I don’t think this is a particularly fair take. Some people bought at high prices because it seemed like the right move (in 2008, for example), market crashes, you’re stuck with your investment even if you’re underwater (upside down).

It’s definitely not fair to assume what his costs are compared to the cost to rent. It isn’t necessary to have the example above to reside in an area where mortgages far exceed rent. Northern Virginia in the USA is a good example, where townhomes can easily exceed 1 million USD, which would typically require a 30-50k+ down payment plus closing costs, and would then be 5k+ in a mortgage. Rent that place for 4500 and that’s a loss on monthly costs, but of course the landlord is earning long term equity (and that is the value, but they may not be turning a profit).

Edit: I’m simply stating that it’s unfair to assume the original commenter is lying about not making a profit. I’m not suggesting they aren’t experiencing a net gain in equity.

I don’t think it’s fair to flatly posit that since the CDC has been wrong at some point in the past, they can’t ever be trusted. While i understand the concept of don’t blindly follow words regardless of who said it, the sheer amount of research and dedication from an organization such as the CDC should count quite a bit more than the folks who have done none.

I don’t have the means to do such research, and as such i will more heavily weigh the words of the applicable research team than i will the words of someone who has no knowledge on the topic.

I think the question really should be not “have they ever been wrong,” but instead, “do i think they’re wrong on purpose.” A lot of research teams are funded by one side of an argument, which is cause for concern. The CDC is most likely not, and it would be fair to say they could be wrong, but likely not on purpose. Therefore i would say in this instance they are the more qualified experts who are also trying their best to be objective, and therefore, they likely have the more reasonable statement on this topic.

I’m not entirely sure this is a fair take. Although i can understand where you’re coming from, i think it’s reasonable to consider that a decent number teachers (although certainly not all) are both passionate about their profession and also underpaid. This almost forces teachers to have a second job (side hustle) to enable them to continue teaching. The teacher in the article chose a less socially acceptable side hustle, but not an illegal one, and once found out, her employer activated a morality clause to fire her.

From a purely monetary standpoint, she’s probably fine (assuming she continues her other job), but I’m not sure it’s reasonable to say that money is the only thing she cares about. Being fired from her (probable) passion of teaching sucks.

Also, being unemployed sucks. It isn’t really about being bored so much as not feeling like you’re part of society. And for many, of course, it’s a financial hardship, but it can definitely be mentally taxing when feel like you don’t have a meaningful role in life or your community.

There is also added social connotation. For example, meeting people, you often ask what you do. “I’m a teacher” will elicit significantly different responses than “i used to be a teacher” or “I’m an onlyfans model.” Whether or not any of us agree that it’s “ok” has no bearing on her future interactions and life. Labels like these matter to a lot of people, so i could definitely see how this would be mentally and emotionally taxing.

There are plenty of insurance companies that are like this. They’re significantly cheaper than the nationally advertised insurance options.

It looks like it’s definitely a scam.

https://malwaretips.com/blogs/evrievri-notes-com-parcel-delivery-scam/#:~:text=This scam is essentially a,identity theft and financial fraud

It looks like the email is a scam! Be careful! Definitely don’t recommend putting your info in there.

Here’s a source, and it pretty accurately describes the email you’re seeing:

https://malwaretips.com/blogs/evrievri-notes-com-parcel-delivery-scam/#:~:text=This scam is essentially a,identity theft and financial fraud.

Excerpt:

The email prompts you to click on a link to resolve the delivery problem, but the link actually directs to a sophisticated fake Evri website. On this phishing site, victims are asked to enter personal details like name, address, phone number, and even credit card information to pay a “re-delivery fee.”

I really don’t find rt to be useful. Take away the fact that critics are being paid to give positive reviews, it’s just a measure of like versus dislike, so 100% of critics liking it is really just saying every critic thought the show was at least decent, but it doesn’t give me any sort of scale. It’s like a giant pass fail, but there’s no indication of whether the show barely passed across the board, or was actually quite good.

That being said, have not seen this series yet, but plan to