What habit/decision has saved you a large/huge amount of money?
Started saving. As soon as I get the salary, I move X amount into my savings account.I prefer buying things in bulk. This way I dnt have to spend every month on it and also get it at little cheaper cost.Regularly arrange my wardrobe. So that whatever little desires I have of buying new clothes, just vanishes away. Almost every week I get to see clothes which have not been used much and how I have enough stuff to wear.Whenever I shop online, I make it a point to check for discount coupons at coupondunia and other coupon stores. I usually end up getting some discount, which I feel is one of the best ways of saving my hard earned money.Another thing which I do while shopping online is, including my friends in it as well. What happens is we order for a huge amount and do not have to pay for delivery charges.I try my best not to shop from those online sales. I feel it's totally overrated, lot of hype is created around such sales. Very few times it happens that the products are ACTUALLY heavily discounted. Rather we tend to buy things we do not need, at least it's not that necessary, and waste money.I try and use only one mobile wallet. I have seen people use 2–3 wallets. I feel wallets work on the principle of tying the user to it. So it's better to use one wallet at time.Live close to my office to save on traveling, both time and money.Minimal use of mobile data. Which means I am not always on FB or IG. My rent includes wifi charges, so I think it's a waste to use mobile data unnecessarily.Use the right mobile plan - this really helped me save a lotttt
What are the pros and cons of buying a house directly from the owner through a contract?
Pros: You can write up the contract anyway you like, as long as it works for you and the seller. Either of you can choose when to close. There is no confusion as to exactly what either of you are getting. No money is taken out from the seller’s money for a real estate agent.Cons: If learning how to write a contract and knowing the rules and process for buying directly from the owner is a hindrance, then that “if” statement would be the only con.Ok, really, there's only the advantages in doing it yourself. If that's what you do, then it has to be done or this would not be what you do. Simple as that. There are no cons. It's all positive flow mindset.“Obstacles make some people say they can't, that's what they do. I see obstacles as something to learn from, something to go through.”
My friend was forced out of a house they trespassed in, at gunpoint by the owner. Was it legal for the owner to do this?
Not to disagree with nearly everyone who has already responded to this, but I disagree with nearly everyone who has already responded to this.But part of the problem is that we don't actually have enough info.Most everywhere in the U.S., when you are not in your house, you have a "duty to flee" unless you cannot reasonably do so. This means that if you can run away that is what you should do. If you can't run away, then you may respond to your aggressor with equal force.Generally speaking that means if your attacker is unarmed, you can fight back unarmed. If your attacker has a non-deadly weapon, then you can use a non-deadly weapon. If your attacker is using lethal force, then you can respond with lethal force.I say nearly everywhere because there are exceptions, like Florida and their "stand your ground" law that changes that. But those are the exceptions to the rule.Of course some of this changes once you are home. In your own home you no longer have a 'duty to flee' and you can defend your home. However the 'respond with equal force' portion does not go away.So, your friends are trespassing. The homeowner shows up and tells them to leave. They refuse and possibly threaten him and he threatens to shoot them. Before anyone can say for sure if the homeowner was justified, we need more info. Such as:- What was the threat?- Was it a realistic threat or just nonsense?- Were the trespassers armed in any way?- Did the threat include whatever it was they were possibly armed with?- Was the homeowner's gun loaded? - Are there drugs present?- Are the trespassers visibly high on drugs? - What were the age, sex and size of the trespassers?- What was the age, sex and size of the homeowner?The last two are not really part of any law, but they will play a part in any jury's deliberation.So here are two scenarios. [Note I've changed the ending in the scenarios from what actually happened]:Scenario 1: The homeowner, a 35 year old male, professional weight lifter and black belt in three types of martial arts, comes home to find four girls all around the age of seventeen in his house. The homeowner recognizes them as local girls from the neighborhood. The girls are all dancing and are all wearing short shorts, tight t-shirts and flip flops. The homeowner tells them to leave and they refuse. One of the girls says, "Chill out. We're just dancing." Another girl says, "If you don't leave us alone I'm gonna call the president and have him drop a nuclear bomb on your house." The home owners goes and gets a gun and threaten the girls. The girls start screaming. Somehow in the confusion the gun goes off and one of the girls gets shot, but fortunately nobody dies.Scenario 2: The homeowner, a 72 year old, retired female librarian who walks with a cane, comes home to find four large men partying in her living room. She does not recognize any of them. The screen of her television set is smashed in and the living room is a complete mess. There are a variety of drug paraphernalia scattered across the coffee table and some of the trespassers are acting strange, erratic and aggressive. The trespassers are all wearing baggy pants, and jackets or hoodies. One of them has a gun visibly tucked into the back of his pants and there is a second gun on the coffee table with the drugs. The homeowner tells them all to leave. One of the trespassers says, "Grandma, get out of here now before we decide to add you to this party." Another one pulls the gun from his pants and says, "If you don't leave I'm going to shoot you in the face with this gun. The homeowner retreats to the hall closet and gets her shotgun. She returns and tells the four to get out of her house now. One of the trespassers says, "@!#$* I'm going to kill you!" and reaches for the gun on the table. The trespasser with the gun in his hand points it at the homeowner. She fires repeatedly and kills all four of them.In one of these scenarios the homeowner will be treated like a hero. In the other one, the homeowner will be going to jail. I will assume that you can figure out which is which.Of course in the real scenario, nobody was hurt or shot, which definitely changes things and makes it all a bit grayer.The question then is, if we make a spectrum with scenario 1 on one side and scenario 2 on the other side, where does your friend's situation fall?The point is that without ALL of the info, we just cannot say.(And that is all of the ACTUAL information and not just what your friend told you when he was trying to impress you with his tale.)
