Kansas qualified tuition plan

Hi. My son is on the autism spectrum and receives benefits from New York through its self-direction Medicaid waiver program. He will likely need our help for the rest of his life. My wife and I care for him, and we are planning for retirement. We would like to move to a low tax state like Florida, but we don't know 1) how difficult it is to qualify for self-direction and 2) how generous are the benefits in any given state. Does anyone know how other states compare with NY?

Hello studentloans,
I am trying to sort through my student loans for the first time in a significant time! I initially graduated back in 2011 with my BA and MST and started teaching right off the bat. I was not aware of income-driven repayment when I first started and so I opted to enroll in “extended graduated repayment”. I made payments up until around 2014. I ended up going back to school for an advanced certificate and applied for deferment. I started making payments after I graduated in the spring of 2015. Once Covid hit I elected to not make payments up until a few months ago when payments resumed. I currently have around 53,000 dollars in loans and I’m trying to sort out the best way to take advantage of loan forgiveness and zero out the loans. As I mentioned earlier, I was a public school teacher and I am currently a school administrator (both in title 1 schools if that matters) I am struggling making sense of everything and I have been trying to contact Mohela, Fedloans and other agencies like NYC DOE, but I find myself spending hours on the phone and not getting anywhere. I am wondering if anyone can please help me answer a few questions:
1.) Does any of my payments or time qualify towards PSLF 2.) IDR plans options are 150-200 more than what I currently pay a month…is that normal and are there other options I can explore that can reduce/maintain payments while also qualifying for loan forgiveness? 3.) what, if any, recommendations do you all have as to actions I should take for loan forgiveness?
Any help would be really appreciated!!!

Context: I plan on working for a few years before going to law school.
86 average and decent ECs.
Applied to TMU BTM and BM, Schulich, Rotman, Degroote, QueensCom and Laurier BBA. I got into TMU BTM and BM in March. With an 86 average, I didn’t think I would get into anything else I applied to so I was set on going to TMU. The benefits of going to TMU for BTM or BM for me are low tuition, commutable, relatively easy program, coop, etc. Although I was a bit disappointed because TMU was at the bottom of my list and it doesn’t have the greatest reputation, I made my peace with it. However this morning, I received an admission offer for Laurier BBA. This is one of the better options on my list and so this gives me a lot to think about. The benefits of this program would be a better program and coop. However, it would be more expensive because I would have to live on res. Furthermore, I don’t know how this program will set me up for law compared to TMU BTM because I'm unaware of how difficult the program is and if I would still be capable of achieving a high gpa for law school admission. Overall, I’m happy I got in but now I’m confused as to which program I should choose. Please upvote and comment!

Any news on when osc plans to cash out? This was sent to us on 2/29-my birthday 🎂:
As you know, Article 7.8 of the PEF contract provides for payment of a Higher Education Differential (HED) to PEF members who possess an associate’s degree, bachelor’s degree, master’s degree, or doctorate (e.g., MD, JD, PhD) from an accredited college or university, or a current professional license issued by the New York State Education Department, awarded on or before March 29, 2024. To expedite HED payments, the Center for Human Resources Management (CHRM) conducted a review of all PEF represented titles to determine if degree/licensure, defined above, is a minimum qualification for appointment. These determinations are reflected in the attached file (PEF HED TITLE BREAK BY MIN QUALS). • Employees appointed to titles on tab #1 (ED ANDOR LIC MQ) qualify for HED, and payments will be processed centrally. o These employees do not need to provide any proof of degree/licensure to the HR office. • Employees appointed to titles on tab #2 (NO ED OR LICENSE MQ) require an HR review of Personal History Files (PHFs) to determine eligibility. Payments will be processed centrally depending on eligibility. o If HR can confirm that there is a qualifying degree/license on file, no further action will be required by the employee. o If HR cannot confirm a qualifying degree/license, the employee will be contacted to furnish a copy, if any, of their qualifying degree/license, no later than March 29, 2024.
It's my understanding that at OMH, the word on the street is.... only those who hold licensure- nursing, medicine received the bonus this pay period.

