4 ms·

The exclusive fixation on "thousands" vs. "many hundreds" or "tens of thousands" is intellectually dishonest.

war1025 8y ago
I disagree. Using credit cards for cash back is on the same order as going to Starbucks or not. Using them to build better credit is also a small-scale gain if you aren't taking on more debt than you can handle.
- diminoten 8y ago
  No it's not, by an order of magnitude, and no you don't need to take on debt to build credit, in fact that doesn't even work. It just sounds like you also don't know how credit cards work...
  - war1025 8y ago
    Looks like you weren't the person who replied about using credit cards to build credit and get lower interest rates on loans. So that probably explains some of the disconnect here. Cashback is definitely on the same order of magnitude as a Starbucks habit.
    - diminoten 8y ago
      > Cashback is definitely on the same order of magnitude as a Starbucks habit. False. Starbucks habit is $10/week, or $520/year. A 2% cashback card will return ~$2,000 annually for a family of 4 with a household income of ~$100,000 (the vast majority of HN users). Please stop replying. Thanks.
      - war1025 8y ago
        Assuming your Starbucks habit is daily, you're looking at closer to $30/week, or $1500/year. If you are making $100k a year, your take home pay is probably closer to $70k. Assuming you are financially responsible and saving a decent amount, that means you are spending generously maybe $50k/ year. At 2% cash back, that comes out to $1000/year. Same order of magnitude.
        diminoten 8y ago
        Your numbers are completely wrong, and you are engaging dishonestly, which is in violation of the HN guidelines. Please stop responding to me, you're ruining this discussion.
        war1025 8y ago
        Sorry I hurt your ego. Those numbers are completely reasonable, and anyone who took half a second to go over them would agree. Further, at this point the post is old enough that no one besides us is likely to read it. No discussion is being ruined. I have been engaging in good faith. I have to conclude that you haven't been. You can reply again to have the last word if that will make you feel better.
        diminoten 8y ago
        You have not been engaging in good faith, and your continued replies are further evidence of your lack of respect for me or the conversation I'm trying to have with others. My ego is irrelevant, you are objectively wrong and also not using HN as it is intended.

I disagree. Using credit cards for cash back is on the same order as going to Starbucks or not. Using them to build better credit is also a small-scale gain if you aren't taking on more debt than you can handle.

diminoten 8y ago
No it's not, by an order of magnitude, and no you don't need to take on debt to build credit, in fact that doesn't even work. It just sounds like you also don't know how credit cards work...
- war1025 8y ago
  Looks like you weren't the person who replied about using credit cards to build credit and get lower interest rates on loans. So that probably explains some of the disconnect here. Cashback is definitely on the same order of magnitude as a Starbucks habit.
  - diminoten 8y ago
    > Cashback is definitely on the same order of magnitude as a Starbucks habit. False. Starbucks habit is $10/week, or $520/year. A 2% cashback card will return ~$2,000 annually for a family of 4 with a household income of ~$100,000 (the vast majority of HN users). Please stop replying. Thanks.
    - war1025 8y ago
      Assuming your Starbucks habit is daily, you're looking at closer to $30/week, or $1500/year. If you are making $100k a year, your take home pay is probably closer to $70k. Assuming you are financially responsible and saving a decent amount, that means you are spending generously maybe $50k/ year. At 2% cash back, that comes out to $1000/year. Same order of magnitude.
      - diminoten 8y ago
        Your numbers are completely wrong, and you are engaging dishonestly, which is in violation of the HN guidelines. Please stop responding to me, you're ruining this discussion.
        war1025 8y ago
        Sorry I hurt your ego. Those numbers are completely reasonable, and anyone who took half a second to go over them would agree. Further, at this point the post is old enough that no one besides us is likely to read it. No discussion is being ruined. I have been engaging in good faith. I have to conclude that you haven't been. You can reply again to have the last word if that will make you feel better.
        diminoten 8y ago
        You have not been engaging in good faith, and your continued replies are further evidence of your lack of respect for me or the conversation I'm trying to have with others. My ego is irrelevant, you are objectively wrong and also not using HN as it is intended.