferred advances. We made these transfers under the terms of our advance facility agreements. These transfers do not qualify for sale accounting because we retain control over the transferred assets. As a result, we account for these transfers as financings and classify the transferred advances on our Interim Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as Match funded advances and the related liabilities as Match funded liabilities. We use collections on the Match funded advances pledged to the SPEs to repay principal and to pay interest and the expenses of the entity. Holders of the debt issued by this entity can look only to the assets of the entity itself for satisfaction of the debt and have no recourse against HLSS.""   I'm not an expert in the accounting of these things but I'll take a stab from the view of a bond investor.  Let's assume the mortgage(s) in question have been pooled together and sold into the bond market in the form of a mortgage-backed security (MBS).    When a homeowner falls behind on their payment, scheduled principal and interest (their monthly mortgage payment amount, or ""P&I"") is advanced as if the borrower is still current to the person who holds the MBS.  This is typically done from the time they first fall behind until either they 1) catch up on their payments or, 2) are foreclosed upon and the home is sold to repay the mortgage balance.  In either instance the advanced monthly payments are recaptured by the servicer before the holder of the MBS is paid.  In this sense, the servicer develops a sort of prepaid asset over time by advancing money they are almost certain to recover at a future date (usually via foreclosure and liquidation).    Due to a high number of borrowers falling behind on their payments since the housing crisis and the resulting time it takes to foreclose on a property, the servicers (OCN, HLSS, etc.) have built a large balance of advances on the asset side of their balance sheet.  To free up this cash prior to liquidation of the home, they have sold short term bonds against this asset (via an SPE), thereby creating the liability you reference.  So in essence they have, say, a home they expect to be liquidated in twelve months that they have advanced P&I on.  The short term bonds sold via the SPE offset this asset at an equivalent term, thereby making the asset and liability ""match funded""."


There is a lot of your financial information that the selling agent handles in the course of a real estate transaction, including but not limited to your pre-approval letter which states what maximum purchase price might be. Closing costs and interest rate are not details they would know unless you shared that with them, given that that is done after you go binding.  I agree with xiaomy in that, while in absolute monetary terms the higher amount should always be more attractive, the selling agent wants to ensure the transaction goes as smoothly as possible. With contracts falling through due to first-time buyers not making it through mortgage underwriting, it is in the seller's interest - and thus the seller's agent's concern - that the buyer not present such hurdles. Insofar as a higher down payment is a signal for that, then I can understand why it would be more attractive.


We carry out pre-matrimonial checks regularly and consider it perfectly normal for families to want to run a background check on a prospective bride or groom.  With more and more people meeting online these days it is paramount that you carry out one of our checks to ensure that you, or a loved one, are making the right decision.


"I don't know really is the best investment strategy. People think that they have to know everything to make money. But realistically, out of the hundreds of thousands of publicly traded securities, you really can only invest in a tiny number of them. Of the course of a week, you literally have more than a million ""buy"" or ""don't buy"" decisions, because the prices of those securities fluctuate every day.  Simply due to the fact that there are so many securities, you cannot know what everything is going to do. You have to say ""I don't know"". Also, when you do understand something, it is usually fairly priced. So will you make money on it? ""I don't know"". Only very rarely will you find something that you actually understand well and it is significantly undervalued. You can be looking at a company a day for two years before you find it. But people get trigger happy. They bet on 51%/49% odds when they should only bet on 90%/10% odds or higher.  If you are forced to bet on everything, it makes sense that you bet on everything you believe is greater than 50% chance of winning. But since you cannot bet on everything, you should only bet on the highest quality bets, those with greater than 90% chance of winning. To find such a bet, you may have to shuffle through 100 different companies and only make 2-3 bets. You are looking for something that is at least 2 standard deviations away from the mean.  People are not good at doing a lot of work, most of which yields nothing, to find one big payoff. They are wired to only look at the present, so they take the best bet they can see at the moment, which is often barely above 50% (and with any misjudgment, it may actually be well below 50%). And people are not good at understanding compound/geometric growth. You can keep multipling 10% gains (1.10 * 1.10 * 1.10 ...), but that can all be wiped out by multiplying by one zero, which is why taking a 51%/49% bet is so dangerous (even though technically it is an advantageous one). They forget to adjust for the geometric aspect of compounding. A 99%/1% bet is one you should take, but if you are allowed to repeat it and you keep going all-in, you will eventually lose and have $0, which is the same as if you took a single all-in bet that has 0% chance of winning.  As Buffett says, if you are only allowed to make 20 investments over a lifetime, you will most likely do better because it prevents you from making many of these mistakes."