Almost 10 years ago, I worked at this company, and one of the roles of my department was to analyze data from surveys and secondary data collection. Each quarter, we were required to design and publish the data into a handbook. After 6 months of joining the department, my manager (who joined the department 2 months after me) reassigned our tasks and projects in an attempt to reorganize the department better.
This manager was promoted internally and was notorious for kissing up to management for his benefit. He was technically not qualified for the promotion due to a different background/expertise required for our department, but one of the C-suite people liked him a lot. He did have some expertise in certain areas and could be quite smart, but he generally had an unpleasant personality, so many people in the company didn’t like him much.
Along with some three new projects, the handbook task went to me, which would be the first time for me to do it. The meeting was in February, so my first handbook would be for that year’s Quarter 1. In the department meeting where my manager announced the reassignment, I asked my colleague who had handled the handbook project before me to share and explain the usual timeline for this quarterly handbook publication. She had managed the project for 4 years and said that the normal timeline would be 6 months.
This means, for Quarter 1 data, the printed copies for publication need to be ready by 30th of September. The 6-month period includes collecting the analysis from survey managers, and for secondary data, I would have to contact the data owner and do the analysis myself. I also have to liaise and work closely with the outsourced company that does the design and printing. Keep in mind that this 6-month timeframe is normal and has been agreed upon by management for years. The timeframe also takes into account that the person managing the handbook would also have other projects that are equally important for the department.
So, I carried out the handbook project quite smoothly along with my other tasks, and by late July, the only thing left for me to do was proofread the content of the handbook. The next procedure required me, my manager, and the designer to sit down and go through every single page to finalize everything before we send it to my manager’s manager (Unit Head) for approval to print. It takes about 2-3 weeks for the printing and delivery, so, following the previous quarters’ timeline, we should hand in the design to the Unit Head by mid-August and confirm the finalize version for printing by the last week of August.
Again, this is the normal and agreed-upon timeline, and every couple of weeks I would update my manager on the progress and the next steps of the project. We had worked with the designeprinter company for years without any problems or delays, so everything was on track. However, on the last Friday of July (a whole 2 weeks before our target timeline to send the design to the Unit Head), this conversation happened:
Manager: OP, I need you to finalize everything today, because we are sending the design to the Unit Head on Monday.
Me: Next Monday? Why? We have two weeks.
Manager: Well, the Unit Head wants to see some changes around here, so I thought we could speed up the publication of this handbook to start. I told the Unit Head we would send the design to her on Monday.
Me: Okay... you could have discussed this with me first. I mean, the proofreading is almost done, I can get it done by today, but we still need to sit down with the designer to finalize and sign off. The appointment is in a week.
Manager: Can you do it tomorrow? Go ask the designer.
(Now, it was not normal in our company to come to the office and work on weekend. And of course I already had a plan for that weekend so this was really annoying to me. At least I knew that the designer would have no issue moving it to the next day, which is Saturday, because he is THAT cooperative.)
Me: I can try... but tomorrow is Saturday. I’m not sure if he can make it, especially at this last minute. And are you sure we want to rush this? Because even if we meet the designer tomorrow, the hardcopy will be delivered just 2 weeks earlier than the normal deadline. Is it that significant?
Manager: Yes! Just go ask the designer now.
So, I called the designer, and as expected, he had no problem meeting on Saturday.
Me: Mr. Manager, the designer is okay to meet tomorrow. Is 10am okay with you?
Manager: Huh? (Puzzled look)
Me: Uhmm... You also need to be there for the sign-off.
Manager: I do?
Me: Yes, you literally need to sign off on the final version to send to the Unit Head. It’s the normal procedure.
(To be honest, if it weren’t for the procedure, he didn’t really need to be there. He had already seen the design a few times, and I'm pretty sure he would never have had anything meaningful to contribute to the meeting. I would have loved for him not to be there anyway. He just needed to be there purely for the procedure. But at that point, I was quite excited to make him come to the office on the weekend when he obviously didn’t realize he ALSO had to be there with the designer.)
Manager: I can’t tomorrow, I’m going [somewhere] until Sunday.
Me: Well, if you want to send this to the Unit Head on Monday, then YOU HAVE to be here tomorrow.
Manager: Sigh... let me get back to you.
About half an hour later, he came up to me with the sourest face ever, “10am tomorrow is fine", and walked away.
I’m guessing he must have pissed off someone when he had to change/cancel his weekend plan.
So the next day, he came in 1 hour late, not smiling at all, and was rude to the designer and me. He was really unhappy to be in the office on that day, but we got it done by 1pm.
The following week, the story of how *I* made my manager come to work on Saturday was told around the company. Apparently, the plan that he had for the weekend was a group trip with some of his buddies who also worked in the company, and he had to make new arrangements to get to the place by himself and arrived late. A lot of people thought it was really funny (including the Unit Head and some of his buddies) and laughed at the image of him walking into the office on Saturday for some trivial yet necessary work.
Nevertheless, the next 2 years that I worked on the handbook, he never promised anyone to have the handbook ready before the 6-month timeline.

I (23 F) have been friends with this woman (23 F lets call her BEBE) since my freshmen year of high school. After high school, we still remained good friends and really we became closer after graduating hs. We ended up going to different universities, BEBE decided to go to a private university out of state and I decided to stay in state for college. BEBE dropped out of school during the second semester of freshman after struggling academically, and financially to keep up with tuition, and as a result, she began to struggle mentally. During BEBE's time out of school, she went to a community college on and off due to not being able to keep her grades up and she lost scholarships because her grades were too low so she had to work to pay for community college (she still stays at home and her mom was not helping her pay for school anymore since she was still paying off the loan from the university). Our friend group suggested that she take a break from school to get right mentally and financially. We have had multiple conversations about comparing her journey to others and how we are all on our own timeline. Right before my undergraduate graduation BEBE car was repoed and our other friend (lets call her Mia) had a birthday so I know it would have been difficult for her to attend my undergraduate graduation, she also said that it would have been difficult for her mentally to attend because she wasn't graduating. I respected that at the time. I was accepted into a one-year accelerated graduate program. During that one extra year of school, BEBE came down to my school to party multiple times, we took roads trips, and attended family events with each other (every time I would drive back home I tried my best to see her, like EVERYTIME even seeing her over my own best friend sometimes because she stayed closer to my mom's house). As my graduate graduation is approaching I told my friend group that I wouldn't be able to attend Mia's birthday plans this year because I had work, finals, and my graduation was the weekend following her birthday(which was on a Friday) ( honestly I was completely overwhelmed with a lot of things at the time and I was completely transparent about how overwhelmed I was feeling). I had told them multiple times that my graduation was coming up but BEBE and Mia never even acknowledged I said anything about my graduation ( I never gave them details because they never asked and honestly I wasn't expecting them to come because they didn't attend last year). On top of that my car was stolen right before I had to go and take a final exam, THREE days before my graduation, and the day before Mia's birthday this year, I was literally devastated and really just needed my family and friends support. We have a group chat ( Me, BEBE, Mia, and our other friend Sarah). In the group chat, the day of my graduate graduation, Mia was upset with Sarah because she fell asleep on Mia's birthday plans (activity was scheduled for 8 PM but it didn't happen until 11:30 PM), Mind you Sarah stays about 45-60 mins away from the activity and was waiting for them to tell her to leave out. BEBE follows up with a message saying that it felt like nobody cared about Mia's birthday. So I responded by saying I apologize for not being as enthusiastic about Mia's birthday this year but it was literally because I was overwhelmed which I expressed to them before that day and that I was dealing with my car being stolen (I haven't told them up until this point because I had no time to process this on top of making sure I finish my classes strong and I was still quite upset about it and didn't want to keep thinking about it). They never acknowledged my message... so I sent another text saying how I was upset that they didn't put in any effort to come to either of my graduations. after that BEBE and Mia were saying they felt the friendship was unequal, they were never formally invited, and that they weren't talking to me originally but yet they kept using "yall" and using other plural words instead of messaging Sarah separately or being direct. Mind you this is a couple hours before my graduation and they still didn't even acknowledge that it's my graduation day, didn't get a congratulation or even checked to see if I was okay after having my car stolen and expressing to them I was overwhelmed. Then BEBE and Mia started saying why should they tell me congratulations soo early when they didn't know what time my graduation was and the fact I didn't tell Mia happy birthday until the evening time on her actual birthday ( less not forget my car was stolen the day before and I was also at work trying to make calls to my insurance agent ). I never formally gave them details because they never asked or even acknowledged I said anything about my graduation. Then they went on to say they didn't even have a ride to my graduation but im like yall could've rode with Sarah but then BEBE goes she had to look after her 16 year old twin brothers......... and she wasn't attending no ones graduation because she isn't graduating. Personally I feel that is so selfish!!!!!! like I understand she's not graduating but like I just needed my friends' support during a difficult time. her saying she couldn't celebrate my accomplishments and perseverance because she's not where she wants to be in life is so not fair and it feels like she's in secret competition with me. BEBE states like she still mentally is struggling to deal with graduation season and personally I just feel like I am struggling mentally too and I have been a good friend to her through all her mental break downs so her not showing up for me is her simply being a fake friend, only wanting to party, drink, and smoke but when I needed her just to show up as a friend (and not for her to compare her life to mine) she couldn't and I am so disappointed. She ended up leaving the group chat and I am willing to lose this friendship because I feel I have really show up her on so many different occasions whether it be mentally and even financially. After all of that I just wanted to get a different perspective to see if I should've gave her more grace or no? Thank you for coming to my TED talk and appreciate yall POV!

