LigmaYC

> I was responding to a comment which was referencing Q1 2022.

There is nothing referencing Q1 2022 on this thread.

> Alas, that has not happened yet, and the market is more complex than net income trajectories

The comment you replied to didn't state that the market is simply net income trajectories.

> If Elon Musk had easy access to Tesla-as-collateral, he would have put more of it up as collateral

Just because he doesn't put up more, doesn't mean he doesn't have access to more. You shouldn't use more collateral than necessary.

Aka, you can't buy anything on a whim.

Not exclusive to sub-urban. Viewing childcare as a "purchasable service" aplies to pretty much the whole country except rural.

Could still be released, but that "product demo" was a few years too early.

> Well, this is a new topic altogether, but I will try to respond to your straw man

Not a strawman, my point was contained in the original comment you replied to. ("WHO is still investigating how it actually developed")

In regards to the rest of your comment and the discrepancy between the case density around the market location in comparison to the lab, I'm sure you can think of many reasons why this evidence isn't conclusive.

I think you're conflating the location of origin with the actual development of the virus. A location is step 0 in understanding how the virus developed.

Completely different reason, fiat is backed by nothing on purpose.

Wuhan fish market is just where the first case was reported, WHO is still investigating how it actually developed.

Future of discourse isn't looking good, seeing how easy it was for tech/media/government to censor this theory as disinformation, even though it was completely reasonable.

Laughing at your favourite language? This may not have been intended to be rude, depending on the context.

>What I'm getting at, is that these colleges are very careful not to charge you more than it is possible for you to pay.

Never said it was impossible for me to pay, just said it was still expensive.

That's a choice individual followers have little say in, since they merely follow and have no say/influence on the followers as a whole.

Ah yes, I should've considered selling my house for BU, thanks for the advice...

Twitter buyout isn't finalized. Old CEO is still in place and Musk is expected to become interim CEO after the buyout is finalized.

Those successful youtubers grew their audience publishing regularly and then switched to publishing irregularly after.

Therapy doesn't have a monopoly on being able to control your emotions.

I think the issue is even deeper.

I agree that education should be free, but not colleges. Colleges are involved in the business of credentialing and monopolising entry level jobs.

There is no use in education being free if there are credentialing businesses charging $320k (which I believe is going to increase as they teach more highschoolers why college debt is worth it) in order to use your skills in the job market.

Colleges who have a history of exploitative pricing have no place in the future of free education.

Didn't claim there was a single pioneer bucking any given trend, I used plural in my previous replies to refer to pioneers as a whole.

> society as a whole improves, including you and everybody else

Massive assumption. People justify to themselves that something is good on a society-level when really it's just good on a selfish-level.

I believe that this can actually be bad on a society-level due to college debt being in the trillions.

>Your net worth will be lower next year, and they'll consider that

I was just giving an example to demonstrate how bad their calculator pricing was (280k fees < 250k savings without selling house) if you wanted to make it more realistic I would also take into account that my investments grow too.

>Their goal is to charge you the most you are able to pay, and someone with $250k in savings is able to pay $70k.

Seems pretty bad to me. Wouldn't pay 7k/year for BU, much less 70k.

This definitely isn't enough to make the contract invalid, however you could prove every BNBL business wrong and put them out of business if you find a court that agrees with you.

I am aware that there are people who succeeded despite their debt and now say that it wasn't a mistake. I am also aware that there are many reasons why someone can't pay off a debt. However, there are also reasons why the part of society who didn't fall for the college debt scam don't want to pay for the part of society who did fall for the college debt scam.

There may be some projection in your comment, a 5 year old kid doesn't have the "let me enjoy my time off" attitude yet, thats something they'll get once they're older. At this age they are usually naturally curious about pretty much anything.

The largest group of followers "deciding" to "stop doing" something, is something that never happens automatically, they are always influenced by a pioneer.

I think it would improve everyones quality of life if they suddenly didn't have to pay back their loans, however there is also the downside where the rest of society now has to pay for your mistakes.

Lacking impulse control does not mean that the entire concept of "pay later" is a scam.

There's another group in between pioneers and followers, the people who are willing to follow things that haven't gained traction yet.

That group plus pioneers are most important to entering the mass market of followers.

Anybody without financial literacy can deduce why "Buy Now Pay Later" may be bad for them. Theres a deeper issue.

Where does it imply a benefit without a negative? The "pay later" part is clearly stated