http://www.legalzoom.com/business-management/starting-your-business/turn-your-calling Answering this, but I expect an expert to give an answer with some insight too There are many more steps, but not having done them personally I suggest you read the legalzoom.com site.


Yeah it's almost like the problem is bigger than small businesses and small business employees and your experiences as a teenager...it's almost like there are armies of people stuck in poverty because they work for the largest corporations in America. But nah fuck that because status quo and don't rock the boat because of you making razor thin margins as a teenager who could have employed four fucking people in the grand scheme of things...


No.  The majority of creditors agreed to those terms.  If they hadn't, then Argentinas default would have been an open and shut case some time ago.  Its only now that they're in technical default, because the holdouts went against the majority, and the conditions of the bonds are that all must get equal treatment.


It depends on how immediately you think you'll need your emergency fund cash: If you anticipate running into problems where you need cash right away (e.g. you live paycheck to paycheck, and your car breaks down a lot), put it into a checking or money market account. If you don't think your emergencies will require immediate access to cash (e.g. unemployment), then put it in a savings account or CD. If there is a lot of money in your accounts that goes unused, and you want a bigger safety net, then consider investing it. Though it's generally a better idea to pay off debts at this point. I think the best idea is to split your emergency fund between your checking and savings. Maybe 20% checking and 80% savings. That way, you have some extra cash on hand when you need it, while most of your money is growing in savings.


Maybe you can explain their position.  It seems to me they should be in favor of:  1. Universal healthcare (public or private) for the reduced uncertainty and increased mobility to the working class   2. Ending government subsidies of things like energy and farming, so that the markets will properly transition and adjust based on the economic realities rather than manipulated markets   3. Copyright reform to enable easier access to aged content by creators and the public at large, including the creation of new businesses 4. Infrastructure investments that fuel growth in the forms of market development and market access   5. Industry-based cooperatives for things like waste management (a la Germany) to preclude the need for the government to dictate the standards and practices, while actually dealing with the problem.  But as far as I have seen, they are opposed to all of these things.    For example, in [1] above, what I've seen is that business likes to have the upper-hand in the employer-employee equation; they like when employees can't up-and-leave because the children would lose health care.  But the same informational availabilities that enable capitalism to function to their benefit are stifled in that case, preventing the employment market from properly equalizing.    To put it another way, erecting barriers to entry to prevent people from competing with you sounds great, but it usually bites you, your investors, and everyone else in the ass because your products/services are stagnant and you aren't competing.  Why do the so-called fiscal conservatives seem to be okay with ass-biting externalities and artificial barriers to entry?


It will be a mistake if it's just another game console.  If you think about it, the last gameplay tech push was made by Nintendo with the Wii U... And even that tech wasn't unique, but the had strong IP to back it up.  VR currently it's still a gimmick, despite the current state of the art.  The form factor hasn't changed in years. Switch is a tablet, with Nintendo IP... If done well they would work on high end smartphones.  PS4 and Xbox, same stuff.  It's all about X86 or ARM, and who has right IP.  In the end it will be a mini-NES like console toy, to play the old Atari titles in a raspberry pi form factor.


Correct, but it will always be harder to raise chickens than to print money.  I'm not actually talking about using chickens as currency, just using them as a metaphor for the dollar bill.  It is generally easier for people to think about something tangible, rather than a piece of paper that has an arbitrary value, especially when dealing with economics issues and debates.


