-
-
Other things being equal (1), over a sufficiently long period (2), lower fees ought to be the winning factor.
The only questions are:
- whether things are actually equal (probably yes for trackers but maybe not for actively managed funds)
- whether you're even leaving stuff in there long enough for compounding to dominate
- and whether the interface is really too awful to justify the effort
Admittedly I'm perhaps biased against Nutmeg because I've spent years working in algorithmic trading and I don't think they're that impressive. There isn't a lot of retail competition that I know of though.
- whether things are actually equal (probably yes for trackers but maybe not for actively managed funds)
-
-
-
-
-
-
The government is an arbitrary set of people (not necessarily representatives, since not everywhere is a democracy) that can use the police, courts and army to enforce payment of taxes in its desired currency.
Bitcoin doesn't have an army attached, and with some particularly stupid exceptions you can't use it to pay taxes or settle court fines anywhere.
Although you may be more interested in a currency's ability to buy pizza and/or drugs, they're not generally more important than staying out of prison.
-
Commodity money has intrinsic value
Often claimed, but not convincing.
Most of gold's "intrinsic" value comes from the fact that there's always someone to sell to who also thinks it has value, just the same as fiat currency.
Its actual intrinsic value as a non-oxidizing conductor is tiny (because you only need very small amounts). Jewellery is fashion, there's nothing intrinsic about that demand. It might be reliable demand, but that's not the same as being intrinsic.
-
-
Fiat currency has intrinsic value in that the issuing country will let you pay your taxes with it. Since they can enforce payment with violence (ie, imprisonment & confiscation), that's worth something.
Stocks have at least the intrinsic value of the company assets after senior creditors are paid off.
-
Nutmeg seem to suggest here that the typical fund fees (which are in addition to the management fee they're zeroing for the first year) are 0.21%-0.36%
For comparison VUSA (the S&P 500 ETF offered by Vanguard) charges 0.07%, and 0.2% puts you in the vicinity of their LifeTracker managed funds.
I'm not sure what the point is of having Nutmeg doing algorithmic management of managed funds when they could just buy the stocks or ETFs directly.
-
-
Conservative MP says Labour council which has been deliberately starved of cash has failed to repair bridge (in project the government refused to fund so their mayoral candidate could take credit if he won) and should hand it over to TfL, which the government has deliberately starved of cash...
Hammersmith bridge has never had a deck suitable for modern motor traffic, by which I mean the tank-sized SUVs that are now ubiquitous. You could feel the road surface flexing if you were cycling across at the same time as one.
Unfortunately buses aren't any lighter, and when there were bus gates they were continually vandalized anyway.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Why would a physical string be taut if you cut the ball off? I don't think that would work in practice.
I agree that the non-tangent component of the ball's momentum is where the centrifugal bit comes from, there's no magic. They're just labelling it "centrifugal" because it acts in that direction.
I think you're missing the mark with the balanced forces though, that's not what the 3rd law means. Equal and opposite forces can also mean two objects accelerating away from each other.
In this case the acceleration on the ball should ultimately match an imperceptible change in the Earth's wobble, communicated from the string, to the post, to the ground.
If one of those forces, say the force exerted by the post on the ground, is not matched in the 3rd law sense - it just means you have a wobbly post.
-
-
I thought the middle bit of the Wikipedia article was reasonably clear:
In the case of a ball held in circular motion by a string, the centripetal force is the force exerted by the string on the ball. The reactive centrifugal force on the other hand is the force the ball exerts on the string, placing it under tension.
IOW:
The second form of Newton's 3rd law is
mutual actions of two bodies upon each other are always equal, and directed to contrary parts
The two bodies are the ball and the string
The centripetal force is the string pulling the ball towards the centre of rotation
The reactive force is the ball causing the tension in the string
Both of those are visible in an inertial reference frame, although the directions are constantly changing
-
Still don't know if I'll ever defeat him with the 8 skulls needed for the first daft trophy, or whether I'll ever beat Charon (at all, let alone fulfilling that prophecy), or ... loads of stuff I'll probably never do before Hades 2 is properly out.