ars_technician

22 ms·

211.
by ars_technician 13y ago
TL;DR; people make whatever justifications they want from the code to support their stance.
212.
by ars_technician 13y ago
Your comment is an ad hominem. Address what he said, not his intentions or account history.
213.
by ars_technician 13y ago
Well your anecdotal evidence really helps. The point is that what he said means two exactly opposite things depending on how reasonable you think it is to live by yourself.
214.
by ars_technician 13y ago
What you don't seem to be getting is that if you are renting, ALL of it is going towards non-equity expenses. A monthly house-payment of $2000 is still better than rent of $2000 even if 90% is going towards interest/insurance ove
215.
by ars_technician 13y ago
You literally said the exact opposite of the point you were implying throughout the rest of the discussion. We were talking about ways to live cheaply. Then YOU were the one that changed positions and said we were talking about someone maki
216.
by ars_technician 13y ago
>As far as addressing counterpoints, I've grown tired of quibbling. I think that you can live comfortably spending 66% of your income net of taxes per year without any undue effort if you make $80k a year in SF. I think anyone who l
217.
by ars_technician 13y ago
You are confusing what the point of building equity in a home is. It's not solely an investment vehicle like stocks, bonds, options, commodities, etc. By building equity in a home, you are also eliminating your cost of rent. >You do
218.
by ars_technician 13y ago
>There's also a cost of liquidity. $10,000 sitting in a bank account at 0.1% is arguably worth more than $10,000 of equity in a house that might take 3 months to sell. You make a big assumption with that statement. It strongly (and
219.
by ars_technician 13y ago
No offense, but I'm strongly inclined to believe that you are not making it by on 80k a year in SF, and if you made that little money at one point, it was not for an extended enough period of time for you to properly understand what it
220.
by ars_technician 13y ago
Read your own message. You said you said the following: >I thought we were talking about someone who is making the bare minimum effort to save money Do you know what the bare minimum effort means? You are the one suggesting bare minimum
221.
by ars_technician 13y ago
Assuming a promotion is known as "shifting the goal-post" too. You are essentially saying you are correct as long as you make more money than the original amount specified. Okay, you said it's trivial for an entry-level engin
222.
by ars_technician 13y ago
That doesn't even make sense. If someone is making the bare minimum effort, then they would probably live by themselves. Are you sure you thought that message through?
223.
by ars_technician 13y ago
No, it doesn't still stand. You just adjusted from your initial 20% up to 35%, which essentially eliminates most of the 'savings' money you mentioned in your post. Also, the apartment assumption isn't that generous. If y
224.
by ars_technician 13y ago
>But a person who is making any real effort would not find it difficult. As long as they don't have a family or want to build equity in a home. The justifications for the costs in this thread are so myopic that it's baffling.
225.
by ars_technician 13y ago
>They were wrong, and I was a fool for listening to them instead of exploring it for myself. Don't make my mistakes. They were right if you ever want to have a family. You are building no equity in rent so you will essentially have
226.
by ars_technician 13y ago
Your math implies 64k after taxes, which is only 20% and is completely wrong. The effective tax rate in Cali after federal and state is closer to 40%. That leaves 48k after taxes. Take out the 24k you blew on the 2k/mo apt and you&#x27
227.
by ars_technician 13y ago
>Outside the HN bubble, this is an acceptable tradeoff. I'm glad you have been deemed worthy enough to make that decision for the rest of the population that doesn't understand the implications of what they are getting into.
228.
by ars_technician 13y ago
Someone you are willfully sending information about requests to? What's so hard to understand. Just because you let your doctor put his finger in your ass doesn't mean you want to let everyone...
229.
by ars_technician 13y ago
People wouldn't be connecting to the website using HTTPS if it didn't have a certificate in the first place, so why does it matter if 'bar.org' doesn't have a certificate?
230.
by ars_technician 13y ago
Sorry, but you are still wasting your money on a business validation certificate. A domain validation certificate is the only thing that a browser actually validates and ensures the security between you and the website. The rest is just spr
231.
by ars_technician 13y ago
You are not building equity when renting. If you plan to be in a location for more than a year, it's worth buying a home. Mortgage payments (minus interest) are then just going back into your own pocket vs. rent which is going into you
232.
by ars_technician 13y ago
>I think 'out of shape' out to be an objective And you would be wrong. It's completely subjective. There is no quantifiable definition of 'in shape' other than fat %.
233.
by ars_technician 13y ago
>Soda may or may not be bad for you, but it's certainly empty calories. Not diet soda. There are NO calories in it. It's not "empty calories". With your level of ignorance, I'm surprised you haven't poisoned
234.
by ars_technician 13y ago
>One burrito bowl can contain something like 75% of your daily sodium intake. So? It's not like he's eating two of those a day.
235.
by ars_technician 13y ago
It hits a nerve because it's being advertised as a candidate for full-time meal replacement. Pizza rolls and fast food are not, so the comparison between the two is a false equivalency. >Obviously he didn't go through a traditi
236.
by ars_technician 13y ago
Where is the scientific evidence that bearing a loaded firearm in public harms other people?
237.
by ars_technician 13y ago
You are misrepresenting CS degrees. There are very few classes based on memorizing facts. It looks like your degree has taught you how to create strawman arguments pretty well though... Let me show you how it looks from the other side. I go
238.
by ars_technician 13y ago
Yes you can. These 'implicit' subsidies you are referring to rely on completely made up numbers. It's not the same thing and trying to convince people that it is doesn't work.
239.
by ars_technician 14y ago
Looks like we have a classic case of not understanding the currency. Bitcoin can be anonymous because you can create wallets and transact between them without any proof of ownership of the wallets. Put another way, yes, they can see that on