America is an oligarchy, not a democracy or republic. The richest people in the country pay congress to introduce more bills so they can get richer.   This problem is not going away, and the wealth gap is going to continue to widen, and poverty is going to continue to rise.


If you are planning this as a tax avoidance scheme, well it is not. The gains will be taxable in your hands and not in the Banks hands. Banks simply don't cash out the stock at the same price, there will be quite a bit of both Lawyers and others ... so in the end you will end up paying more. The link indicates that one would pay back the loan via one's own earnings. So if you have a stock worth USD 100, you can pledge this to a Bank and get a max loan of USD 50 [there are regulations that govern the max you can get against 100]. You want to buy something worth USD 50. Option1: Sell half the stock, get USD 50, pay the captial gains tax on USD 50. Option2: Pledge the USD 100 stock to bank, get a loan of USD 50. As you have not sold anything, there is no tax. Over a period pay the USD 50 loan via your own earnings. A high valued customer may be able to get away with a very low rate of intrest and very long repayment period.   The tax implication to your legal hier would be from the time the stock come to his/her hands to the time she sold. So if the price increase to 150 by the time Mark dies, and its sold at 160 later, the gain is only of USD 10. So rather than paying 30% or whatever the applicable tax rate, it would be wise to pay an interest of few percentages.


"the point is is that your hard work may or may not pan out based on factors which are completely not in your control, both in the past and in the future. that's the ""right time"" part of the expression. the right place is the part that everyone controls, but it's insufficient.   i mean are you really going to tell some person growing up in a slum that all they need to do is spend time and get to know and become friends with people? 9999/10000 times that isn't going to cut the mustard, because of their unlucky starting point."


The city's leaders operated on the assumption that the housing boom would continue in perpetuity and committed too much of the city's coffers to employee benefits. Median home prices in Stockton fell from nearly $400,000 in 2006 to roughly to $110,000 in 2009, which decimated property tax receipts. The city has the 2nd highest rate of foreclosures in the country. They've been running perennial budget deficits and have burned through all their emergency rainy day funds. Public safety represents 80% of the city's $200 million budget, and city employees receive a guaranteed salary increase from 2.5-7% each year. Employee healthcare costs have seen a meteoric rise, growing at 10% per year over the past decade. Other post-employment benefits (OPEB), including pensions, are have also skyrocketed. Stockton is on the hook for more than $800 million in unfunded liabilities for pensions and OPEB. So, basically, public employees are draining the resources of a city that has been devastated by the housing collapse.


"There are a number of ways to measure such things and they are generally called ""sentiment indicators"".  The ones that I have seen ""work"", in the sense that they show relatively high readings near market tops and relatively low readings near market bottoms.  The problem is that there are no thresholds that work consistently.  For example, at one market top a sentiment indicator may read 62.  At the next market top that same indicator might read 55.  So what threshold do you use next time?  Maybe the top will come at 53, or maybe it will not come until 65. There was a time when I could have listed examples for you with the names of the indicators and what they signaled and when.  But I gave up on such things years ago after seeing such wide variation.  I have been at this a long time (30+ years), and I have not found anything that works as well as we would like at identifying a top in real time.  The best I have found (although it does give false signals) is a drop in price coupled with a bearish divergence in breadth.  The latter is described in ""Stan Weinstein's Secrets For Profiting in Bull and Bear Markets"". Market bottoms are a little less difficult to identify in real time.  One thing I would suggest if you think that there is some way to get a significant edge in investing, is to look at the results of Mark Hulbert's monitoring of newsletters.  Virtually all of them rise and fall with the market and almost none are able to beat buy and hold of the Wilshire 5000 over the long term."