You can make the case for weakened demand due to people who can afford EV's already having bought one and the sustained elevated interest rates hurting demand but there are a couple of factors that can affect the future stock price that are of varying degrees of likelihood of occurring but are positive catalysts for the stock.
take this information as you will and make your own financial decisions.
Positive Catalysts and likelihood of occurring
*Rivian has just completed their plant shutdown in order to streamline operations and promote productivity which should also impact profitability.
As this has already occurred the chance is 100% and unless they are complete idiots should in fact lead to greater productivity and in turn profitability aka less $ lost per vehicle, it remains to be seen how much impact this will have on operations
*Rivian has changed suppliers on certain things like sensors and cameras as they are doing a refresh on the current R1 lineup. Chances of occurring is 100% and based on what Wassym from Rivian has stated should lead to increased capability including self driving capability. May lead to increased demand.
*Rivian has access to the Tesla charging network and is currently in the proceess of sending out CCS to NACS adapters for free to current owners. Chance of occurring 100% as this has happened / is in progress. Some rivian owners have already bought their own adapters. This should solve the issue of the charging station woes and lead to reduced range anxiety for current and potential owners as road trips become basically a non issue. Just happened recently so should lead to increased demand going forward.
*EV tax credits are currently being looked at to be reworked in 2025 the details are still in flux, but as Rivians currently only qualify for $3750 tax credits to those who are under the income limits this is more likely to be a beneficial change to rivian than to hurt rivian. I'd say the chances of a rework to EV tax credit rules are 100% as the current EV tax credit rules are stupid and everyone knows it. The chance of it being beneficial to Rivian is currently unknown as they could increase the amount Rivian owners would qualify to receive or increase the amount of potential Rivian buyers who would be eligible. Worst case I could see no change for Rivian,
I dont see Rivian buyers less eligible or receiving less credit than they do now.
*Rivian becomes positive gross margin by Q4 on a per vehicle basis. This is what Rivian is pushing for and what they say they are striving for on their earning calls. For this to occur they would have to make great strides to profitability. Whether they meet their goal or just get close remains to be seen. I think this is both a potential positive catalyst if they meet this goal or get really close as it should greatly increase stock buyer sentiment. Conversely if they fall well short then this could be a very negative catalyst. its hard to assign a chance to this occurring with so many variables that could happen between here and there.
*Interest rates reducing. Interest rates haven't increased since July of 2023. As the rates have been sustained since then that may have weakened demand somewhat. However I believe it is more likely for interest rates to be reduced than to be increased further. If interest rates somehow increased I couldn't see how they could possibly sustain more than an additional .25 or .50 total increase from where they are now and even then I think those are unlikely. I think its more likely that interest rates are reduced at least .25 by the end of the year with further rate reductions likely in 2025. This should increase consumer sentiment toward both the stock and toward demand.
Can't predict the future but I think rate reductions or at least one by the end of the year is at least 65-70% likely in my opinion. The stock price at the time of the last rate hike was around a peak of $26-27 before dropping after that but staying around $17-23 til 2024.
*R2 model, if Rivian starts improving their financial situation and that they look like they will be able to stay in business to launch the more affordable R2 which there should be a robust preorder demand I think this will have a good impact on the stock price. They will probably release preorder numbers at some point this year and if they do that will probably help the stock price on their own. I would estimate that there are 60k-100K R2 Preorders and as that is a much more affordable price point the closer we get to the 2026 projected launch the better rivians stock price should be.
My positions: 170 Shares and 21x $20 calls for January 2025 with plans to add another $10k worth of a mix of calls at varying strikes and shares in the near future. If you do your research and decide to buy calls/puts dated out in 2025 or beyond make sure to check the bid/ask and put in a limit order so you aren't burned by large bid/ask gaps. I also own a Rivian Quad R1T
I would like to address the apple partnership speculation last. This is all rumor based and should be taken as such and not as factual in any capacity. As to what validity to it I wouldn't care to guess but there are many options in which a partnership of some sort would make sense and a lot of different options as to how that would take shape.
*Apple could simply lease/sell the research from Project Titan to Rivian for cheap as they spent a lot of money on it and Rivian was asked on the Quarter 1 24 call how they plan to be able to fund future development of their driver+ software (self driving).
Apple spent a lot of money on project titan and it would be a waste if none of that data was useful or ever used.
*The rumors of the apple rivian partnership was credited to an unnamed supplier in Asia. This could be relevant because if Rivian is purchasing or looking into purchasing Apple chips (to power self driving AI assistants) or anything like sensors of the same kind that apple used on its test cars for project titan, could make the rumor a bit more credible. If any information comes out supporting that Rivian is buying apple related hardware this could impact the stock price upward.
*maybe this could simply be a planned implementation of Carplay with the new upcoming version of Carplay being added to R1 and future R2 lineups. Given that no one is going to refuse to buy a Rivian if it introduces the completely 100% optional carplay and that Rivian has a real issue with the lack of software in its vehicles (I can't name another vehicle that doesn't have integrated text messaging) I could only see this only helping demand as there are plenty of soccer moms who wouldn't buy a car without carplay.
*could be a partnership to build apple branded R1/R2/R3 vehicles. Rivian vehicles look good and have a good interior quality thats better than what you would expect. I could see apple badging and functionality being added to a Rivian vehicle to be sold as the apple car.
They could even throw an apple chip in there to run the center screen and it could basically be an IPAD and run all the ipad apps to instantly compete with tesla on functionality and breadth of media/games etc.
Think of like how Ford had an Eddie Bauer edition of their Expedition vehicle years ago. Makes way more sense than apple starting their own car manufacturing and Rivian makes a whole lot of sense for Apple to partner with due to quality of the vehicle.
Note I dont believe the chances are anything but low for most of the speculation about Apple above, but if there was a major or even minor partnership with apple, expect the stock to take off.
Even without any of the apple things above taking place, I think if Q4 profitability happens the Rivian stock price could be above $20 again in 2025. While there are chances of negative catalysts taking place such as dilution so that Rivian can raise cash and other negative things that could occur so take care to make your own informed decisions do the research and dont risk more than you can afford to lose.

