ryanwaggoner

There is no tax benefit to leaving a unit vacant, despite people who don’t understand real estate constantly making this claim. You do not get to deduct the rents you failed to collect, and there is no tax benefit that is lost when you rent the property. It never makes sense to refuse a dollar because you’ll have to pay 30% tax on it, or whatever. There may be other factors leading your friend to keep his property vacant, but this isn’t one of them.

The last paragraph sounds like nonsense too, though I’m less sure about that. What mechanism do you think there is for the mortgage holder to see your leases? And how stupid do you think banks are, that they’d rather your property bring in zero than less than they were expecting?

By your own admission, it’s nearly impossible to address the core issue here, so I can’t blame people for trying to nibble around the edges of the symptoms. It’s all that seems possible.

I think it’s different if someone is waiting on the immediate output of your work.

But in your example, if the HR person needs to process 1000 documents this month and mine is one of them, I’d much prefer they use this process to help them actually get through all that, rather than struggle to start every day and get less done over the course of the month.

AppleCare+ does not include theft coverage. For that you need to pay for "AppleCare+ with Theft and Loss", which I assume you didn't do: https://www.apple.com/support/products/iphone/

It's pretty easy to see why they wouldn't include theft + loss coverage unless you pay for it...

You can click through to the actual list here: https://wallethub.com/edu/most-diverse-cities/12690

It's worth taking a look at their methodology and how they're measuring diversity. Notably, NYC ranks much higher than Houston for cultural diversity (#5 vs #28 for Houston).

Your second paragraph is pretty ironic given your first.

This might technically work, but everyone would hate it. And that’s why it won’t happen, because people would hate it so much that it would have to be enacted en masse, and there’s no way to coordinate that.

This is a great comment.

Taking this further, if big data can eradicate the consumer surplus, then maybe big data could make price controls more feasible. Maybe big data actually could make a command economy kinda work.

Agreed, I think this is corporate lore and mostly bullshit. I've flown Southwest many times and they're not turning those planes around in anything approaching 10 minutes, it's more like 30-45 mins. I don't doubt that they aimed for that and maybe even hit it here or there, but I'm highly skeptical that it was the norm.

I’ve traveled all over Europe and lived in Italy for several years and I’ve never heard of this.

The USDA classifies nine million American kids as “food insecure”, some of them quite desperately so.

https://apnews.com/article/free-school-lunch-child-hunger-7d...

It may not be any better for European kids, but it’s inaccurate to say that US kids don’t go hungry.

Higher education is also similar

I associate the hedonic treadmill with a life of advertising-driven consumerism, and the US seems way ahead of Europe in that regard.

That’s likely because the non-prime vendors have to lower their prices to match prime, or they wouldn’t sell much.

Better yet, just do it as discounted coworking space. Win / win.

Brake, not break. Not just trying to be pedantic, I think this misspelling makes it less clear what you're trying to say.

I would bet money that this is exceedingly rare. You'd probably have to have a 767 or larger for this to make sense, and only a tiny fraction of private jets are this large. And then it would still have to be extensively modified to be able to fit a car. Not saying it never happens, I'm sure there's some oil prince or oligarch with a 787 that has a garage, but "many cars like this" is likely a huge stretch. Happy to be proven wrong.

Now, do some people who buy cars like this have them shipped via cargo plane to wherever they're needed? That's slightly more believable, but I bet it's still very uncommon.

Some of that is false, but not all of it. And some of it is misleading.

For example, women usually get more custody, but that’s also because men often don’t seek custody. Men who seek custody are awarded it at similar rates as women, IIRC.

It’s also not true that men are “lucky” to get 50% of the assets. That’s the default position in community property states.

And it still doesn’t explain how women are incentivized to divorce, given that despite some of the things above, women still fare worse in divorce than men do. Child support and alimony are, on average, something like softens the blow for the lower-earning spouse, not a path to a higher standard of living than was enjoyed in the marriage.

FWIW, I’m divorced and pay child support and the lion’s share of kid expenses, including school tuition. And yet I wouldn’t trade my financial position for my ex’s. This is true for almost every divorced man I know, and I know a lot at this point.

That may be the hypothesis that you are entertaining, but that’s not the comment I was responding to.

Nor is it a particularly well-formulated or convincing hypothesis, your cherry-picked examples notwithstanding. We don’t have evolutionary-timescale experience with medicine, electricity, the written word, or democracy either. How we think prehistorical people groups may have arranged their societies is almost completely irrelevant for modern policymakers, which is what this article is actually about. We have a long list of better ways to make this decision than “Hmm, well, how do uncontacted Amazon tribes of a few dozen people structure things? Perhaps we should just copy that in our nation of 300 million people?”

Hunter-gatherer societies do not represent some ideal state that we should strive for, but rather a particular societal adaptation to the environment at the time. We live in a different environment (one that I have zero interest in destroying in favor of trying to recreate some imagined ideal from prehistory), so the naturalistic fallacy is what has no place here.

Even if that's true (a big if), all we can infer is that that's what hunter / gatherer societies seem to naturally coalesce around. It's not what modern society is coalescing around. Some folks take that as a sign that modern society is fundamentally flawed, but I'd rather be born as a random person in modern society than a random person in a pre-historical hunter gatherer society. Perhaps that's just my bias towards modernity though.

You're commenting on a thread about a claim that what's "best" is for children to have a father and a mother, not "let's encourage fathers and mothers to stay together", which is quite different.

Humanity will be just fine. There are eight billion of us and growing, and while fertility dropping is increasingly a localized economic issue, it hardly threatens our species survival. Even when population peaks (projected in a few decades), there will be billions of us for centuries to come. And it’s impossible for you or anyone else to predict how civilization and culture will change or grow over such timeframes. Imagine someone in 1623 wringing their hands over humanity’s downfall based on whatever was happening in their tiny corner of time and space.

Given that most women do worse financially after divorce, I’m curious about these incentives for women to become single mothers that you’re talking about.

I also had a similar issue with Stripe, years ago at this point. I got it resolved partly by posting here, so this is a good first step. I'd also search HN for threads about Stripe, and there are often a few folks from the HN community who work at Stripe who offer to help. I'd reach out to them as well, let them know about this thread here, etc.

I know how frustrating and scary this is, I wish you luck in resolving it!

Yes, totally, Joe Biden should disregard the careful work of thousands of economists and other professionals, and instead focus on a layoff of 237 people he heard about.

I have no personal interest in this topic, but I like this site and the way the FAQs are organized. I'd love to have this for more topics.

I use mine every day.

Not for Microsoft it wouldn’t, which was their point.

In which direction?

And is that universally true? Does it apply to all relationships, like parents for their children?