Hey, if you're not buying when there's a bull in your ass, I can't help you.

That's genuinely a huge reason why BTC ever got it's initial huge pumps. That never would have happened if there wasn't a community full of people who were holding for reasons other than just getting a modest payout.

It's how it's meant to be. Crypto should in your wallet, on-chain. It feels much more involved that way.

I paid Ivy League prices for an education majoring in 'don't be a moron'.

I can't help but think that's kind of the goal of all these lawsuits.

I feel like the SEC is just driving a dagger into a dead horse. What few crypto orgs haven't already collapsed are being targeted by the gov far more than they have been historically.

It's important to clarify because people without ribs are completely clueless about what ribs look like and always try to weigh in anyways.

This is the case for every post on here. People talking about how they "can't" do things to live on less that actually all translate to "don't want to".

Or maybe just not every young family can afford to raise kids downtown in one of the most expensive cities in the country.

Not live in my two bedroom condo downtown with the view and all amenities within walking distance?!?!

clutches pearls

But I work in STEM!

Seriously. I'm sorry, but not everyone can live dead in the middle of LA with a whole ass family and a nice house when they're 32. The entitlement is wild. We are not main characters in a movie. Yes, LA was fun when you were young and single and living with roommates, and it would be great to stay there when you get married and want to own a house and have kids. That's also what tens of millions of other people think. Unless you're in the 1%, enough of them are richer than you for you to not get to live that fairy tale.

I really don't have a lot of patience for it. I don't know why I read these threads because I just get mad. I see people who live in the same city as me talking about how the "cheapest apartment" in the area costs as much as my entire annual budget. I guess I must keep getting the very last cheap one every time I move.

The thing about that 25% though, is that they all make significantly less than the median income of their area, or else they are severely mismanaging their money. The idea that six figures is under the median income of anywhere is what is silly. And people in here who make significantly more than the median income talking about how it's impossible to survive are necessarily ignoring the fact that MOST people live on less money than they do.

These threads make me roll my eyes out of my skull. Everyone has problems, but I can't take any of this seriously. I see so many people talk about how the exact city I live in is impossible to afford on twice my income. Meanwhile I'm going on trips and spending money at bars. I'm sorry everyone's nice downtown apartment is breaking the bank, or that it's tough to raise a family in historic downtown instead of the suburbs. "Getting by" and "liveable wage" is not the same thing as raising a whole ass family in a roomy home smack dab in the middle of a major metro.

Still seems like a pretty good set up. If you can find a place for $15k per month in overhead and pay someone else to watch the kids for $65/hr you don't even have to do anything and you make money as long as taxes are less than 50%.

Right? Do daycare, take in 10 kids and pull in that sweet $300k per year.

Yes, the one who doesn't fantasize and crush on celebrities needs to meet more real people.

That's not my point. The question is whether you would sleep with someone outside of your relationship if your partner gave you a pass. That is a yes or no question. If it is the case that the woman would not actually sleep with those celebrities if given the chance, then the answer to the initial question is no. If she would actually do that, she's entitled to that, and he's entitled to not like that.

I responded to this: "You're telling me that, for kicks on a video, you couldn't pick out a couple attractive celebrities?" because that's... not the question. I could certainly pick out a couple attractive celebrities for kicks on a video if someone asked me about attractive celebrities. If I was asked the question in the video I would say no, and no celebrities would be involved.

There's not a lot of answers you can get

Yeah, there's exactly two answers. Yes and no. You don't need to "come up with celebrities for kicks" to answer with either of those 2 options.

Asking someone a yes or no question is a game..? And the way you play the game is by first answering the yes or no question with 'yes', regardless of what's actually true, and then you follow that up by listing hot celebrities. Really glad you told me. I might have spent time socializing with other adults (for the very first time, obviously) and been embarrassed by not knowing the code word 'yes' that unlocks the game.

I can see why that's a game. It's sort of like a game of how complicated and loaded you can make the question 'who is your celebrity crush?'. Sounds like a very fun game for mature adults.

He would be insecure if he pretended to be comfortable with his partner having a viewpoint he was uncomfortable with because it was culturally expected of him.

I don't think there's anything wrong with him or his answer. Why is this question only silly and fun if you answer yes? I would answer no, because sex doesn't mean much to me outside of emotional connection. So even if my partner gave me a hall pass, I wouldn't use it. It's just sex with a stranger. I would also prefer to be with someone else who is similar. I promise I can also be fun and joke about hypotheticals, and I'm not uncomfortable with myself. But if people ask me a question about what I would do in a situation, I would assume they are interested in my perspective and genuine answer, not that they are actually beating around the bush for fun and indirectly asking me which celebrity I think is hot.

If it's not real, and she wouldn't be willing to do that off camera, then her answer to the interviewer's question is no. Why would you have to pick out a couple attractive celebrities when no one asked about attractive celebrities?

I mean, that wasn't even the question. I could understand the (admittedly dumb) hypothetical celebrity question, but he just asked if she could sleep with someone else, would she? It was a yes or no question.

Not really. You can say that about the hall pass game or whatever, but this wasn't that. The question was "If he gave you a pass to sleep with anyone in the world, would you use it?" it's not a game, it's a yes or no question. You can say yes and follow up with the celebrity thing, but saying no is a perfectly valid answer, not a killjoy. I would also say no, although I find his reasoning a bit silly.

Right, might as well call it a quadruple fork since you can take a pawn too.