So I’m a 17 year old guy who is the son of two somewhat religious immigrant parents. I’m pretty sure I’m bi, and right now things are going good. Me and my family both now know for sure that I’m going to college and that it won’t be too expensive, and we are all thrilled over this. Theoretically, it would be a good time to come out right now.
However, my parents aren’t very accepting of queer people. To be fair, they used to be a lot worse about it. We used to have lots of fights about it because my dad’s been speculating that I’m queer for the longest time, but every time we’d fight about it I’d decline that I was. Recently, my mom told me that she told my father a while ago that she wouldn’t shun me out just because of my queerness after one of my fights. I assume she thought it wasn’t that relevant of a thing to tell me now, because as far as I know they’re under the impression I’m straight. My mom’s still religious, but my dad has been coming out of that religiousness a little bit more, but is still at the end of the day spiritual. With college season going on for the past year, he’s made it clear that he’s extremely proud of me and loves me very much. But like I said, he used to be very homophobic and just half a year ago he said that coming out as trans, even though I’m not, would be his biggest disappointment ever and that he would have failed as a parent (the context is a long story…). Besides, I know how laying on the news of your queerness can lead to reactions that you might’ve thought were completely out of character, just because they’re coming from a place of anger. So at the end of the day, I really can’t tell how they’d react, but I’m pretty sure for other reasons that no matter what my parents would still pay for my tuition and wouldn’t kick me out.
So my dilemma arises: Of course, I don’t technically need to come out ever! But if I were to come out, I’m trying to decide if doing so now would be fine, or if it would be better to do it while I’m in college.
If I’m in college, the plan would be to come out like right after my dad has paid my monthly college payment during a school break, that way he has no way of going back on that for another month while he processes. This would also be good since I’d be leaving a few days later, for example if I did it during winter break, and it’d be easier for my parent’s to process with me at school instead of having to see me every day and act like nothing’s different. Not having to see them and be in the awkwardness until they’re done processing would also be MUCH better for my mental health. Then, I’d slowly start contacting my parents again a couple of weeks later until we’re at least a little bit more comfortable with each other again, that way I can also remind them comfortably that the next college payment is due soon. Giving them at least until my winter break would also give them more time to grow and become even more accepting. Who knows, maybe even them being away from me for a few months would make them more accepting yet. And slowly, we’d just kind of get over it, I’d hope.
The other option is that I come out to them now. Like I’m talking in the next month. So like I said it might not be that bad of an idea because right now my parents are at like peak proudness of me, what with graduating high school and also now officially going to college without having to kill their wallets. Unfortunately, it would probably soil the first half of my summer vacation, if not the whole thing and possibly make things awkward before going to college. And also like I said, they’ve been getting better about being open-minded, but they’re still growing. They have a lot of work to do still, so coming out now would warrant an unpredictable reaction. Best case scenario though, it’s only awkward for a bit and we’re mostly back to normal by the time I go to college. Then, I can also date normally in college and not have to tell any guy I get with “oh btw I’m not technically out to my parents yet.” The awkwardness during the summer though would be unbearable. There’s a lot we need to do and discuss together over the summer, like shopping for my dorm, getting my driver’s license and debit card, my birthday, college orientation, as well as orthodontist, dermatologist, and optometrist appointments. I feel like coming out would at the very least make all of that grueling, if not impossible.
So what do you guys think???

I (18f) just moved back in with my mom (40) after living on my own (my mom moved away 2 years ago and didn’t take me with her, so I’ve been figuring it out since then). My plans with this are to get a second job and save my money so I can move back to my hometown again, buy a car, etc. I can do this within the span of a year or so. I am also starting my college general education which costs money.
My mom lives with her boyfriend (45) and my older brother (21). I am the only one in the house who is employed and has work experience. My mom, my brother, and her boyfriend live on government checks. My brother doesn’t work or pay bills.
Ever since I moved back in my mom’s boyfriend has been treating me like an asset. Saying things like “once you start helping to pay our bills I can save up to buy ___” which is usually a recreational thing like boats, guns, cars, electronics, or pot plants and dabs. I tell my mom that my paychecks will not go towards their fun when I am the only one in the house who is working full time, especially when I will not be living with them for all that long. She tells me not to listen to him because most of what he says is bullshit, but it pisses me off.
I’m afraid they see me as a steady source of additional income. I do not have a problem with paying my portion of rent, but it bothers me that my 21 year old brother doesnt pay rent but I’m expected to by her boyfriend.
It especially bothers me that her boyfriend at his age doesn’t have a job and also barely pays rent. My mom is stuck paying most of the rent. He doesnt have a car and uses her car to drive everywhere. My mom pays for all of his things and then complains to me that she does everything for him. I dont want to help with bills if it means he will be able to save more of his money for his own fun.
I don’t really know what to do but I am annoyed that I am being treated like a benefit, and I will not pay bills if it means he gets to save his money for stupid shit when I am saving for my tuition and future. He doesn’t even call me by my name, when he talks to my mom, he refers to me as “your daughter”.
WIBTA for not paying their bills?

