Investing money 101
"The way to invest money in a company is to buy its shares, or derivatives of its shares. However, it seems you're way in over your head. Don't buy what you don't understand.  There is plenty of material to teach you about stock investing on the internet. However, a book may be the fastest way to learn what you need to know. And yes, there is a ""for dummies"" book about that: Stock Investing ForDummies. I just found it by Googling, I'm sure you can find even more interesting books out there. (Note, the link is to the ""cheat sheet"" in the back of the book. The full book is worth reading.)"
In response to your points #1 and #2: In general, yes it is true that capital gains are only subject to half one's marginal rate of income tax.  That doesn't mean 50% of the gain is due as tax... rather, it means that if one's marginal tax rate (tax bracket) on the next $10K would have been, say, 32%, then one is taxed on the gain at 16%.  (The percentages are examples, not factual.) However, because these are employee stock options, the tax treatment is different than for a capital gain!    Details: On the Federal tax return are lines for reporting Security option benefits (Line 101) and Security options deductions (Line 249).  The distinction between a regular capital gain and an employee stock option benefits is important.  In many cases the net effect may be the same as a capital gain, but the income is characterized differently and there are cases where it matters.  Somebody who is about to or has realized employee stock option benefits should seek professional tax advice. In response to your next two points: No, one cannot transfer a capital gain or other investment income into a TFSA immediately after-the-fact in order to receive the tax-free benefits of the TFSA on that income.  Only income and gains earned within a TFSA are free from tax – i.e. The options would have to have been in the TFSA before being exercised.  Once a gain or other investment income has been realized in a non-sheltered account, it is considered taxable.  The horse has already left the barn, so to speak! However, despite the above, there is another strategy available:  One can create an offsetting deduction by contributing some of the realized gain into an RRSP.  The RRSP contribution, assuming room is available, would yield a tax deduction to offset some tax due on the gain.  However, the RRSP only defers income tax; upon withdrawal of funds, ordinary income tax is due (hopefully, at a lower marginal rate in retirement.) There is no minimum amount of time that money or assets have to be inside a TFSA to benefit from the tax-free nature of the account.  However, there are limits on how much money you can move into a TFSA in any given year, and many folks weren't aware of the rules. p.s. Let me add once more that this is a case where I suggest seeking professional tax advice. Los Angeles Times Investing 101 http://www.latimes.com/business/la-moneylib,0,3098409.htmlstory Clark Howard's Investing Guide http://www.clarkhoward.com/news/clark-howard/personal-finance-credit/clarks-investment-guide/nFZK/ &gt; That's a simplified, layman's argument that you have minunderstood.  That's the only argument presented against deflation in the link you posted  &gt; Suffice to say, literally everyone who studies this stuff agrees that a small amount of controlled inflation is beneficial   I don't think there is a single topic where [literally everyone](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwI3Nya5L9g) agrees on something. Even if they did, it doesn't make it right. You seem informed enough that I don't have to use cliched examples.  &gt; Econ 101. Take it. Love it.  I believe that you've taken Econ 101 Not charging taxes on a money losing investment or business is much more than humanitarian it is common sense. In general money that is used to invest has already been taxed as income or inheritance to the person making the investment so taxing that money again not just the profit would provide a disincentive for people to invest. Which would be bad for economic growth over the medium and long term. As far as taxing a money losing businesses goes, most businesses don't make money in their couple of years and adding further tax burdens would be counter productive because it would provide a major hurdle for people wanting to start a business. Other have already mentioned that the money losing operation likely paid indirect taxes as well. Small businesses provide a majority of the economic growth and innovation. So in short additional taxes on money losing investments and businesses would be both foolish and shortsighted. There are all sorts of topics in finance that take a lot of time to learn.  You have valuation (time value of money, capital asset pricing model, dividend discount model, etc.), financial statement analysis (ratio analysis, free cash flow &amp; discounted cash flow, etc.) , capital structure analysis(Modgliani &amp; Miller theories of capital structure, weighted average cost of capital, more CAPM, the likes), and portfolio management (asset allocation, security selection, integrates financial statement analysis + other fields like derivatives, fixed income, forex, and commodity markets) and all sorts.   My opinion of Investopedia is that there is a lot of wheat with the chaff.  I think articles/entries are just user-submitted and there are good gems in Investopedia but a lot of it only covers very basic concepts.  And you often don't know what you don't know, so you might come out with a weak understanding of something.    To begin, you need to understand TVM and why it works.  Time value of money is a critical concept of finance that I feel many people don't truly grasp and just understand you need some 'rate' to use for this formula.  Also, as a prereq, you should understand basics of accrual accounting (debits &amp; credits) and how the accounting system works.  Don't need to know things like asset retirement obligations, or anything fancy, just how accounting works and how things affect certain financial statements.  After that, I'd jump into CAPM and cost of capital.  Cost of capital is also a very misunderstood concept since schools often just give students the 'cost of capital' for math problems when in reality, it's not just an explicit number but more of a 'general feeling' in the environment.  Calculating cost of capital is actually often very tricky (market risk premium) and subjective, sometimes it's not (LIBOR based).    