No I'm thinking of you needing to buy groceries or do anything that requires people to be working...

I mean... everybody doesn't work during the summer, how are you going to buy groceries or do literally anything if nobody is working. It doesn't make sense lol

It's ok I read it recently so it was fresh in my mind :)

asqueroso

This thread is insane lol people don't know what a fucking JOKE is

I assume it said something completely different before he edited it?

I really enjoyed this book but lost it during a move before I could finish it, going to have to pick up another copy

Ok

You passed the guy who IS in second. He WAS in first. The tense matters. Without the tense it's ambiguous.

I'd say "when I passed the person who was in 2nd place" or "when I passed the person who ended up in 12th place" because specifying removes any ambiguity

Ok, let's say you reach the finish line, and you say "man I thought I was going to pass out when I passed the person in second place" and you point back at the person in second place. The (who is) is implied by the context. In your example the context doesn't lend itself to this interpretation. However if I was sitting at a restaurant with you, and I said "do you see the cheapest burger on the menu? I ordered that in '89" where "that" is the cheapest burger on the menu. Doesn't necessarily mean it was also the cheapest burger in '89. Without specifying context becomes everything

But this should all just be considered a fun exercise because it doesn't really matter lol

Nahh the first person just sounded dumb as hell, I agree the second guy is joking

Are you artistic? The person who said the part I quoted is a different person from the guy you're quoting.

"two movies. a year apart. same bitch. shoutout to Gen Z for teaching me this"

LMAO that is a really good joke

Just change "pass" to "passed" and it could technically be correct by the interpretation "passed the person (who is) in second place"

https://www.nber.org/papers/w12663

However, the oft-stated assertion that recent research fails to support the traditional view that the minimum wage reduces the employment of low-wage workers is clearly incorrect. A sizable majority of the studies surveyed in this monograph give a relatively consistent (although not always statistically significant) indication of negative employment effects of minimum wages.

I don't even understand the point you're trying to make. Yes, owning provides the benefit of having an asset. What's your point? I never said there aren't benefits to owning. Are you trying to argue that there are no benefits to renting? It feels like you're beating around the bush, I don't understand what your motive is or what you're actually trying to communicate.

I didn't say it's cheaper to rent. I said there are benefits to renting, like not having to pay large amount of money up front. I don't know what "$40K down payment isn't something you come up with in one paycheck either" has to do with anything because I never said anything about that

Is it not a benefit to be able to have a place to live without having to have enough money to pay the down payment, closing costs, escrow fees?

The point is, renting a house with a $40k down payment isn't going to cost you $40k up front which would be more expensive for the renter than $40k amortized into monthly payments

I'm not good at the game but I'm flame ruler not garyu and that's irrelevant to the discussion because you don't have to be good at the game to see that people are crying because they like to cry and not because it makes sense. As seen by your deflection and refusal to engage with my point

I'm not defending shit, just pointing out that when you play Tekken you're playing against somebody who is playing the same game. To say it's "easier" doesn't make sense because it's easier for both parties. Word it differently if that's what you mean. Skill ceiling is lower making it easier for worse players to beat better players? Sure. But it's like complaining that pong is imbalanced. The other player has the exact same rules

Why didn't he abuse heat and momentum to beat you?

But if the T7 player is better at the game, and the game is easier, they should still be able to beat the worse player, no?

If it's easier then why are defensive players from T7 not outplaying brainless T8 aggressive button mashers?

Doesn't that technically make T7 players frauds in T8 since they are defensive with poor pressure/aggression?