I'm a bot, *bleep*, *bloop*. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:  - [/r/talkbusiness] [First, Amazon destroyed retail -- now, it's coming for Starbucks | ZDNet](https://www.reddit.com/r/talkbusiness/comments/79uaxa/first_amazon_destroyed_retail_now_its_coming_for/)  &nbsp;*^(If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads.) ^\([Info](/r/TotesMessenger) ^/ ^[Contact](/message/compose?to=/r/TotesMessenger))*


"(See also the question How many stocks I can exercise per stock warrant? and my comments there). Clearly, at the prices you quote, it does not seem sensible to exercise your warrants at the moment, since you can still by ""units"" (1 stock + 1/3 warrant) and bare stock at below the $11.50 it would cost you to exercise your warrant.  So when would exercising a warrant become ""a sensible thing to do""? Obviously, if the price of the bare stock (which you say is currently $10.12) were to sufficiently exceed $11.50, then it would clearly be worth exercising a warrant and immediately selling the stock you receive (""sufficiently exceed"" to account for any dealing costs in selling the newly-acquired stock). However, looking more closely, $11.50 isn't the correct ""cut-off"" price. Consider three of the units you bought at $10.26 each. For $30.78 you received three shares of stock and one warrant. For an additional $11.50 ($42.28 in total) you can have a total of four shares of stock (at the equivalent of $10.57 each). So, if the price of the bare stock rises above $10.57, then it could become sensible to exercise one warrant and sell four shares of stock (again allowing a margin for the cost of selling the stock). The trading price of the original unit (1 stock + 1/3 warrant) shouldn't (I believe) directly affect your decision to exercise warrants, although it would be a factor in deciding whether to resell the units you've already got. As you say, if they are now trading at $10.72, then having bought them at $10.26 you would make a profit if sold. Curiously, unless I'm missing something, or the figures you quote are incorrect, the current price of the ""unit"" (1 stock + 1/3 warrant; $10.72) seems overpriced compared to the price of the bare stock ($10.12). Reversing the above calculation, if bare stock is trading at $10.12, then four shares would cost $40.48. Deducting the $11.50 cost-of-exercising, this would value three ""combined units"" at $28.98, or $9.66 each, which is considerably below the market price you quote. One reason the ""unit"" (1 stock + 1/3 warrant) is trading at $10.72 instead of $9.66 could be that the market believes the price of the bare share (currently $10.12) will eventually move towards or above $11.50. If that happens, the option of exercising warrants at $11.50 becomes more and more attractive. The premium presumably reflects this potential future benefit. Finally, ""Surely I am misunderstand the stock IPO's intent."": presumably, the main intent of Social Capital was to raise as much money as possible through this IPO to fund their future activities. The ""positive view"" is that they expect this future activity to be profitable, and therefore the price of ordinary stock to go up (at least as far as, ideally way beyond) the $11.50 exercise price, and the offering of warrants will be seen as a ""thank you"" to those investors who took the risk of taking part in the IPO. A completely cynical view would be that they don't really care what happens to the stock price, but that ""offering free stuff"" (or what looks like ""free stuff"") will simply attract more ""punters"" to the IPO. In reality, the truth is probably somewhere between those two extremes."


Targeted voter registration is *everywhere*, that's not very malicious.  My college has people going around getting students to register (and that's a good thing!) on an absolutely industrial scale. Of course, I understand that they're not doing it out of the pure goodness of their heart; they want their candidate to win. This is somewhat reinforced by the fact that there's a democratic party office rented out 1 minute from campus...


"Two things that will help...keep in mind it takes a long time to build up a client base but things will help...a LOT!  First, join the local property management professional groups and make friends with all the regional property managers in your area.  They are usually the deciders when it comes to hiring vendors.  Second, get a bunch of water-proof stickers and magnets made with your contact info...when you repair a plumbing stack, clear a drain, install a water heater, slap on of these bad boys on it.  Have it say something like, ""Installed with pride by XXXXXXX, if you need any other work done, please let us know.""  When the heater fails or the line is clogged most home owners will look at it (the water heater) and then wonder who to call for a repair...and you just gave them the answer before they had to break out the proverbial phone book."


