Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The man who spent forty-two years at the Beverly Hills Hotel pool (1993)

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 324 posts

Re: The man who spent forty-two years at the Beverly Hills Hotel pool (1993)

#121

Post by smogcutter »

thewanderer1983 wrote: post #115
ForTheKidz wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no doubt this is a widespread behavior, but I do have doubts as to whether or not this benefits children. Children seem to benefit primarily from watching relationships that genuinely make both parents happy. There's very little evidence to support that faking it yields results of children reacting as if you weren't faking it. You might as well divorce.

> Children seem to benefit primarily from watching relationships that genuinely make both parents happy. I think you'll find the data supports chidren benefiting from a happy loving home. Not from the concern of the parents relationships with others. My childhood friends were mostly from divorced parents and it very much impacted them all in negative ways. Parents are security blankets for children. It's who they run…

Most people with happy loving homes don’t get divorced.

Re: The man who spent forty-two years at the Beverly Hills Hotel pool (1993)

#122

Post by memco »

dmayle wrote: post #36
fxtentacle wrote: post #34

I find it wonderfully clichee that the guy who's job was linking vendors and customers was called Mr. Link.

It's called nominative determinism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_determinism

I’ve also seen “Aptronym” used for this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aptronym

Re: The man who spent forty-two years at the Beverly Hills Hotel pool (1993)

#123

Post by jannyfer »

ziptron wrote: post #56
fxtentacle wrote: post #34

I find it wonderfully clichee that the guy who's job was linking vendors and customers was called Mr. Link.

https://experts.mcmaster.ca/display/ironsga <-- A professor of steel making named Dr. Irons

Dr. Doctor

https://www.nygh.on.ca/areas-care/maternal-newborn-and-paedi...

Re: The man who spent forty-two years at the Beverly Hills Hotel pool (1993)

#124

Post by permo-w »

B1FF_PSUVM wrote: post #87
permo-w wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do think that with the loosening of corporate control on mass media, we are slowly iterating towards reasonable dietary advice

Hope springs eternal

the current dietary advice in my local segment of society goes pretty much like this: try not to eat too many processed foods, keep it balanced, and fats aren't actually bad for you. that all sounds fairly reasonable to me

Re: The man who spent forty-two years at the Beverly Hills Hotel pool (1993)

#125

Post by walthamstow »

dexterdog wrote: post #116
kristianp wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course when they bought their house it would have cost mere 10s of thousands. You can see why there's an attraction to owning your own house.

If you live in a place that doesn't have oppresive taxes and the real estate market maintains an unrealistic growth rate.

You have described London. There are no taxes on owning a property at all, the growth rate has slowed somewhat since the 00s heyday but it's still going up.

Re: The man who spent forty-two years at the Beverly Hills Hotel pool (1993)

#126

Post by yieldcrv »

kamaal wrote: post #117
kristianp wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course when they bought their house it would have cost mere 10s of thousands. You can see why there's an attraction to owning your own house.

Owning a home is always good no matter what the finance influencers tell you. In fact, earlier the better. Its not even the buying vs renting thing, renting is bad, you don't get to own anything at the end of the journey, and often the kind of things you have to put up with to save rent, or avoid getting homeless in case of of a job loss or other life crisis is just worth your mental health. Most of your life is spen…

its not renting vs owning that's the problem, its renting vs mortgage where mortgage is improperly considered synonymous with ownership. but that's because its so rare to be able to own the home near the places you can rent.

so sure, renting vs buying a home in cash will give the cash ownership a leg up. but then it shifts over to people that would love to espouse about the 'time value of money' and leverage, where putting all the cash down is suboptimal vs a mortgage. the % increase of the home value isn't amplified when using cash up front either.

so lets optimize this further, renting vs mortgage with the option to pay it off at any moment is always better. but nobody has that cash, so we're back at square one.

if you HAVE to do a mortgage, then its likely that renting will be a better deal for you for over 10 years straight, before the mortgage pays dividends.