After that, you can build up on those basic concepts and start to do things like dividend discount models (basic theory underlying asset pricing models) and capital asset pricing models, which builds on the idea of cost of capital.    Then go into valuation.  Learn how to price equities, bonds, derivatives, etc.  For example, you have the dividend discount model with typical equities and perpetuities.  Fixed income has things like duration &amp; convexity to measure risk and analyze yield curves.  Derivatives, you have the Black-Scholes model and other 'derivatives' (heh) of that formula for calculating prices of options, futures, CDOs, etc.  Valuation is essentially taking the idea of TVM to the next logical step.  Then you can start delving into financial modelling.  Free cash flows, discounted cash flows, ratio analysis, pro forma projections.  Start small, use a structured problem that gives you some inputs and just do calculations.  Bonuses* would be ideas of capital structure (really not necessary for entry level positions) like the M&amp;M theorems on capital structure (debt vs equity), portfolio management (risk management, asset allocation, hedging, investment strategies like straddles, inverse floaters, etc), and knowledge of financial institutions and banking regulations (Basel accords, depository regulations, the Fed, etc.).    Once you gain an understanding of how this works, pick something out there and do a report on it.  Then you'll be left with a single 'word problem' that gives you nothing except a problem and tells you to find an answer.  You'll have to find all the inputs and give reasons why these inputs are sound and reasonable inputs for this analysis.    A big part that people don't understand about projections and analysis is that **inputs don't exist in plain sight**.  You have to make a lot of judgment calls when making these assumptions and it takes a lot of technical understanding to make a reasonable assumption--of which the results of your report highly depend on.  As a finance student, you get a taste for all of this.  I'm gonna say it's going to be hard to learn a lot of substantial info in 2 months, but I'm not exactly sure what big business expects out of their grunts.  You'll mostly be doing practical work like desk jockey business, data entry, and other labor-based jobs.  If you know what you're talking about, you can probably work up to something more specialized like underwriting or risk management or something else.   Source:  Finance degree but currently working towards starting a (finance related) company to draw on my programming background as well. "I was going to ask, ""Do you feel lucky, punk?"" but then it occurred to me that the film this quote came from, Dirty Harry, starring Clint Eastwood, is 43 years old.  And yet, the question remains. The stock market, as measured by the S&P has returned 9.67%  compounded over the last 100 years. But with a standard deviation just under 20%, there are years when you'll do better and years you'll lose. And I'd not ignore the last decade which was pretty bad, a loss for the decade.  There are clearly two schools of thought. One says that no one ever lost sleep over not having a mortgage payment. The other school states that at the very beginning, you have a long investing horizon, and the chances are very good that the 30 years to come will bring a return north of 6%. The two decades prior to the last were so good that these past 30 years were still pretty good, 11.39% compounded.  There is no right or wrong here. My gut says fund your retirement accounts to the maximum. Build your emergency fund. You see, if you pay down your mortgage, but lose your job, you'll still need to make those payments. Once you build your security, think of the mortgage as the cash side of your investing, i.e. focus less on the relatively low rate of return (4.3%) and more on the eventual result, once paid, your cash flow goes up nicely.   Edit - in light of the extra information you provided, your profile reads that you have a high risk tolerance. Low overhead, no dependents, and secure employment combine to lead me to this conclusion. At 23, I'd not be investing at 4.3%. I'd learn how to invest in a way I was comfortable with, and take it from there.  Disclosure (Updated) - I am older, and am semi-retired. I still have some time left on the mortgage, but it doesn't bother me, not at 3.5%. I also have a 16 year old to put through college but her college account i fully funded." The safest investment in the United States is Treasures. The Federal Reserve just increased the short term rate for the first time in about seven years. But the banks are under no obligation to increase the rate they pay. So you (or rather they) can loan money directly to the United States Government by buying Bills, Notes, or Bonds. To do this you set up an account with Treasury Direct. You print off a form (available at the website) and take the filled out form to the bank. At the bank their identity and citizenship will be verified and the bank will complete the form. The form is then mailed into Treasury Direct.  There are at least two investments you can make at Treasury Direct that guarantee a rate of return better than the inflation rate. They are I-series bonds and Treasury Inflation Protected Securities (TIPS). Personally, I prefer the I-series bonds to TIPS.  Here is a link to the Treasury Direct website for information on I-series bonds. this link takes you to information on TIPS.  Edit: To the best of my understanding, the Federal Reserve has no ability to set the rate for notes and bonds. It is my understanding that they can only directly control the overnight rate. Which is the rate the banks get for parking their money with the Fed overnight. I believe that the rates for longer term instruments are set by the market and are not mandated by the Fed (or anyone else in government). It is only by indirect influence that the Fed tries to change long term rates. "seems like a dumb idea to me. Will these people know what to do with $1000? Will they know best how to invest it or will it be squandered on booze, or just plain living expenses? It might be better spent giving it to them with a string such as ""buy a cow or chickens that can produce"" or seed for a patch of land. I expect some will fall in each of the three catagories. Question now is what will be the distribution?"