You can make the case for weakened demand due to people who can afford EV's already having bought one and the sustained elevated interest rates hurting demand but there are a couple of factors that can affect the future stock price that are of varying degrees of likelihood of occurring but are positive catalysts for the stock.
take this information as you will and make your own financial decisions.
Positive Catalysts and likelihood of occurring
*Rivian has just completed their plant shutdown in order to streamline operations and promote productivity which should also impact profitability.
As this has already occurred the chance is 100% and unless they are complete idiots should in fact lead to greater productivity and in turn profitability aka less $ lost per vehicle, it remains to be seen how much impact this will have on operations
*Rivian has changed suppliers on certain things like sensors and cameras as they are doing a refresh on the current R1 lineup. Chances of occurring is 100% and based on what Wassym from Rivian has stated should lead to increased capability including self driving capability. May lead to increased demand.
*Rivian has access to the Tesla charging network and is currently in the proceess of sending out CCS to NACS adapters for free to current owners. Chance of occurring 100% as this has happened / is in progress. Some rivian owners have already bought their own adapters. This should solve the issue of the charging station woes and lead to reduced range anxiety for current and potential owners as road trips become basically a non issue. Just happened recently so should lead to increased demand going forward.
*EV tax credits are currently being looked at to be reworked in 2025 the details are still in flux, but as Rivians currently only qualify for $3750 tax credits to those who are under the income limits this is more likely to be a beneficial change to rivian than to hurt rivian. I'd say the chances of a rework to EV tax credit rules are 100% as the current EV tax credit rules are stupid and everyone knows it. The chance of it being beneficial to Rivian is currently unknown as they could increase the amount Rivian owners would qualify to receive or increase the amount of potential Rivian buyers who would be eligible. Worst case I could see no change for Rivian,
I dont see Rivian buyers less eligible or receiving less credit than they do now.
*Rivian becomes positive gross margin by Q4 on a per vehicle basis. This is what Rivian is pushing for and what they say they are striving for on their earning calls. For this to occur they would have to make great strides to profitability. Whether they meet their goal or just get close remains to be seen. I think this is both a potential positive catalyst if they meet this goal or get really close as it should greatly increase stock buyer sentiment. Conversely if they fall well short then this could be a very negative catalyst. its hard to assign a chance to this occurring with so many variables that could happen between here and there.
*Interest rates reducing. Interest rates haven't increased since July of 2023. As the rates have been sustained since then that may have weakened demand somewhat. However I believe it is more likely for interest rates to be reduced than to be increased further. If interest rates somehow increased I couldn't see how they could possibly sustain more than an additional .25 or .50 total increase from where they are now and even then I think those are unlikely. I think its more likely that interest rates are reduced at least .25 by the end of the year with further rate reductions likely in 2025. This should increase consumer sentiment toward both the stock and toward demand.
Can't predict the future but I think rate reductions or at least one by the end of the year is at least 65-70% likely in my opinion. The stock price at the time of the last rate hike was around a peak of $26-27 before dropping after that but staying around $17-23 til 2024.
*R2 model, if Rivian starts improving their financial situation and that they look like they will be able to stay in business to launch the more affordable R2 which there should be a robust preorder demand I think this will have a good impact on the stock price. They will probably releease preorder numbers at some point this year and if they do that will probably help the stock price on their own. I would estimate that there are 60k-100K R2 Preorders and as that is a much more affordable price point the closer we get to the 2026 projected launch the better rivians stock price should be.
My positions: 170 Shares and 21x $20 calls for January 2025 with plans to add another $10k worth of a mix of calls at varying strikes and shares in the near future. If you do your research and decide to buy calls/puts dated out in 2025 or beyond make sure to check the bid/ask and put in a limit order so you aren't burned by large bid/ask gaps. I also own a Rivian Quad R1T
I would like to address the apple partnership speculation last. This is all rumor based and should be taken as such and not as factual in any capacity. As to what validity to it I wouldn't care to guess but there are many options in which a partnership of some sort would make sense and a lot of different options as to how that would take shape.
*Apple could simply lease/sell the research from Project Titan to Rivian for cheap as they spent a lot of money on it and Rivian was asked on the Quarter 1 24 call how they plan to be able to fund future development of their driver+ software (self driving).
Apple spent a lot of money on project titan and it would be a waste if none of that data was useful or ever used.
*The rumors of the apple rivian partnership was credited to an unnamed supplier in Asia. This could be relevant because if Rivian is purchasing or looking into purchasing Apple chips (to power self driving AI assistants) or anything like sensors of the same kind that apple used on its test cars for project titan, could make the rumor a bit more credible. If any information comes out supporting that Rivian is buying apple related hardware this could impact the stock price upward.
*maybe this could simply be a planned implementation of Carplay with the new upcoming version of Carplay being added to R1 and future R2 lineups. Given that no one is going to refuse to buy a Rivian if it introduces the completely 100% optional carplay and that Rivian has a real issue with the lack of software in its vehicles (I can't name another vehicle that doesn't have integrated text messaging) I could only see this only helping demand as there are plenty of soccer moms who wouldn't buy a car without carplay.
*could be a partnership to build apple branded R1/R2/R3 vehicles. Rivian vehicles look good and have a good interior quality thats better than what you would expect. I could see apple badging and functionality being added to a Rivian vehicle to be sold as the apple car.
They could even throw an apple chip in there to run the center screen and it could basically be an IPAD and run all the ipad apps to instantly compete with tesla on functionality and breadth of media/games etc.
Think of like how Ford had an Eddie Bauer edition of their Expedition vehicle years ago. Makes way more sense than apple starting their own car manufacturing and Rivian makes a whole lot of sense for Apple to partner with due to quality of the vehicle.
Note I dont believe the chances are anything but low for most of the speculation about Apple above, but if there was a major or even minor partnership with apple, expect the stock to take off.
Even without any of the apple things above taking place, I think if Q4 profitability happens the Rivian stock price could be above $20 again in 2025. While there are chances of negative catalysts taking place such as dilution so that Rivian can raise cash and other negative things that could occur so take care to make your own informed decisions do the research and dont risk more than you can afford to lose.

Hey all,
My wife and I have been on individual insurance plans from our respective employers. We had our first child recently, and decided to move everyone (myself, wife, and baby) onto my health insurance as a family plan.
I have that all set up and the effective date for coverage on my plan is the child's birth date.
My question is: Is it safe to now terminate my wife's previous individual plan with her employer? Her individual plan has already been billed for both her and baby's coverage before, during, and after the date of birth of the child. What happens to those charges if we cancel her plan? Do they get rejected and charged to my plan retroactively...?
We are still within the 30 day window of the qualifying event btw.
Thanks!