Re: The man who spent forty-two years at the Beverly Hills Hotel pool (1993)

#127

Post by eru »

kamaal wrote: post #117
kristianp wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course when they bought their house it would have cost mere 10s of thousands. You can see why there's an attraction to owning your own house.

Owning a home is always good no matter what the finance influencers tell you. In fact, earlier the better. Its not even the buying vs renting thing, renting is bad, you don't get to own anything at the end of the journey, and often the kind of things you have to put up with to save rent, or avoid getting homeless in case of of a job loss or other life crisis is just worth your mental health. Most of your life is spen…

Have you ever heard of opportunity costs?

Re: The man who spent forty-two years at the Beverly Hills Hotel pool (1993)

#128

Post by eru »

yieldcrv wrote: post #126
kamaal wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Owning a home is always good no matter what the finance influencers tell you. In fact, earlier the better. Its not even the buying vs renting thing, renting is bad, you don't get to own anything at the end of the journey, and often the kind of things you have to put up with to save rent, or avoid getting homeless in case of of a job loss or other life crisis is just worth your mental health. Most of your life is spen…

its not renting vs owning that's the problem, its renting vs mortgage where mortgage is improperly considered synonymous with ownership. but that's because its so rare to be able to own the home near the places you can rent. so sure, renting vs buying a home in cash will give the cash ownership a leg up. but then it shifts over to people that would love to espouse about the 'time value of money' and leverage, where p…

> if you HAVE to do a mortgage, then its likely that renting will be a better deal for you for over 10 years straight, before the mortgage pays dividends.

How do mortgages pay dividends?

In any case, it's all about opportunity costs, and yields.

To give an extreme example: if the house costs 100x the yearly rent, you are probably better off putting your money in the stock market instead of buying the property, and paying your rent from the returns on the stocks.

Re: The man who spent forty-two years at the Beverly Hills Hotel pool (1993)

#129

Post by kamaal »

eru wrote: post #128
yieldcrv wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

its not renting vs owning that's the problem, its renting vs mortgage where mortgage is improperly considered synonymous with ownership. but that's because its so rare to be able to own the home near the places you can rent. so sure, renting vs buying a home in cash will give the cash ownership a leg up. but then it shifts over to people that would love to espouse about the 'time value of money' and leverage, where p…

> if you HAVE to do a mortgage, then its likely that renting will be a better deal for you for over 10 years straight, before the mortgage pays dividends. How do mortgages pay dividends? In any case, it's all about opportunity costs, and yields. To give an extreme example: if the house costs 100x the yearly rent, you are probably better off putting your money in the stock market instead of buying the property, and pa…

Having to pay rent likely makes retiring early, or even retiring itself impossible.

Somethings like marriage, kids, buying home just have be done in life as early as you can.

Note money is just a number at the end. The idea is not to have max($money), rather max($free_time, $health). Optimise for $free_time and $health, and then you have a very different life strategy to work towards.

Re: The man who spent forty-two years at the Beverly Hills Hotel pool (1993)

#130

Post by kamaal »

yieldcrv wrote: post #126
kamaal wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Owning a home is always good no matter what the finance influencers tell you. In fact, earlier the better. Its not even the buying vs renting thing, renting is bad, you don't get to own anything at the end of the journey, and often the kind of things you have to put up with to save rent, or avoid getting homeless in case of of a job loss or other life crisis is just worth your mental health. Most of your life is spen…

its not renting vs owning that's the problem, its renting vs mortgage where mortgage is improperly considered synonymous with ownership. but that's because its so rare to be able to own the home near the places you can rent. so sure, renting vs buying a home in cash will give the cash ownership a leg up. but then it shifts over to people that would love to espouse about the 'time value of money' and leverage, where p…

From where I come(South Indian Muslim), there is a saying that how quickly you own a home, get married and have kids decide the overall affluence you have in life.

If eat that frog is a think for daily schedule, there is also such a thing for life itself. You just have to get a few things done as early in life as you can. Or you end up living for other people.

Post reply on HN