I hear that expenses can scale to wealth (although, as I said, the difference is that the wealthy person can scale back but someone already buying the cheapest option has no choice), but what does that have to do with the article? Just a topic you wanted to bring up? Is there something I'm missing?
Okay but if the rich person misses their Porsche payments, they can buy a Honda Civic.
I don't know why you are even saying this. What is the point? "If a person spends lots of money on luxury items, they will have less disposable income." Okay? What does that contribute to the question of how our government policies regulate wealth?
There's a local store that rents outdoors gear (climbing stuff, camping supplies etc), it's for profit and it's great. Would be way cooler if it were a library, but the local business is totally affordable and easy.
I've used it several times. My friends and I plan an outing and plan supply pickup/dropoff as part of the outing.
I don't see how going to the library is such a big hurdle? The closest library to me is less than ten minutes drive, and on the way to a lot of stuff. I don't know this seems like a kind of insane objection. If you're poor, it's not like you're just gonna spend $200 on a new tool anyway because you can't. In my experience I'm more likely to just try to make do with the crappy alternative I have available.
This take just seems really privileged. The biggest barrier for a lot of people isn't the time - it's affording the tools in the first place.
I have read that this is largely a myth based on a book from the 70s, and that while there are varying proportions of amino acids in different vegan protein sources, there is still enough of each so that you could easily get everything you need.
I read this in a book years ago that I don't remember the name of, but found a source instantly
You think people in trades don't think at work? This is actually just classism or something idk. You really don't think electricians, contractors, plumbers etc aren't problem solving on the daily? We're not talking about working on a factory line.
Nah I do biology as a hobby and also for work, it's great. There are the usual trappings of work, but I've had jobs I'm not passionate about and it's definitely worse lol. I feel like what you're saying is a cope people say when they don't follow their passions.
I have an outdoors job (biology/ecology), it's not extreme lmao, although when I go hiking with my tech friends it does seem like maybe it is extreme to them. Your body adapts to what you do. I do office work some days and outdoors work others, and my mental health after more outdoors days just is like exponentially better. I feel connected to nature, I am using my body, I'm touching and smelling and seeing novel things every day. And in my case, doing something that I truly believe matters.
I enjoy my office days, I get to do planning, mapping, data analysis ... but I wouldn't be caught dead using all my mental energy to stare at a screen every day lol
I used it in college, I didn't have money. Honestly I didn't mind. You were allowed to skip five or six times in an hour, and I would just make custom playlists and it ended up being like a nicer radio. Fewer ads than radio, music I like, a few skips.
Honestly at that time, I don't remember anyone who paid for it. I remember the first time I heard someone say they had premium was a friend who worked at Starbucks in like .. 2017? Because Spotify premium was a job perk. At the time it was like, oh she only has premium because of Starbucks. And then somewhere along the way everyone got premium.
I hear that expenses can scale to wealth (although, as I said, the difference is that the wealthy person can scale back but someone already buying the cheapest option has no choice), but what does that have to do with the article? Just a topic you wanted to bring up? Is there something I'm missing?