Marrying another introvert is great until it leads to offspring. Then the kid sucks and sucks your mental energy for dealing with people to the point you barely even want to interact with the spouse or anyone else.
I guess the big question is whether landlords will hand down to tenants the massive increase in mortgage costs as interest rates rose while real estate barely budged.
Sorry, but why do you think landlords have experienced an increase in mortgage costs?
Maybe if they have adjustable rate mortgages or if their loan originated after March 2022. But I don't think that's the case for the vast majority of established landlords.
What's way more likely is that everyone marking rent money off of leveraged property went ahead and refinanced everything to 2-3% fixed rate mortgages as soon as that became an option.
There is the other side of the coin here, in that if landlords are trying to expand their businesses / finance improvements to properties, they will be looking at taking on more debt. This will increase their average rate, and they will absolutely pass that on to their tenants. The question is of timeframe over which this process will occur.
In the US, improvements/repairs to rental properties are extremely tax advantaged. You might take on debt for the initial liquidity, but as I understand it's easy for landlords to use these expenses to effectively nuke their income tax liability.
If we're to believe the media, one of the myriad issues with housing at the moment is that landlords held onto their low-rate pre-pandemic mortgages, so there might broadly not be an increase to pass on.
Is it impossible simply opening WF increased crime as it is a perfect shoplifting target? I saw a youtube video linked (sorry lost it, somebody here maybe point it out) where a guy bike touring SF literally pointed out how it was a perfect spot to shoplift and he constantly saw people doing it there.
I guess, on a narrow technical basis? But the article is trying to imply SF is “getting worse,” because right wing media believe SF is perpetually “getting worse”, but everyone who actually lives here already knew this is and has been one of the worst neighborhoods in SF.
So, sure, the Whole Foods opening could mean that some of the neighborhood’s crime was happening in the Whole Foods. But nothing about the neighborhood has changed recently that would have caused that.
Should also point out that DA Brooke Jenkins, who is far to the right of every elected official in the city and ran on giving the cops carte blanche to just throw everyone on the street in this neighborhood in jail, has not done anything to change it. And she’s been the DA since the Whole Foods opened. So, I don’t know what that tells you.
Being near intoxicated people, whether you agree or not, is unpleasant to many shoppers and especially families. Perhaps they are misguided but it is not good for business. You can call it wrong but I will shop pretty much anywhere alone no matter how drug infested , but will alter my shopping patterns in the city when with women or children in order to reduce their exposure to areas of known heavy intoxicant use.
When I lived in the ghetto you could go up to a window with bars and ask for something behind the counter. I wonder if they could put all the food behind bulletproof glass with an attendant and have the attendant slide it through a prison style food tray or something? You could prepay using an industrial grade impact resistant point of sale machine on the other side, and stainless steel floors with drains could be used to wipe the grime down daily and make it easy to flush out anyone camping inside.
I encountered a bat many years ago acting erratically inside the house. It had evidently entered in my sleep.
I looked up the cost, and found out the household would be bankrupted by the shots and we would end up homeless. I calculated the danger from homelessness outweighed the risk of rabies. I guess the bet paid off, as we're now well past the 99th percentile of incubation period.
Seems pretty remote chance to get rabies without being bit, but did you read the last paragraph?
"The Aguilars wound up paying $3,546.64 out of pocket. The insurance company told us Wednesday that they "are reaching out to NorthBay Healthcare... to address these excessive charges.""
The shot normally costs ~$600 USD. There is no way the insurance in the end will pay the $54k the hospital tried to get away with.
> Seems pretty remote chance to get rabies without being bit
Just FYI, it's possible to get bit by a bat while sleeping and not realize it. Most bats are small and a bite mark may not be painful or immediately noticeable. There was a case in 2021 in Illinois of a man being bitten by a bat in his sleep; in his case, he realized he'd been bitten, but declined treatment (cost, probably...) and died of rabies a month later. Not a fun way to go.
I've heard the advice before to get a prophylactic rabies shot if you find a bat trapped in your house while you were sleeping. ...in civilized countries, anyway.
Says in the article they are contesting it. I am guessing in the end they will be made whole. The only more vicious actor in this situation is the insurance company.
If I recall correctly we had no insurance at the time. I was able to afford to re-vaccinate my animal, as it's only $60 at the vet, I figured at least my pet would survive.
Theoretically, yes. The infection can lie dormant for an exceptionally long period of time in an exceptionally small percent of cases and can be triggered by unrelated external factors.
I mean for her yeah. The average guy wanted on a felony for stealing cars or something, could probably be fine working as an agricultural worker on a farm in Brazil or something for the rest of their life. I've met plenty of white euro looking people in South America living off the black market and frankly no one would bother to find out who they were unless their were some big reward, and usually there isn't.
Willful negligence resulting in death arguably is violence. It becomes obvious when the device is not a blood test but say firing a gun in the air without regard to where the bullet will land. Willfully misrepresenting medical testing is firing a gun in the air without regard to where it goes; it is totally unreasonable to believe the outcome will be anything but violent.
I think that the taking away of personal freedom is "democratic" in the sense that it is painful for rich and poor. Not so for financial penalties.
Consider a "fake it till you make it" company that produces medical equipment. During the the "fake it" phase some people suffered life changing damage directly related to the company's equipment. The damaged is quantified and the company pays up without breaking a (financial) sweat.
I'm not saying there is anything wrong with credit but the ol latin american method of buying a house one brick at a time does work. You may have to buy the land all at once, but even where I live (top 10 city) that's doable for roughly what a down payment costs.