"I believe MrChrister's answer is correct:  Since they're FDIC insured, they are ""legit.""  Second, on the seemingly too-good-to-be-true rate: They're basically making up the difference on other fees (not necessarily paid by you) in order to offer you the higher-than-market rate. I'd like to point out two things not mentioned about the current rate offer, though: The high 4.09% APY advertised is only on balances up to $25,000; anything over that threshold is at a lower 1.01% APY. The offer also states in the footnotes: ""Rates may change after the account is opened."" You might want to see if they have a good history of paying higher than average interest rates. You wouldn't want to switch only to find out the promotional rate was a teaser that soon gets reduced."


Sometimes for me its that I'm sitting at my desk for 8 hours a day, plus commute. The last thing I want to do is sit another 2 hours at a movie theater seat. Then on weekends, things just come up and I rarely go. Probably less than 8 times a year.


Lakeville condo by MCL is a new launch project in the Jurong Lake district of Singapore. Check out the fact sheet about Lakeville to know about the type of residential units available, floor plan, location, nearby tourist attractions and other relevant details.


It's like no one gets this. If you funneled everyone into a particular course of study, you're going to massively saturate the market.   Need proof? The same has happened in terms of funneling into everyone into a particular educational choice, i.e. the Bachelor's degree.


Just to punch it in, my friend owns bars/restaurants and is a multi millionaire at the age of 29. His career choice wasn't corporate ladder, but entrepreneur.   I'm investing his wealth and he is giving me a generous deal, I'm starting my own investment firm and having him as a client is the only client I need to be potentially a millionaire as well too.   Don't pigeonhole yourself like everyone else does, but also know what you are capable of. Some people just aren't made to be their own boss as much as they say they could so it takes a bit of swallowing your pride and moving along to your best pathway.  I could no way ever work for someone else so I swallowed my pride in a way and went my own path by saying bye to the corporate world. Some people think this is the ultimate goal, but I would relinquish potentially moving up that ladder and having that sort of prestige etc.


"**Sidebar on gold and gold-backed currency and stuff like that:**  Because I said I would get to it...  The above pretend history of the pretend village is not how modern money actually came to be. In reality, things are much less sequential and happen much more contemporaneously without the ""eureka!"" moments. The above was a parable to illustrate how money works to a 5-year-old, not an actual history of how money emerged.   Until fairly recent times, paper money was not really very useful or practical for most purposes, especially if you wanted to spend money in a different village than where it was printed.   If we go back in time a period before ATMs, wire-transfers, widespread literacy, etc, then a piece of paper written in Timbuktu is not likely to get you very far in Kathmandu. You could take your apples and deer-haunches and shoes around with you to trade, but the earliest naturally-emerging currencies tend to be hard things that were rare and easily-identifiable (jewels, colored shells, etc), and they frequently coincided with the personal decorations of the rich, in a self-reinforcing feedback loop (people with a surplus of time and food could decorate themselves with pretty things, which became valuable as status symbols, which made them more valuable as decorations, which made them more valuable as barter objects, which made them more prestigious shows of wealth, etc).  Gold emerged as a sort of inevitable global currency, before people even thought of it as currency. It is rare, portable, easy to identify, can easily be made into jewelry, and can be easily quantified (unlike, say, jewels or seashells, which are harder to treat as a ""substance""). Once word got around that rich people like it, it became easy to barter with anyone, anywhere, for anything.   In the early stages, it was not really the same thing as ""money"", it was just an easy thing to barter. But it had money-like characteristics:  - If someone walked into your apple-orchard offering to trade a yellow rock for apples, you might look at them a little funny. What use does an apple-grower have for a yellow rock?  - But if you know that rich people in town covet this soft yellow metal as something they can make jewelry out of, then you might be happy to trade apples for it.   - Once *everyone* knows that rich people will trade for this stuff, it becomes something like actual currency: neither the hunter, the shoemaker, nor the fisherman in town has much use for it, but because they know they can redeem it for the stuff they *do* want and need, it becomes a sort of transferable IOU that can be redeemed anywhere, i.e., money.   The early history of paper money did not evolve the way I described in the earlier posts (although it could have, and would have got to the same place). Instead, the early history of paper money was certificates issued by storage-vaults of precious metals (i.e., early ""banks""). Instead of carrying around yellow and silver rocks, you could deposit them somewhere and get a piece of paper entitling the holder to withdraw a certain quantity of gold or silver or whatever.   Pre-1934 dollars, like virtually all paper currency until fairly recently, could be redeemed for physical gold or silver at a Federal Reserve Bank, and dollars were only printed if the treasury had enough physical gold and silver to ""pay off"" the bearer with precious metals.   For a whole lot of reasons that are topics for another discussion, decisions were made that eventually led to the abandonment of the ""gold standard"" and now the dollar, like most modern currencies, is pure fiat paper: it's only ""worth"" whatever everyone agrees it is worth, and can only be ""redeemed"" by trading it to someone else for whatever they will give you for it. There are long, loud, and ongoing feuds over whether that was a good idea, and I'm not going to get into that here."