What is the shrewdest pivot in business history?
I’ve written about this before on the Q and it never gets old.In 1938 Chester Carlson, a patent attorney and inventor, developed a process that would change the world. Trouble was the world didn’t want it.The product would not make it to market until 1959. A man Named Joseph Wilson, the founder of Haloid Corporation, took a risk and invested in development of Mr. Carlson’s new device.Almost a decade of struggle and a factory was financed for the production of the above. Wilson headed the executive team. Top finance people from New York and elsewhere committed millions to the project. The Business press, however, said “it would never succeed in the market.”The factory started to churn out these machines. The market included every government and private institution in the world. In today’s dollars? It was a trillion dollar market.Top sales management and field reps had been brought in, organized and sent out to get orders. An institution would use a group of twenty staff to produce this commodity product. It would take these employees up to an hour to produce what Mr. Carlson’s device could do in less than a minute.The campaign commenced. Reps fanned out and called on the US government, General Motors, Bell Labs, Ford, IBM, Texaco, Harvard, Yale … everyone.Nothing happened.The machine was not selling. There were tens of millions and a decade of work into this innovation and sales were 20% of schedule.Machines were piling up in the warehouse and the all too famous “meeting” was called. Anyone in start-ups knows what this meeting is.It is labeled the “what the hell are we gonna do now?” meeting. Wilson, Carlson, heads of sales, finance, engineering and an addition. This man was an outsider brought in for his perspective on the pending catastrophe.A $25,000 machine was a “capex” item. It had to be budgeted on a 12 month cycle. General Motors would need hundreds of the machines and that would be an enormous budget item to push through. The sales staff was despondent.The meeting adjourned and the outsider said he’d get back the following week.The original model was to produce the device and sell it directly to the users.The outsider called and a meeting was held.Engineering was instructed to attach a “counter” to each machine. Finance was instructed to redesign the revenue model to a “fee per unit used” of 2 cents. Sales was instructed to call on clients and ask where the device could be located, plug it in and inform the client the machine was free of charge - they would only be billed monthly for the numbers of copies used.The client now had two choices to get a 15 page document duplicated. Bring it to the typing pool where typists would type an original with carbon paper between sheets for additional copies or walk over to the Xerox 914 copier and get a spotless copy in a couple of minutes which the company would pay for, no budget meeting, no requisition…no problem.Xerox became the fastest growing technology company in history.Original model $25,000 capital purchase.PivotSuccessful model 2 cents a page…(service)“The machine nobody knew they needed until they had one”EDITS: Thanks for comments/responses. I’m not a Xerox/Haloid archivist, just a business person who, through study of Mr. Carlson, was always fascinated by the story. The almost two decade struggle to get the technology packaged and onto the market was quite simply, epic. Every top tech firm shot him down. Just about everyone everywhere, besides Haloid and the Batelle Memorial Institute, just wrote him off as an idiot.The stats on the pivot to “service” from “equipment sale” have been requested and the issue is there were “stages.” The paper I read 20 years ago stated the machine would be placed in the customer’s office and the only charge was two cents a copy. Perhaps this was an early rendition. As the deal eventually became identical to the structure IBM used for their computers. The lease was $95/month and the first 2000 copies were free. After the free 2000? It became 5 cents a copy.Ready for the Inflation adjustment? $250,000 per machine in today’s dollars.Their proposal related to current method which, for the majority of customers, was a “secretarial pool.” My Mom was the head of administration for the department of investigation of the United States Army Air Corps Intelligence in 1944. Their department had to manage tens of thousands of background checks with mechanical typewriters and carbon paper. They needed four or five copies of everything. She laughs out loud when telling about pushing paper through a government agency. They had fifty women just in their section in Manhattan typing all day long. God bless’em!With that picture in mind, what the copying machine’s proposal was about is about the same as “horses to cars”. The profundity of this new automation?This $250,000 machine would replace 50 employees and do a much, much better job in less time.Xerox simply didn’t know how large the market was for this machine. They assumed the lifetime market was in the 100,000 unit range…as above they were really expensive. That is an estimated $2.5B (today’s dollars) market for the device. Not too shabby.Once they got it rolling? Xerox could not make them fast enough, their inability to assess the breadth of the market is shown here…They sold the “estimated 100,000 machine product lifetime” in six months! Now there’s a back log for ya.The New York Times business editor attended the roll out for the machine and panned it. People simply didn’t understand that it was going to change the world.One of the first units is in the Smithsonian next to the light bulb and the cotton gin.
