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.

So you’re ideologically confused. Got it.

Workers should own the wealth their work creates! 

“No one should have to subsidize paltry FTE pay with government programs, but that is exactly what happens.”

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

I asked you a reasonable question on how you’d address the effects of your position on whether businesses should or shouldn’t exist and your response is that I’m the one putting on a show?

The “controversy” is over the fact that these delivery marketplaces make minimum guarantees on the transaction (not on what they pay you). DoorDash says you’ll get at least a dollar from them every time along with 100% of the customer tip.

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…

I don’t disagree with the idea that most of these marketplace type businesses may only exist because most people are bad at accounting.

“How much should the customer spend to ensure a living wage?”

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

It’s absolutely true with respect to executive comp.