Illinois Statement Economic Interests: Fill & Download for Free

There is a mechanism in place in many states that would accomplish the same goals of evaluating conflicts of interest while not necessarily requiring tax returns.In Indiana for instance, a candidate from a minor party or an independent candidate must file a statement of economic interests with the Indiana Ethics Commission. This has been the case for years with no one questioning the appropriateness of this requirement being in place for those candidates, but not for those from the major political parties. Also, a statement of economic interests is required by many states, such as Wisconsin for one, to be a candidate for state offices . These requirements are commonplace and have never been considered inappropriate. If they are able to be applied to these candidates, a similar requirement for federal office holders should be allowable also. Here is the Form 700 required by Cook County Illinois to be submitted by over 22,000 public officials, candidates and employees http://www.fppc.ca.gov/content/dam/fppc/NS-Documents/TAD/Form%20700/2018-2019/Form%20700%202018.2019%20IA.pdfThere is a good chance that if you look up your state’s requirements for filing for candidacy for state or other offices, or for minor parties, you will discover that this information is required for many candidate situations.There should be no exemptions from this kind of scrutiny by any candidate or office holder, in my humble opinion. These requirements don’t necessarily require tax returns, but as the form I linked to demonstrates, they are legal documents that mimic much of what is required in tax return documents. It should be do-able for for many states to expand their already existing “statement of economic interests” requirements to all candidates for public offices, and perhaps an easier battle to win then requesting a requirement for a tax return.

You could learn finance on its own, but there are some pre-reqs you should knock out first.I’d suggest learning financial accounting and building up some knowledge of economics before you dive headfirst into finance.Here are some courses you might take:Start with Financial Accounting: FoundationsAny kind of financial analysis will involve financial statements, which in turn come from individual transactions (credits and debits). Understanding how those transactions come about in the first place and how they’re summarize in financial statements is crucial.$: Foundations is the first of seven courses from the Financial Management Specialization from University of Illinois. The whole Specialization might be worth your while, but so you’re aware, each course costs $79.Understand some economics with Microeconomics Principles and Macroeconomic PrinciplesInterest rates, risk, and return are core concepts in finance, but economic forces determines each. A strong understanding of economics is pretty helpful for understanding finance down the road.$: Both courses are free.Once you’re comfortable with Accounting and Economics, hop over to Corporate Finance Essentials from IESE (if you’re not doing the whole Specialization from U Illinois)Corporate Finance deals with concepts, tools, and methods businesses use to make decisions (e.g. do we invest in X, Y, or Z? How can we measure if our investment in A was worth it in retrospect?)Many of the models and tools bankers use are built on these concepts$: This course is free, but it follows a fixed schedule so check the calendar. Next course starts in late May.If you find this answer helpful, please follow and check out OpenCourser, a site that helps learners find online courses.

This question is interesting from another angle as compared to the wonderful answer by User-13812768563281058315. In places where land prices are high or where land parcels are small, we are normally faced with such requests from clients wanting to make a statement by going tall.For one such project, we had done a quick parallel research (to free our minds as they say, before we actually did what was most economically viable) while designing a 70 floor tower which would have been the tallest structure in that country. And this is what we found:Assuming the area of foot print was fixed, the height would depend primarily on shape of the tower and further structural refinements adopted.We came across this wonderful article in Wired on Baker (the structural head of SOM who were the structural engineers of Burj Khalifa):Engineer Bill Baker Is the King of Superstable 150-Story StructuresAccording to him, a tapering Y shaped plan would be the most efficient design for a skyscraper and would occupy a lesser footprint compared to say a rectangular block for the same height.Each of the shape's three "noses" (as he called the wings) acted as a brace for the other two, so unless the wind was coming from every direction at once, there was always an unstressed segment to anchor it. If you connected each of the noses to a strong central core, the shape would not torque. Baker called this the buttressed core.As Mr.Baker says, the buttressed core design could be used to build structures even taller than the Burj Khalifa. "We could go twice that or more”. He also thinks that it's totally feasible to build much taller than even the Kingdom Tower (which was initially planned to go as tall as 1.6km)The actual height vs foot print achieved would depend on the exact design which has to eventually have usable floor plate after deducting all the vertical transportation requirements like elevators & stairs, and is a complex design calculation depending on whether it is a concrete structure, steel or a combination of both, and other variables like soil conditions, wind loads etc.Now this is assuming you mean foot print of the building viz footprint of the plot. Even if it is plot, am pretty sure a Y shaped plan would fit in a triangular site of lesser area than a rectangular one.If, by foot print you are referring to purely the building footprint, there are far more options, for e.g., this research done by Prof. Peter Land of Illinois Institute of Technology.Tripod TowerThe building is designed as a Tripod, legs of the tripod would occupy a far lesser area in relation to its height.There was a proposal for a Tower in Seoul (I don’t recollect the name at the moment) which had a donut shaped plan, with the central atrium being open to sky (which could be deducted from the building foot print area). The whole building acts as a tube and seemed very efficient structurally and showed great potential.Here are images of a conceptually scheme from the same site on study of facade, which would further increase the height:Eventually, it boils down to the basic conceptual shape. We don’t have definite answers on that yet as we still haven’t tried out all possible shapes and surface treatments yet.