Not it doesn't, and yes they can. If the audit is closed, you should have received invitation to attend the closing conference, and get the summary of decisions from that meeting in writing. I suggest you check with your tax representative about this refund check before cashing it.


You might be the exception. Having too many types of mustard would waste space on shelves, prevent TJ from a better bargaining position, and cause customers greater confusion, leading them to spend longer in the store and buy less. All those are costs to TJ. Often TJ brand is just the day thing that you get elsewhere but repackaged and cheaper due to superior bargaining position.


Well, the potential problem is that the FTSE 100 could go down, or just not up. Really, it's as simple as that. After all, why diversify if the FTSE 100 will only go up? So, the question is, why wait to diversify? Why not add in the Gilt ETF for a little government bond exposure? Why not a Corp. bond ETF? Maybe a little of that Global ex-UK for a little foreign stock exposure?  That said, saving is better than not saving, so if starting it off with just the FTSE 100 gets you saving, go for it.


I'm so tired of Google's shameless, evil shenanigans. Amazon, Facebook, and yes, even Microsoft try damn hard to create products people want.  What does Google do? Ride their one-horse pony (search), invade people's privacy, and shamelessly copy - and fail - everyone else's good ideas.


I will just explain the time value of money in general, descriptive terms and save the math for someone else. Imagine: You have half a million dollars. I'd like to borrow it all from you. I'll pay it all back, every penny, but no more. And I'll pay it back in about, oh, thirty years or so. (Imagine also that you can be 100% sure that I'll pay it back.) Does this sound like a good deal? Not really. Why not? Well, you could do something with that sort of money. With that sort of money, you could do a lot of things for 30 years. You could buy a nice house and live in it for 30 years and save yourself from spending a lot of money on rent during that time (or save money on interest by paying off a mortgage early) even if the price of the house goes nowhere. If you already had a house, you could do some home improvement, like insulate the place better (to save on heating bills) or even just on something that you're going to enjoy for part of those 30 years (a patio in the back yard). If you were feeling entrepreneurial, you could take that money and start a business. Or you could invest that money in the stock market, and get a lot more back.... and if that's too risky for you, just start a savings account and earn interest. And finally, in 30 years, the value of the dollar will be lower because of inflation, so it won't buy as much now as it will then. That's the time value of money. It's the opportunity cost of the best of the things that you could have done with that money during the time it was gone. When you take out a loan, your interest payments will depend in part on the time value of the money you're borrowing: the people making the loan could be investing that money somewhere else, like government bonds. (It will also depend on factors like the risk of default on the loan - this is why credit card debt is more expensive than debt like a mortgage that's backed by a big fat asset like a house which can be seized and sold if you happen to default.) This is how the Federal Reserve can affect interest rates across the economy by just buying or selling government bonds.


