What really makes me concerned is what the after effects are going to look like. What happens to housing prices after this is all over? When people realize their impulsive buys were a mistake. When foreclosures and evictions sweep the country. We are in this strange period where people are not yet feeling the extent of the potential economic impact, and I fear for what will happen in two or three years.
> Even if you invest at the worst possible times (right before crashes) you’ll come out way far ahead of leaving it in cash.
I don't like this argument, because it seems to imply you would indefinitely leave it in cash. In this hypothetical situation, where a market crash is impending, and individual could invest at the bottom and make significantly higher returns than investing prior to the crash.
This of course goes without saying, "you can't time the market", but it's a bit dishonest to indicate that you can't beat the market here.
Why should a company hire someone who is potentially going to impact their own revenue? And in rarer cases, a side project that actually generates enough revenue to where the amount of money they are paying you is less than the share you are taking from their revenue.
To your second point, sure, employers hold more power. What is wrong with that? If you don't like it, you can always work somewhere else.
I don't think the price differential between San Antonio and Austin housing is high enough to offset the level of talent and appeal that Austin (or even Dallas for that matter) currently provides for the tech scene.
I disagree with your first sentence. Say that you work for Amazon, and you start an e-commerce side project that directly impacts the growth of e-commerce outside of the Amazon marketplace. It may be a negligible share of the market, but you are still negatively impacting Amazon's sales. There is a reason that they put conflict of interest in the fine print, and posing the question helps bring more context.
Not necessarily, many large companies are willing to guide and help an employee determine if something is okay or not to work on. You shouldn't be discouraged for posing the question, and if you are, the employer is not being rational.
As long as the side projects are in no way considered a conflict of interest, I think it should be acceptable. It is sometimes difficult to determine whether or not something is a conflict of interest. The other thing to be careful of is making sure that the additional side project(s) are not burning out the employee, or occasionally eating into their actual time at work.
Is there strong evidence that this will happen anytime soon? I've heard many arguments that claim this wouldn't happen anytime soon, particularly because of the level of difficulty and the required determination.
I think you are going about this all the wrong way. You seem to think that most people who use positive words are just putting up a facade and using these words for the sake of using them.
Consider the co-worker who acknowledges hard work you do, and appreciates you for your effort. This acknowledgement gives this you a sense of accomplishment, which in turn makes you feel happier and better.
Consider the neighbor who offers help when he notices you have a problem with your car, or gives you advice that helps you solve your problem easier.
Consider the person who recognizes that you have a disability or health defect, and chooses to help you and provide you with positive reinforcement to help you focus on progress and feel better about your situation.
I think the article, and the notion of "positive people," is more than just throwing a word around. It's about people who add weight and meaning to their words through thoughtful consideration and genuine compassion.
It's worth noting that insurance companies require a relatively substantial fee for Uber drivers yet most of the people driving don't report being drivers to insurance companies. I am not sure if this study accounts for this.
I can't imagine how immensely powerful it would be to have a game like Diablo leverage block chain for its items. This would eliminate the risk of dupes and ensure a fair system.