Hey y'all, I am a game developer and video creator and I am kind of in a weird spot right now.
I have been learning to make VR games (and games in general) for a couple of years now and thought it would be fun to tryout YT for I bit. It ended up being quite the endeavor and I planned on stopping it and focusing on developing and publishing a game for the Meta Quest platform to hopefully get rid of some stuff that is looming just behind me. So I wrapped up what I thought was going to the second and last video of mine, (A video I did not even think was all that great I might add), and it performed really well (Like 70K views on a channel that only had ~200 view before that video + now I qualify for YT monetization). Now I am kind of conflicted on what I should do.

A month ago I filed my taxes and it said I was approved for a long term payment plan. I forgot to do it all month and now I’m trying to pay online but it says I don’t qualify for a payment plan, even though I already got approved. The IRS website gives me a weird error message no matter what I do. What should I do? I only owe $800

Hi all! I'm thinking of doing the residency option where you have to hang around from May-August at the end of your first year to qualify for in-state tuition.
Can anyone give me an idea of how many students are around during the summer months? Will it just be me and a couple of international kids? Or are there tons of people?
And is there anything to do???
Thanks as always for any insight.

Hi there!
I’m 27 (f) and I am currently doing BSc (hons) in mental health nursing. My dream was always to be a clinical psychologist and wanted to study psychology but last minute I applied to MH nursing due to it being a more stable career. I qualify as a RMN next year however I genuinely don’t want to do nursing. I love the psychology aspect of the course and working with individuals with mental health and psychological difficulties however I HATE the nursing side of it. My grades are good & I really enjoy reading & researching all aspects of psychology. I plan to complete a BPS accredited MSc in psychology once I graduate, with the aim to train in some psychological therapies and eventually my goal of becoming a clinical psychologist. My question is:

1. Will working as a mental health nurse for a few years while I get my MSc in psychology doing as relevant work experience when applying for DClinPsy?
   
2. If I don’t get in to DClinPsy, what route can I take to do psychological therapies full time?
   
3. Is it possible to become a full time therapist if DClinPsy doesn’t work out?
   

TL;DR - I’m currently studying mental health nursing, can I convert to clinical psychology?

My boyfriend (23 M) and I (23 F) have been together for almost 5 years now- living together for 2. I love him to bits and we have a very good and transparent relationship. We’ve talked multiple times about our commitment to eachother and wanting to spend our lives together. But I feel like this is putting a big strain on the relationship.
Here is the thing, I want to buy a house - but not just for myself, for my parents. I’m an immigrant who moved to the UK as a child, in search for a better life. We own nothing, growing up it was always renting, constantly moving houses, never feeling like I have a place that I can call “home”. I barely ever had my own room and have no place I can call my own when I visit my parents. Both of my parents have been working their lives off to give me and my brother the best life they could and I am very grateful for it. It’s been my life dream to buy a house that I can give to my parents and have a place where we don’t have to worry about being told to move out. I’m getting especially worried about it now as they are getting old- I don’t know how much longer they would be able to work for as the jobs are physical. I’ve been working since i was 17 - all the way through uni and by the time I graduated I already had enough saved for a deposit. I always made it clear to my boyfriend (who I met in uni) that this is something I want to do and was always transparent about it.
We have recently relocated together for full time jobs, we’re renting a Teo bed place and life has been great. But, now that I am finally in a full time job, I want to get on the property ladder ASAP and have been talking to him how my plan is to buy a house in the next year. However, this was not received very well.
You see, he really wants to buy it with me. Our recent chat revealed that he was under the impression that this dream of mine getting a house for my parents was something I wanted to do later in life, like in my 50s….so he is feeling betrayed that I don’t want to invest into our life and building our family, and buying a house together where we can start a family and etc…While I understand his feelings, I have tried to assure him that we can still do that.. in a year I will be fully qualified in my field and am projected to earn double of what I earn right now so I’m more than happy to get another mortgage with him where he’s the main share holder…but this was not received well.
Edit: a lot of people are commenting that he is prioritising starting a family - I want to point out that we have had multiple conversations on this and he doesn’t want to have kids or anything of sort until early 30s…if anything I’m the one who wants to get married and have kids earlier
He comes from a very wealthy background, went to a private school and his family is very well off - their house is gorgeous. I tried to explain to him that I have nothing, and I want something to be able to call my own, so to me it’s very important I do this by myself. I think he has the issue of me owning something so big by myself, where he is not involved, he is feeling left out…. But I also reiterated that at the end of the day when we get married; this is something that will become ours anyway. He never expressed a desire to own a house quickly before, his timelines were always far away like get a place at 28 marry and kids by 30… so I’m also frustrated as there is nothing preventing us from still doing that….
Edit: I’ve done my research - spoke to a mortgage advisor- there is nothing from preventing me getting another mortgage (later on) - assuming I have the finances to support the payment. I wouldn’t be getting a full second mortgage either, It would probbaly be 40/50 split between myself and my boyfriend depending on the size of the house. The math is mathing, it’s possible…
After many conversations, from his point of view we can get a house together now that we can give to my parents when they will need it and move out ourselves - but to me this is not the same. Firstly, I don’t want there to be any dependencies, I want my parents to have the ability to move into it whenever they want, do with it whatever they want and not feel guilty that half of it isn’t theirs - or like they are taking our place. Also I don’t want to create a situation where my boyfriend feels like my parents depend on him as well and vice versa. Second of all, this situation was never discussed with my in laws and I can’t imagine what their reaction to this is going to be nor do I want to. I want to be independent and not have anyone else involved so that if anything ever goes wrong - my parents don’t have to worry about moving out and again, have something that I can invest in and have something in this world.
My boyfriend says that he understands where I am coming from but but also I don’t think he is because there is so much tension; every time we talk about this, he gets very upset and defensive…I don’t know what else to do to or say make it better, it feels like every reassurance I give is being received with the same response…
So am I a bad person for wanting to do this myself….
Edit: I will not be living with my parents. I’m expecting my parents to cover more than half of the mortgage repayments but I will also be contributing. This was discussed with them. Even if all comes to worse, I will still be able to cover the mortgage AND my share of rent/bills with my boyfriend. This will not pose any strain on my boyfriend as so far I was able to regularly save a significant amount of money per month while also paying my share of the rent/ bills and an active life style.
TL;DR I’m an immigrant who wants to buy a house without my boyfriend because I want to have a place to call my own. He’s been very fortunate in life and him nor his parents will never have to worry about having a roof over their heads. This is not the same case for me, so it’s important I do this and I have been saving up for this ever since I could work. I was always transparent about my dream, but now that I am in a position to do this, I’m not getting a good response from my boyfriend as he feels betrayed and left out he is not involved… am I a bad person ..

