You are forgetting the fact that this is a private investment, whereas the student loans problem should be solved by the government. No private institutions will have any interests in paying off student loans.
WFH is the best solution. You get a better distribution of people across a whole region thus solving the traffic problem. It won't even be needed to invest in public transportation networks anymore.
No it is not. You get to replace the social parts of the job too, and pay for the place to be prepared for the job, if at all possible.
WFH really means convert your room into an office or rent a coworking space. Is anyone paid extra for that? Nope!
And it's really not for everyone either, you cannot get interactive with coworkers in the same way.
Never thought of the social aspects. I am married with kids and have a strong social cricle. I guess it's harder for the people that are missing those.
As to converting the room into an office, I think everyone that works with a computer has a desk and a chair at home. You just need to put the company machine on it.
Real estate in places close to work is already so expensive that with anything further you can easily afford a whole additional room.
As for the social aspect - to the degree it's possible at work you can cultivate that online and during occasional get-togethers. It's not worth the time waste and environmental destruction associated with commuting.
There are plenty of companies whose stock is sought after but that never paid dividends (I think Tesla and Amazon are some example, or used to be at least)
It’s not really about dividends. If you buy a share of Amazon stock, you’re getting a cut of the value that a million+ people are producing every day by writing code or moving stuff around. The value most workers create for their employers’ shareholders is much bigger than their rent check, and capturing that value is even easier than being a landlord. Dividends are just moving money from one pocket to the other, the value created by people’s work is where the returns come from. Financial returns without value creation are an anomaly, though not necessarily a rare or short-lived one.
Never have isn’t never will, dividends and buybacks are a sign the company doesn’t have use for the money. Meta and Google both eventually started paying dividends because they’re essentially tapped out of internal investment ideas.
Telsa and Amazon on the other hand believe they have something meaningful to do with the money. But eventually successful companies just don’t have anything useful to do with their giant piles of cash.
I'm pretty sure you're not. Or at least, my grocery stores and the IRS/tax people take dollars, not SP500 or QQQ. If yours does I'd live to hear how that works (and where you are).
If you're referring to investing $1,000, having it be worth $1,500, and then selling off $300 to pay for groceries, which a Coinbase/whatever account would let you do with Bitcoin while it appreciates.
If there is someone who wants to start a dog walking service, but they don't have the capital to do so, I can lend them the money with a promise from them to pay me a share of any revenue. My money goes to create a service that real people get benefit from (their dogs are walked) and they pay for that service with a medium of exchange that represents their own labour (fiat money).
I get something in return for my capital, and the world gets a valuable service.
Bitcoin does not offer that. The only return it offers is the hope that tomorrow some other people will pay me more to take my bitcoin, in the hope that some other people will pay them more the day after to take the bitcoin, with the hope that .... you get it.
the entire ETF industry is based on either spending the distributions or reinvesting them, depending on which side of the curve your age lands on, so it's pretty much spending the index.
Oh, definitely. Those are, generally speaking, the places where it's most important that you can do so: the People's Republic of China, North Korea, Afghanistan, Egypt, Bangladesh, etc. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_cryptocurrency_by_.... But it's legal in almost all of the world, and fairly easy, while opening an account with a NASDAQ-listed broker is near impossible for most people.
Even in the literal sense of "owning" you don't need a majority, but yes - one share does have fractional power. I voted my 1000/<a very big number> just recently.
In my opinion, scaling becomes a bigger problem with this architecture style, but the biggest issue is testability. Testing microservices is a really tedious task, and no, contract testing is not a solution.
I think microservices are bad for your mental health as an engineer. What appears to be a huge jump in quality of life, leading to fast development, better flexibility and improved scalability, turns out to be a huge pain. Constant context switching, increased stress from observing and understanding all the interactions, and the hazardous nature of adding changes to your services will easily make you burn out and lose motivation for your work.
The software, food, services, healthcare, everything seems to have worse quality and getting more expensive.
Software today often feels frustrating. Core features are needlessly scattered across multiple apps, cloud services regularly glitch, and even expensive banking apps are a chore to navigate. It seems we lack the care to make things reliable and secure.
Why is this? Are we too distracted to focus? Do trendy buzzwords outweigh solid engineering? Has the ease of modern coding tools led to developers who don't understand the basics?
And what about AI? Could the rise of AI-powered development make things even worse before any improvements arrive?
I've seen basic functions split across apps, broken cloud services, and even big-budget banking apps that are painful to use. Reliability and security often feel lacking too.
I have a few theories why this happens: Are we all too distracted to do focused work? Does the industry focus too much on the newest trends rather than building things right the first time? Have easy coding tools led to devs who don't grasp the fundamentals?
Plus, what does the rise of AI mean for software quality? Could things get a LOT worse before they get better?
What are the worst examples of bad software that drive you crazy? Are there shining examples of exceptional quality that give you hope?
reply