Is it legal to buy a house insurance for an owner-occupied and then rent the house out?
I have a Fire Policy on rental property. It covers the building for certain risks, and it does not cover the tenant’s personal property. My insurance company understands the building is used as a rental.If you buy a standard homeowner’s policy, which is cheaper where I live, and then rent the property, you will committing fraud and discover that any claims will not be covered.When my parents moved out of their home into a new place, they had to revise the policy on their old home because they didn’t live there anymore.Do not lie to your insurance agent about what risks are being covered by a policy. You will not get your premium money back, and you will not get covered for any events.
How do you write a for sale by owner house contract?
U.S. perspective:If you are smart, you don't even try to do this on your own because of the serious liabilities that can accompany the sale of a house. If you are selling without a real estate agent representing you, you should retain a lawyer to prepare the required documents.If you do this on your own, anyway, you start with form documents provided by a real estate professionals' association in your state. If there are no such documents provided by real estate professionals, then you look for documents provided by a company that supplies legal forms (which, one hopes, are customized for your state).
How do I fill out a title when buying a vehicle from a provate seller off craigslist for instance?
To be sure to get it right, buyer and seller should meet at the buyers bank and have one of their Notaries handle the paperwork. The seller can then get paid from your account and will officially be absolved if responsibility for what the buyer does with the vehicle. The buyer is also protected because the Notary will be sure the seller is the legal owner and be sure their are not liens on it.
To anyone who strongly supports the NRA and the largely unrestricted right to bear arms, are you not concerned about school shootings? What would be your solution to reduce that?
“To anyone who strongly supports the NRA and the largely unrestricted right to bear arms, are you not concerned about school shootings? What would be your solution to reduce that?”First of all what in the world does the NRA have to do with this? On this issue so many people seem to get their brains in a knot.First and foremost the NRA is a safety training organization, so if you somehow want to distort the issue and focus on the NRA, then the NRA is just as appalled as anyone else, since I and millions of others ARE the NRA. The NRA has done more for teaching gun safety and responsible gun ownership than any other organization.I would like to ask, can you name any of the “mass shooters” who were members of the NRA?The answer is a resounding NONE. That’s again, because the NRA members are responsible gun owners and the NRA teaches millions about gun safety.So I am not sure how the part of your question, “To anyone who strongly supports the NRA” and “are you not concerned about school shootings” is even a conceivable question? This seems like utter nonsense! Of course we who are the NRA, are concerned, that’s why we always talk about protection. Armed protection.Since the school was a “gun free” zone, guess that didn’t work, eh! So the obvious conclusion is, focusing on banning guns will never work! Especially if you focus only on one type, like the AR15 as being the problem.In the US AR15s were actually banned, for 10 years. The DOJ did a report after that on it’s efficacy in stopping murders/gun violence.The DOJ CONCULSION: The AR15 ban had NO effect on diminishing crime/gun violence.So that and myriads of other facts, show focusing on the gun is of no effect. And that is what the NRA is trying to educate people about. So their real concern is public safety, since knee jerk, gun control proposals only provide an allusion of safety, like gun free zones, that criminals love! Shooting fish in a barrel is a criminals translation of “gun free zone”!THE SOLUTION:There is a PROVEN fix that has been working for years upon years in facilities around the world, with people of all different cultures, dozens of different languages, ethnicities, social rank and even some with criminal backgrounds enter and exit these facilities and everyone is safe from criminal and gun violence!These facilities have no dependencies on the 2nd A, and the 2nd A does not need to be infringed on one bit, in fact the 2nd A infringements could actually be relaxed and these facilities would remain safe. Again this has been a PROVEN fix for years.And there is no debate about the effectiveness, like there is about gun laws!The facilities are called Airports. Gun laws will never be able to prevent someone from bringing a gun into a school if someone wants to. Ban an AR15, they will bring in a high capacity semi-auto shotgun.But that does not happen in Airports secured areas. Time to stop the useless debate on “gun control” and make the schools safe and secure!There is a terrible change/sickness in our society, guns have been around forever, so that is not what changed, something in society is very sick. We should cure that.Until then we should secure our schools, with a PROVEN fix.Gun laws have been proven, not to work! Oh, I forgot, maybe we should just pass another law. You know, like “it is illegal to break gun laws”! That should do it, eh.Let’s go with a proven fix, instead!!