271–280 of 324 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Egg consumption was considered to lead to high cholesterol levels and thus linked to cardiovascular disease. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4632449/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/wellness/19... https://australianfoodtimeline.com.au/egg-consumption/
The idea that granola would be healthier is rather strange
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a fine generalisation because it's assumed that people eat 1-2 eggs for breakfast, not 20. "Something like LD50" can't help because it is literally another generalisation that may not apply to you personally: eggs are mostly fine unless you have an eggs allergy or problems with cholesterol or whatnot.
At least at US restaurants, a "small" omelette is three eggs and larger ones more, though. And likewise for servings of scrambled eggs. Pretty much the only case where 1 or 2 eggs are the norm is when ordering fried eggs (and those are generally accompanied by bacon, potatoes, toast, etc.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For a proper comparison, you need to pay up the guy paying off the mortgage with someone who eg invests similar amounts in an index fund. To be even more proper, you'd need to allow the stock market investor to use leverage, just like the guy with the mortgage does. Or, if you want to avoid the mortgage/leverage complication, we can compare someone buying a house outright with someone investing the same amount in sto…
An important thing to consider is not just average return, but risk factors, and worst case scenarios. If you buy a home instead of investing, you've got a locked in, controlled rate for your housing expenses. (Yes, there's some variability with property tax and insurance). In difficult times, you can still plan very carefully around your housing costs and wait for better times. If you rent and invest, your housing c…
Housing is not as liquid, and prices can also go down as well as up. Often there are large transaction costs associated with buying/selling property.
What if an event happens that is not covered by insurance? Subsistence, large-scale repairs required etc. Changes in housing regulations c.f. the fallout from Grenfell in the UK.
There are risks in both, and risks from housing can also be large. The leverage offered by banks works in your favour in good times but can work against you in bad.
If, like me, you were curious about the visuals to go with this piece, it appears that this is the pool today: https://www.dorchestercollection.com/los-angeles/the-beverly...
Good luck zooming into that photo on an iPhone
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There’s a great scene in the movie World’s Greatest Dad where Robin Williams plays a frustrated writer. Another teacher at the school where he teaches gets a story in The New Yorker ¹ and Robin Williams’s character tells him something along the lines of “how nice, I hope your next one gets published somewhere that isn’t regional.”² ⸻ 1. This is generally considered the pinnacle of literary short fiction publishing. 2…
Yeah, it's kind of a lost idea now, but through the 80s and 90s the absolute best places to get a story published were, in no particular order: * The New Yorker * Harper's * The Atlantic * and, believe it or not, Playboy In re: the latter, see https://ew.com/books/playboy-hugh-hefner-famous-authors/
Those three are still the top tier, at least when it comes to money for short fiction, although it’s depressing to read stuff from the 30s which has dollar amounts attached to publications and realize that even in nominal dollars, those would be better paychecks than most writers receive today.
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…
Mortgage is temporary though, rent is eternal and usually increasing over time. This means you don't save money in the long term, either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The idea that granola would be healthier is rather strange
One of the best examples of a food industry (grains) being able to influence eating habits to their benefit. Anyway, the phrase "healhty" in relation to food is a bit of a trigger phrase to me nowadays, healthy how? It's completely lacking in nuance. Apples are healthy, except when you eat 200 seeds at which point the cyanide gets to a lethal dose. Granola is healthy, unless you eat it three times a day and little el…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many people still "stay together" for the children.
Many do today, but in those days nearly everyone did. These days we realize that two unhappily-married parents can often be worse for the children than if they get divorced and continue to be active parents.
She treated our relationship as being adversarial. She felt like she had to "win" every conversation, and one time even admitted to choosing to take a side that she knew was factually wrong just to stir things up. I think she truly believed that love was constant bickering.
Within a year of her and her sister's moving out, her parents divorced. They stuck together "for the kids", and as a result, the kids got a terrible impression of what a loving relationship is supposed to look like.
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…
But I think parents sticking together for the kids is worse. Kids can see the contempt between their parents and might get the wrong impression that that's what a normal relationship looks like.