"Open an investment account on your own and have them roll the old 401K accounts into either a ROTH or traditional IRA. Do not leave them in old 401k accounts and definitely don't roll them into your new employer's 401K. Why? Well, as great as 401K accounts are, there is one thing that employers rarely mention and the 401K companies actively try to hide:    Most 401K plans are loaded with HUGE fees. You won't see them on your statements, they are often hidden very cleverly with accounting tricks. For example, in several plans I have participated in, the mutual fund symbols may LOOK like the ones you see on the stock tickers, but if you read the fine print they only ""approximate"" the underlying mutual fund they are named for. That is, if you multiply the number of shares by the market price you will arrive at a number higher than the one printed on your statement.  The ""spread"" between those numbers is the fee charged by the 401K management company, and since employees don't pick that company and can't easily fire them, they aren't very competitive unless your company is really large and has a tough negotiator in HR. If you work for a small company, you are probably getting slammed by these fees. Also, they often charge fees for the ""automatic rebalancing"" service they offer to do annually to your account to keep your allocation in line with your current contribution allocations.  I have no idea why it is legal for them not to disclose these fees on the statements, but they don't. I had to do some serious digging to find this out on my own and when I did it was downright scary. In one case they were siphoning off over 3% annually from the account using this standard practice. HOWEVER, that is not to say that you shouldn't participate in these plans, especially if there is an employer match. There are fees with any investment account and the ""free money"" your employer is kicking in almost always offsets these fees. My point here is just that you shouldn't keep the money in the 401K after you leave the company when you have an option to move it to an account with much cheaper fees."


"But speculation is absolutely intended to happen, and is considered necessary for healthy a investment environment.  What I am saying, however, is that this desire to rid the world of HFT appears to be moral rather than logical. There is very little reason to eliminate HFT as it stands, although there appears to be a propensity for very emotional responses to the basic concept. Ones I can appreciate. However I am suggesting they are misguided as the people who should be upset with HFT are the hedge fund managers and day traders they are outwitting, not you or me who buy and sell shares on a whim every so often. If you want to ban day traders that is a separate argument I don't want to go into.  The idea that these computer algorithms are all set to ""sell,sell,sell"" is provably nonsensical. If that were the case, all of the HFT participants would have gone massively bankrupt during the flash crashes. Also, it is quite patently the case that somebody has to be buying in order for anybody to sell. Saying ""this is what caused some of the crashes"" is just your desire for a simple explanation. It must have been more complex than this, and to my knowledge none of these crashes have been adequately explained although some poorly designed algorithms have been implicated. Note that in one of these cases IIRC a fund closed its doors due to the losses, and the market was largely unaffected. So it seems like a problem that self corrects in this case, and one that only *harms* the participant that erred.  Also, to correct a basic misunderstanding, selling happens all of the time, and does not inherently drive the price down. There are by definition an *equal number of sales to purchases*. What drives the price down is *the people buying being willing to pay less*.  EDIT: as another aside, a point I have made elsewhere and seems suitable to make here: flash crashes, whilst causing panic, are again something only the professional intra-day trading community are likely to be affected by. Their very name implies so. The reason being that anybody investing based on the *long term investment potential* of a company will only benefit in the temporary drop in price, as they can purchase more of the company at a bargain price. Any intelligent investor will not be fazed by the drop in price, as price has *no bearing on a company's real value*, and stocks do tend towards this value over time, whatever happens over the short term. The only case in which it could is if the company owns a large portfolio of stock that itself devalues dramatically that they intended to sell and as a result experience cash flow problems. This is so incredibly unlikely with a flash crash as to be ignored."


First the obvious: Business school rankings are flawed.   I have no doubt that Asian business schools are improving rapidly, and many are already on par with Western universities. Many of the best teachers at US/European schools are also teaching in Asia (I have never had an Asian teacher but I expect that they are as great as their Western counterparts). Also, academic journals accept more and more Asian submissions.   But we also have to put the numbers in perspective. An American student who did an MBA in China will have a hard time getting a job in the US. Even those who go to European universities are met by recruiters with puzzlement. So these the high ranking of Asian schools is really only relevant for Asian students.   In short, what the ranking says is: If you're Chinese, you don't *need* to go to the US or Europe for your business degree. Personally I suggest you still do if you can afford it, because the experience abroad, and the exposure to students with a different attitude, will be an enrichment.