*Management style:
Not democratic/participative. Not transformational. Not Coaching. Very much Autocratic/Authoritative/Coercive. Sometimes Laissez-faire. Style depends on the department.
*Chain of command:
The ministry is seen as a church by top management. Top management are the “elders” and the CEO is the Senior Pastor. Then there is everybody else. So, confidence is put on their positions of authority. They are, in all sense and purposes, the “spiritual leaders”. They present themselves as having spiritual authority and, therefore, as being entitled to receive immediate agreement and unquestioned compliance.
Also, there are multiple management layers or chains which this quote sums up as well:
"When you become an admiral, you never have bad meals and you never hear the truth. there are all these layers of management and buffer layers and each one is afraid to tell unpleasant truth to the top levels.... “
Not a culture of authenticity where everyone on the team, including management, is encouraged, and expected to be who they are. There is a sense that top management puts up a false front, they seem to want to appear perfect. Illusions of invulnerability exist. They always lead well, they always make the right decisions, they never admit mistakes, etc. Want people to think they got it all together- all rainbows and lollipops. Do not exhibit vulnerability. Toxic positivity is also very much present: Everything is seen as “awesome”. So, there is judgment if you have a bad (not "everything is awesome") day.
The vertical chain of command, results in less collaboration, slow communication, lack of career growth, feelings of subordination, and decreased employee empowerment. Top management sets the rules and standards without any input from the “bottom” employees. Employee questions, concerns or ideas have to go up several steps of the chain of command so that upper management can address or approve. The bottom employees do not have the ability to make decisions related to their work or a particular situation. So, not everyone feels equal.
So, if you are not a spiritual leader, you are just basically told to submit and listen to those who are in authority over you because they are the people that “hear from God” and you are not and so whatever they say goes. And they set up a scenario where they basically kept those of us who were not spiritual leaders dependent upon them.
Many in management are overconfident and overestimate their abilities. They have a simple idea of how things are and how things work. Unfortunately, they make decisions that impact entire departments without gaining the needed knowledge.
The chain of command and lack of ongoing training also results in many employees being promoted so much that they max out their competence and will remain there until they leave or are let go. So, you end up with many in the role of management that lack the training and competence of the respective department. So, employees with the most authority are often not the most experienced and not adept in the particular field leading team members. And employees with the most experience and skills and knowledge and wisdom have the least (or no) authority.
Good leaders don’t always claim the “leader” title. Oftentimes, good leaders are those with more understated temperaments. Leadership is as much about listening as it is about telling. However, people with the most open and receptive personalities often do not have much authority.
Also, how the chain of command should operate when there is a unit that acted without proper authorization, it is not a junior authority who’s going to bear a responsibility for that, but somewhat of more senior status. And that’s true in any military or business or ministry operating by a code of ethics. So, if someone at the bottom of the chain is struggling, failing, or making mistakes, those at the top of the chain bear full responsibility. Everything stands or falls on leadership. Unfortunately, the chain at FCBH is not two directional.
There is also a sense that top management promotes employees who are least-competent but pose no risk to their own position (in-group bias) to management.
*Feedback:
Work environment or culture is not set up for employees to give honest feedback/opinions or to deliver bad news or to question or disagree with management.
Sample bias is also common. Management will send an email asking for feedback but they won't consider how only the people who are open to talking and sharing their opinions will participate while others won’t. Bias arises because employees with specific characteristics (e.g., extroverts) might be more likely to agree to participate than others, making the participants a non-representative sample. People with strong opinions or substantial knowledge about a specific topic may be more willing to give feedback than those without. Management does not follow up to determine why they are unresponsive or follow up frequently to reduce attrition.
Management claims they want to hear from employees, but they only want opinions and ideas on matters that are superficial or trivial. So, few employees give candid feedback on important and significant matters.
Top management does not involve employees in the change process when changes occur.
Management does not ask for honest feedback on their leadership or on decisions that are made that affect employees. Management will not ask how they are doing as leaders, what employees need from them. No regular check-ins or 1:1 on employees’ professional and personal well-being. Are employees stressed, disappointed or feeling burdened physically, emotionally or spiritually? No growth and career discussions.
Management will ignore most feedback, comments, suggestions even when it's common knowledge but will adamantly listen to employees who preface with "God told me to tell you..." Or “I felt God say …” or “God spoke to me and said…”
For example, management started focusing on Gen Z only after a few people claimed that “God told us that Gen Z are important for our future business growth.” In another instance, someone said “God gave us this word: we as a ministry need to really consider how everyone is wired, how each person is different. How people have different personalities.” Then, management affirmed this “word from God.”
If one employee brings something up to management it is often ignored and the employee is gaslighted. If two or more employees bring the same thing to management, then God is communicating something and they take it seriously (per Matt 18). Even if it is just coincidence or frequency bias.
*Groupthink/Conformity:
Groupthink, confirmation bias, in-group bias, illusions of unanimity, and self-censorship is very prevalent in the culture and especially in their meetings. There is a lot of direct pressure to not question, to conform, to agree with the views and personal convictions of the top management. Employees condemn those who disagree or question top management and they accept those who agree, creating immense pressure for conformity.
So, many employees frequently remain quiet, preferring to “keep the peace” rather than disrupt the uniformity. Employees are pressured to hide problematic information (especially from top management).
*Disagreements/Different perspectives:
Top management will also point out the working and living conditions of international employees to “encourage” local employees to not “complain” or give critical feedback or bring up legitimate problems (e.g., fumes or loud noises from construction in the building).
Management also often commits the "ends (or goals or vision) justify the means" fallacy: the work, the production and distribution of bibles (the ends) being done is more important, so employees shouldn't complain at all about the means or their working conditions (broken chairs, broken or inadequate equipment, poor work-life balance, bad management).
And, if management disagrees with you, with your observations, feedback, suggestions, or theology, they will often try to trump you with spirituality or vague meaningless spiritual terminology instead of using Scripture (properly interpreted), facts and reasoning.
