tertius

40 ms·

451.
by tertius 9y ago
1. You don't need a $100k per year job to buy a house. 2. Easy way = not spending but rather saving. It's simple, but not fun in the short term. 3. House too expensive? Save more or buy cheaper. 4. 2007 loan crisis. I.e. don'
452.
by tertius 9y ago
It depends on what your choose to define as overspending.
453.
by tertius 9y ago
Spending cash is a lot harder psychologically than spending money with a CC. Dopamine is in effect. Much easier to keep scrolling and consuming on FB than stopping. That's the comparison.
454.
by tertius 9y ago
Here's my guess: We hit the target of the Paris accord without having to pay anyone a dime! The talking point: "it doesn't compel anyone to do anything" is probably still valid.
455.
by tertius 9y ago
> the facts on the ground are that we can't all be rich Yes but it's actually very doable and we can do it while adding value. Be the example that you don't believe exists.
456.
by tertius 9y ago
Direct debit (or cash). Rental is more often done with direct debit than credit cards.
457.
by tertius 9y ago
I understand why. Semi-free money. Invest in increasing your income instead. That's my recommendation. Long term thinking.
458.
by tertius 9y ago
I'm not suggesting buying a house in cash. This would take a long time. There are lenders who do not require a credit history. Look it up. The "save, wait" comment was more general than house buying.
459.
by tertius 9y ago
More work: - cancel the card because yearly fee. - pay tax on churned $. - shorten cumulative account age (lowers credit score). I've done this... Not worth it. Focus on more important things.
460.
by tertius 9y ago
It's also hard without a credit score. But not impossible but any stretch.
461.
by tertius 9y ago
> discipline not to over spend Like the discipline to never use Facebook? Extremely rare. And psychologically expensive.
462.
by tertius 9y ago
Then you have to pay income tax on the churn.
463.
by tertius 9y ago
I'd ask for a cash/direct debit discount instead. Cut out the middleman.
464.
by tertius 9y ago
Spend $3k and get $500 in rewards... Why not just spend $2k instead? Maybe spend the time increasing your income. (I have done this... Rarely would the hassle.)
465.
by tertius 9y ago
If "invest what you don't pay" is the only benefit to buying a very quickly depreciating asset then you're not a very good investor. Buy a used car and invest the bulk of the cash (if you actually have any). Can't g
466.
by tertius 9y ago
Wait, save, then buy if you still want to. You can buy a house with no credit history. Look it up.
467.
by tertius 9y ago
Ah yes! Because "regulations" don't exist. I agree with you, but 99% of people here want the executive to do a lot more than it really should. Think net neutrality... (Karmaship down.)
468.
by tertius 9y ago
You argued that it should be published in public immediately. You didn't say why this is important. Clearly it's open important for those who actually have to keep up with the literature and they're in institutions that have
469.
by tertius 9y ago
Agreeing on, let's say abortion or how to discipline children is not the same as an extrovert marrying an introvert. Some opposites can work together others (think religion) can not.
470.
by tertius 9y ago
Replace "be right" with "dominate" and "be happy" with "co-operate". That may make it clearer.
471.
by tertius 9y ago
> Things move quickly, and when half a year passes, you hardly have access to cutting-edge research. Ah yes, things move very quickly in science... You have to keep up with the literature! Define the group of people for who this is actua
472.
by tertius 9y ago
> More to the point, however, is why in the world should the people who funded the project get delayed access? Have you actually tried to answer this question yourself?
473.
by tertius 9y ago
https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not-od-05-0...
474.
by tertius 9y ago
And they generally do, in 6 months or so.
475.
by tertius 9y ago
To be fair for phones you focused on: 100% charge and pocket (body) heat. You did mention 100% and temperature being the problem generally though...
476.
by tertius 9y ago
Or collaborated with someone who cares enough.
477.
by tertius 9y ago
You're right. But he's going off of what is established, whether that is faulty or not. So his claim is based on something faulty, but it is based on something. Your qualm is not with him or his statements, rather with the standar
478.
by tertius 9y ago
> Not sure why you are bringing wolves into this. I'm guessing you're trying to trap me into saying the following: Why? Because they are direct descendants of the gray wolf. > Dogs needing bone is incorrect. Plant sources ca
479.
by tertius 9y ago
If we have a baseline of 500 year flood level at 0.2% and it's well over that then yes there is a basis for making this claim. I wouldn't make this claim though...
480.
by tertius 9y ago
What is incorrect? I implied that they're not obligate by contrasting them with cats. They forage when in a fasted state. And no, they have no carbohydrate requirement. Yes they'll eat it. They have some omnivorous capability. So

More ›