That's an assumption. 1 these aren't all houses, some of these are small rooms. Looking the place up I've actually been there, some folks end up there for PT or hospice and I can tell you the place aint swank.
2 They could afford the 1.3K monthly fee they expected, sheeeet that's about what I was paying for a one bedroom in the city in not a particularly great area and I didnt have the assisted living aspect that River Glen provides which I assume is the biggest cost. it's not a surprise that they couldn't handle it going up to $6K a month. can you handle your rent going up 300%? Also you gotta keep in mind these are olds. They probably bought their house back forever ago and with housing prices here, and from what it sounds like damn near everywhere, the value of their houses have just been going up like crazy. That doesn't necessarily mean they have money, they probably sold their house or whatever and that's how they managed to get that hefty down payment.
In the end in both scenarios they sunk what they had into a thing that was supposed to last them to the end, the didn't have much left after that and now the terms of the agreement have changed and they can only pray the terms of the agreement don't change further. I get not wanting to side with perceived rich people and prices vary by region. you can feel different about that if you want but they aint all that different of situations
Same area, st Charles and Elgin are one town apart. It's been a while since I checked but I think $100k-200k would be the average house price in the area. I'm a little closer to the city than those burbs and tiny foreclosures that aren't even up to code can be 200k.
So yeah that might be rich compared to some areas but for this area it's not but all surprising.
This news are actually quite similar. You'll find in both people investing heavily, most of their retirement savings, to establish themselves and then the management company or property owner jacking up the rent to the point where people can no longer live there and have to abandon their investment/retirement fund. Not too complicated of a comparison really.
There's always scams and they often target those most vulnerable who can't fight back. You'd think there should be some protections or safety nets but gods of capitalism require blood sacrifices
partially sarcastic, Tasha Yar as a character had big potential and was intended to be cooler but they started off on the wrong foot, never corrected, and never developed her.
The wikipedia rabbit hole for Tasha Yar and her actor Denise Crosby is an interesting one. Some of the creators thought she was the most interesting character in the "show bible" so maybe it was the episode writers that missed the message and gave her such empty stories and flubbed what could have been a cool character. Either way it would have been interesting to see a woman in the role of chief of security and another big leap in the progressiveness of star trek.
TOS had post cold war russians, and showed that black people are part of the future. Aside from briefly having a woman in charge of security I can't think of any progressive traits on TNG other than negotiating and 1st contact (are Picard's bag and) better that fighting. Don't get me wrong through I still hold a special place for TNG, just finished a rewatch not too long ago, but on second-ish watch, with the rose tinted glasses off, it is disappointing they had an opportunity to make a statement about a brighter, freer, more equitable future but ended up going with rape gangs and forced marriage (oh and fucking Data) instead.
So yeah the character ended up weak but was originally intended to be a bad ass. missed opportunity for something cooler and bigger.
Wait wait wait, are you trying to say that a character whose first big episode s1e4 saw them, as the head of security, get kidnapped for a forced marriage and had a character background of [checks notes] planet of rape gangs wasn't enough of a character?
Early TNG wasn't great, not surprising Denise Crosby asked to be released from her contract early. Fully agree they did her dirty with that death story but glad they still brought her back a few times
That works. The local L trains running along side the highway in Chicago got me, seeing 5 trains roll by while barley moving in bumper to bumper gave me the final push to covert to public transit
Pure enshittification, squeezing both sides.
I had no idea on this part but that would explain a lot, fuckin wild
Here's how that worked: when you ran a query like "children's clothing," Google secretly appended the brand name of a kids' clothing manufacturer to the query. This, in turn, triggered a ton of ads – because rival brands will have bought ads against their competitors' name (like Pepsi buying ads that are shown over queries for Coke).
Here we see surpluses being taken away from both end-users and business customers – that is, searchers and advertisers. For searchers, it doesn't matter how much you refine your query, you're still going to get crummy search results because there's an unkillable, hidden search term stuck to your query, like a piece of shit that Google keeps sticking to the sole of your shoe.
But for advertisers, this is also a scam. They're paying to be matched to users who search on a brand name, and you didn't search on that brand name. It's especially bad for the company whose name has been appended to your search, because Google has a protection racket where the company that matches your search has to pay extra in order to show up overtop of rivals who are worse matches. Both the matching company and those rivals have given Google a credit-card that Google gets to bill every time a user searches on the company's name, and Google is just running fraudulent charges through those cards.
Doubt they care. They do anything to uphold a two party system where they can raise campaign contributions from the same corporate interests that also contribute to radical regressives, while at the same time being able to hold some offices solely by being the marginally less shitty party (at least publicly). Ranked choice makes a third party a viable option and the Democrats as a political party with no real stances doesn't make sense in the world where they aren't the sole alternative.
![But Class War [Illinois]](https://midwest.social/pictrs/image/74e5762a-344f-46d2-800a-b0808723c4e4.jpeg?format=webp&thumbnail=128)
I really need to watch the sequels, if they're anything like the original it'll be worth it to me.