Assuming United States; answer may be different elsewhere. The best instructions I have seen for this were on the webpage of one of the law firms making an organized business out of intra-family loans, but any lawyer who can deal with normal bank loans should be able to help you set this up and get it filed with the appropriate authorities to make it a legally binding mortgage. Shouldn't cost you much in legal time to do it. You will have to charge interest; your lawyer can tell you what the minimum and maximimum interest rates would be where you are. Your interest income will be taxable. The borrower may or may not be able to deduct the interest paid from their taxes. Of course if the borrower has any sense they'll want to get their own lawyer to review the terms of the agreement, and to tell them whether they can deduct it from taxes or not.


Nowhere. To back up a bit, mutual funds are the stock market (and the bond market). That is, when you invest in a mutual fund, your money is ultimately buying stocks on the open market. Some of it might be buying bonds. The exact mix of stocks and bonds depends on the mutual fund. But a mutual fund is just a basket of stocks and/or bonds (and/or other, more exotic investments). At 25, you probably should just be investing your Roth IRA in index stock mutual funds and index bond mutual funds. You probably shouldn't even be doing peer-to-peer lending (unless you're willing to think of any losses as the cost of a hobby); the higher interest rate you're getting is a reflection of the risk that your borrowers will default. I'm not even sure if peer-to-peer lending is allowed in Roth IRA's.  Investing in just stocks, bonds, and cast is boring, but these are easy investments to understand. The harder the investment is to understand, the easier it is for it to be a scam (or just a bad investment). There's not necessarily anything wrong with boring.


Yeah, I completely agree. There are examples of both good and bad government interventions. All innovation comes with risk.  I think what I objected to initially was the corporate doublespeak. Saying they are doing one thing when they are clearly, selfishly, doing another.


First price isn't artificially maintained at a level. When a refining company signs a contract to buy crude from a supplier, it promises to buy at a certain price with options for increase and decrease due to the fluctuating prices in the market. And it buys crude to build up a certain buffer to supply itself for a certain duration, in case of supply problems. As it had bought oil at a higher price, it would be reluctant to lower the prices even if the current crude it buys is at a lower cost. If it buys oil from the open market, it has no other option than to pass on the hike on to the consumers, so a more intense fluctuation in the prices of oil at the point, where you buy it. Some airlines used hedging to take care of the spurts in the price of oil, to mantian their operating margins.  And moreover refining and distribution is a very low margin business, so the company has an incentive to sell at a higher cost if required.


"You could end up with nothing, yes.  I imagine those that worked at Enron years ago if their 401(k) was all in company stock would have ended up with nothing to give an example here.  However, more likely is for you to end up with less than you thought as you see other choices as being better that with the benefit of hindsight you wish you had made different choices. The strategies will vary as some people will want something similar to a ""set it and forget it"" kind of investment and there may be fund choices where a fund has a targeted retirement date some years out into the future.  These can be useful for people that don't want to do a lot of research and spend time deciding amongst various choices.  Other people may prefer something a bit more active.  In this case, you have to determine how much work do you want to do, do you want to review fund reviews on places like Morningstar, and do periodic reviews of your investments, etc.  What works best for you is for you to resolve for yourself. As for risks, here are a few possible categories: Time - How many hours a week do you want to spend on this?  How much time learning this do you want to do in the beginning?  While this does apply to everyone, you have to figure out for yourself how much of a cost do you want to take here. Volatility - Some investments may fluctuate in value and this can cause issues for some people as it may change more than they would like.  For example, if you invest rather aggressively, there may be times where you could have a -50% return in a year and that isn't really acceptable to some people. Inflation - Similarly to those investments that vary wildly there is also the risk that with time, prices generally rise and thus there is something to be said for the purchasing power of your investment.  If you want to consider this in more detail consider what $1,000,000 would have bought 30 years ago compared to now. Currency risk - Some investments may be in other currencies and thus there is a risk of how different denominations may impact a return. Fees - How much do your fund's charge in the form of annual expense ratio?  Are you aware of the charges being taken to manage your money here?"