I go into employment discussions from the position that either my current boss is going to give me what I want or my replacement boss is going to give me what I want. It’s not uncomfortable for you when your current boss is the only one that stands to lose anything.

“A car buyer in 2016 got a zero percent APR loan on a new car that retailed $30,000 and the payments were $500 per month. That person is now back in the market but their trade value is equal to their loan payoff so it’s a wash.”

The idea is that you need to weigh the cost savings associated with aggressively addressing debt against the opportunity cost of not investing that money. The number itself isn’t really important because it’s personal.

The trustworthy vpn is the one where you sign up with a cloud service of your choosing and administer your combo tunneling/forward proxy solution on your own. I’d wager that that’s some degree of what these VPN providers that have been coming out of the woodwork are doing so cut out the middle man and do it yourself.…

That paragraph, minus the part about apps, could probably be a personal finance article all by itself because a lot of people struggle with its content.

The guidelines exist to give people a fighting chance at avoiding a trip into debt, the street, or being plain old house poor when faced with shit happening. The only caveat is that if you want a greater risk of encountering one (or all) of those outcomes when shit happens do whatever you want.

Those people have broadcasted, loudly, that you could raise taxes on them but as long as they get a refund in the end they’ll be happy because the refund is obviously what really matters.

Gurus only exist because seemingly everyone is waiting on someone to spill the beans on the magical money secret. Spend less than you make and invest. Personal finance isn’t rocket science. Whoops. Spilled the beans.

It’s a which costs more comparison. Do the cheaper one and use the difference to get ahead financially. More clear?

The housing calculation becomes even more significant when weighing renting vs owning. If you can rent the one bedroom apartment despite being able to afford buying the 2-3 bedroom house the savings represent a massive opportunity to get ahead financially.

The issue at hand is cost. It is entirely a question of cost. If MfA cost less (For the individual; no one should a damn about per capita spending. They should care how much they spend.) it would sail through. The problem is that it doesn’t actually cost less. It’s less for some (maybe even a lot) people and a lot of…

What makes you think MfA would simply claim the premium you already pay and leave it at that?

So premiums still exist but you’re disguising them as taxes and hoping that people are too stupid to catch it? Free means at no cost. MfA is not free because taxes are a cost.

The team you want to watch gets primary sponsor funding to compete in a sport you want to watch. They comply with the rules, to the letter, while testing the spirit of those rules which is utterly consistent with team behavior in the sport you want to watch.

No premium, no deductible, no co-insurance health coverage would be the best thing since sliced bread. That’s literally and genuinely free. No one is offering that. I think that’s the definition of a fanciful position.

You left out the fact that premiums will still exist and whether your option is better or not depends entirely on what those premiums end up being. You asked a question that no one can answer intelligently because it’s missing critical information.

The average deductible for a HDHP for 2018 was $2,245 for an individual or $4,329 for a family. Average firm contribution to employee HRAs/HSAs was $1,149 and $2,288 respectively.

You do realize that there are tens of millions of people that don’t have shitty insurance right?

I suspect that she does.

“I think the key to making reparations not divisive is to make them as broad based as possible.”