It's like a 90min flight and $120 ticket for me. I would absolutely make a trip out there to see the tallest building in the US, especially with how out of place it would look next to the rest of the skyline.
When you sign a 12 month lease, you know more or less how much you'll spend towards housing for the next year and it's easy to accurately predict a cost ceiling.
When you own a home, you know the minimum you'll spend is the mortgage+taxes but in an unlucky year your AC goes out and you get a hole in the roof that insurance doesn't cover and suddenly you've spent 20k that you didn't plan on.
Only if you have the planning capabilities of a 5-year old.
A house doesn't have that many things that can go wrong with it that would be unforseen expenses.
AC, water pipe leak, appliance breakdown, roof replacement. None of these cost above $8k, and for bigger things there is home insurance (e.g. tree fell on a house). Many of these things can be mitigated with a cheap fix that will last you those 12 months until you have the funds to do it properly.
Also, I see this sentiment a lot from people who have no problem dropping a $15-20k down payment on an car, but somehow spending that money for home maintenance is "scary" and "unpredictable".
A billion dollars split evenly over the US population nets around $2.98 per person, so we're gonna need a lot to really make any appreciable difference.
Most large companies that do layoffs give over a month of notice+severance. Perhaps they're not required to, but to be given less than a 2 week heads up with no severance is pretty rare.
How large? I don't think Allstate does this and they're Fortune 100. There were layoffs/a reorg back in 2018 in at least Allstate Benefits division but I don't think anyone got severance. I think everyone with more than X years of service was automatically not considered for severance. I know there are many former coworkers who are still there who certainly aren't still there because of their talent. Age is the only factor that comes to mind.
>Wealth for whom is the better question to ask — certainly not the thousands of laid off employees
I think that depends on the pay structure. If a large part of your compensation is in stock then you'll still benefit from the additional wealth creation. Assuming a decent severance package it's certainly possible you come out ahead compared to the more conservative company, even being laid off.
> If a large part of your compensation is in stock then you'll still benefit from the additional wealth creation.
Oh yes, the beautiful golden handcuffs will give those laid off workers wealth. Except... the handcuffs come off and are kept by the employer. Otherwise they wouldn't have been handcuffs
Is a temporary boost worth developing a reliance on such medication? From what ive seen your body quickly adapts to the testosterone, and while it feels good initially eventually you are back to the same baseline, except now if you stop taking it you will feel even worse as the levels drop below what your initial baseline was to start with. And many people will resort to taking even higher and higher doses, chasing the "high" that they got from it initially.
I’m 40, was on TRT for a year, quit for a year because of hair loss and fertility, then have been back on for the last six months. The initial high doesn’t last past a couple months, but I’ve always felt much better on TRT than off. The baseline is steady, not declining.
As someone who is generally against testosterone supplementation… hell no that’s a terrible comparison. How extrogenous testosterone affects the HPTA axis and the returns/dependence, is nowhere near what opiates do to your mu/delta opioid neuroreceptors.
Opiate neuroreceptors autodownregulate, for one, so that means tolerance/dependency gets worse over time. That doesn’t happen with testosterone at all. Also, TRT would not have diminishing returns, after you get past the first few weeks. Some of that is tuning E2 levels, etc; most of it is psychological result of expectations (think placebo effect).
You risk issues at common doses, like cardiovascular damage (which tend to be higher doses than TRT), but these issues don’t compare with opiates.
I am 100% pro TRT but if a person starts in their 40s, I just highly doubt it will be a free lunch if you are on TRT for 40 years.
On the other hand, there is no way to know at the individual level all the healthy habits that would come with TRT. This discussion is always from the point as if everyone is optimally healthy when reality is the opposite. Even just getting bloodwork done so much more than you would without TRT is a huge factor. No one is taking TRT and then playing video games and eating pizza all day.
The real downside to me though is having to get a supply of testosterone for decades. We are just so irrational on this subject that who knows what will happen in 10 years. The proposed hoops to have to jump through that are being debated right now are completely insane. Having to see a doctor in person once a month would be utterly ridiculous.
Being deficient in sex hormones is not conducive for a long life. It doesn't mean a 55 year old should necessarily have 1200 ng/dL testosterone, but supplementing up to a normal range is a very good idea for bone health, the ability to exercise, and put on a reasonable amount of muscle so that you don't break a hip from falling when you're 65 or 70.
That's the catch though, these absurdly high levels of testosterone have not proven better quality of life. Especially for those who aren't suffering from a severe lack of testosterone (far beyond the aging process).
I didn't interpret their question as hostile, this might be a case of you projecting. You felt enraged at the question, responded hastily and labelled them in a certain way. Try not to do so in the future.
Please don't post like this to HN, regardless of how wrong someone is or you feel they are. If you want to share correct information respectfully, that would be great; not posting is also a fine option.
Unrelated, but while I have you: Could you please stop creating accounts for every few comments you post? We ban accounts that do that. This is also in the site guidelines.
You needn't use your real name, of course, but for HN to be a community, users need some identity for other users to relate to. Otherwise we may as well have no usernames and no community, and that would be a different kind of forum. https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...
I see what you are trying to do, thanks for contributing to the discussion.
Low T levels can massively negatively impact someone's life, if that can be addressed by supplementing testosterone people should be able to do so. If higher levels can benefit someone then they should be able to supplement it also.
Have you seen the living conditions that people in SF are willing to put up with for cheap rent? Living out of their car, renting a closet, an attic, a couch in a living room. And that's not just baristas, it's well paid tech employees as well.
An endless amount of people would live in a 400sqft apartment with ex-homeless neighbours if it meant saving 2k on rent every month.
Without the price fixing though, apartment complexes will actually have to compete against each other on rent.