In addition, top managers will take great offense when employees question or disagree with the directions and decisions they make. Dissent is not welcomed. Respectful debates/disagreement is not encouraged. Open discussion and alternative perspectives are not encouraged. Management does not value, support, or respect diverse opinions and ideas. They do not actively seek out different viewpoints. Do not allow people to speak their perspective, their thought of mind. So, there is no psychological safety. Employees do not feel comfortable expressing dissenting opinions without fear of retribution or judgment. Afraid of breaking the little glass image. People do not feel comfortable sharing setbacks, mistakes, failures. Management does not encourage open communication. Management often seeks agreement, instead of posing honest questions that challenge the status quo and provoke critical thinking and discussion. They do not encourage employees to challenge them. In fact, they are seen as a type of complaining or critical feedback and so are viewed as sin. This makes top management seem self-centered.
*Appeals to emotion: Guilt and Shame:
Top management often shares their personal opinions and convictions (e.g., spending money only when absolutely necessary, not accepting large gifts, not buying fancy items) as something everyone should do. It’s never direct. It's always through stories. Management loves stories. The personal convictions of management are presented as more than preferences.
For instance, top management encourages extreme frugality and poverty through their personal anecdotes #loudbudgeting and stories from international cultures. Think along the lines of: “we, here in America, have no right to be sad or to complain about things or to request better things or ask for accommodations or for more employee engagement because others (internationals) have it much worse.” Even wanting better equipment and supplies or asking for better working conditions is frowned upon (in some cases seen as a sin), even if your request helps you to do your job more effectively and makes the work better (a new whiteboard, a new office chair, better computers, etc.)
Example: “You should really try to come in to work even if you feel bad, even if you are snowed in and the roads are hazardous because people need to get our bibles. And our international employees work in much harsher conditions.”
You also get this feeling from the way they communicate that top management would rather not pay their employees. They would prefer it if everyone just worked for free because “we are on a mission from God. We are doing the Lord's work.” There is also a sense that employees should be more than willing to sacrifice their well-being, career goals, financial goals, personal goals for reaching people with their Bibles.
Leadership sets the example and expectations, so this all ends up making employees confused and feeling guilty and ashamed. Guilty and shameful about asks, spending money (even their own). Guilty and shameful about having nice things (new car, new phone, new tv), about making needs known, about sharing concerns regarding work, about asking for raises to keep up with cost of living, etc.
Example: An employee has continued to use an old whiteboard. It is so old it is hard to read and difficult to erase. Management likes to tell donors: “We don't spend money on everyday things like whiteboards…. Instead, we use that money for more bible recordings, for people to hear about Jesus.”
This also causes confusion. Every few months there is a meeting where management discusses how sitting on stores of money is bad, but spending it is also bad, but also not spending it is bad... "Being rich is bad. Money is bad. let's not accumulate money, that's bad. We must think about how people will see what we have. So we should look poor and not appear too frivolous." But top management is okay with receiving gifts from donors and other ministries. Management personally does not like to have nice “fancy” things, and as a ministry, they say FCBH should also not have nice fancy things, they should use the money for other more important things. They don't like when other ministries use their money for nice fancy things, but it's okay if other ministries give FCBH nice fancy things like tote bags, key chains, mugs, phone holders, lunch bags. Another example, it took them years to repaint the parking lot. It was at the point where people did not know where to park. Before repainting, management decided to remodel the hallways and install posters and multiple monitors with language stats.
There is also a subtle sense that producing audio and video bibles is the highest calling one can have. And it's implied that FCBH is the main means God uses to fulfill the great commission: “God needs FCBH to do these bible recordings or people (specifically unreached internationals) will go to hell.” So, top management hints that working anywhere else isn't really serving God (or at least, not serving God as well as one could if they worked somewhere else). They imply that working at this ministry is the only way to truly serve God and fulfill your calling. They also use this framing to guilt and shame employees into not quitting. Management implies that employees should not take opportunities to leave or take other jobs because getting the Bible to people is God’s highest calling for us as Christians:
“If anyone leaves FCBH, then they must not really understand the vision/calling. They are not committed to saving people. We should be willing to give up things to fulfill the calling. The apostles did not pursue better jobs and so God will provide if we need better pay, benefits, career. For those of us who join the ministry to hold true to get God's word to every person, it takes discipline because we have opportunities to do other things. I'm sure that Noah had problems with Builders because he probably had hundreds of people not thousands working on the ark. They started their own businesses and started side things going on. pretty soon they'll have no time to work with him on the ark. and you can have all kinds of diversionary things happen. and so we want to understand they focused in the ministry. and that's been one of the things that I've really tried to do is what did God tell me at the time this ministry began because I was not interested in this ministry. I was interested in living by faith and experiencing God through people and seeing people experience God. and when I was praying about that here in Albuquerque the Lord said bring my church together and make disciples. and then he also told me that when his people think the same they are one. so it's not a matter of getting rid of the buildings or the leaders but it's a matter of people thinking the same. They can go to different denominations, different buildings, have different teachers, and different preachers and leaders but once they think the same, they're one and that's what his objective was. and so that's when I felt like the Lord said get God's word to every person. So I'm challenging us to stay true to what God has called us to do. and every time somebody leaves the ministry there are reasons for leaving. but it startles me a little bit, because I think well we haven't, we haven't communicated the vision very well somehow because they didn't get it. like Noah building the arc. it it's a long project it's not a month or a year two years or three years. our immediate goal is 2033 and it means that we're committed to a cause. and that means some of us we give up something. I we've given up stuff we live in a small apartment and that's what we saw that God had us do and that's our lifestyle we we tone down our lifestyle to get the cause committed to the cause. and and I know that's difficult for some, in some cases maybe there's financial needs because of family growth and stuff there they just can't afford to work in the ministry. but sometimes it's a choice and every time somebody leaves it where it's actually a choice. I think we haven't communicated the mission very good the vision very good. I've been looking at is that could you imagine read reading the New Testament. and finding out that Peter about halfway through or Paul halfway through the ministry all of a sudden got a better job offer. and stopped their portion of the ministry they held the course no matter what happened. whether it was good or whether it was bad. Paul talks about this and sometimes we want to follow the Lord. but we don't impart on ourselves the same responsibilities that those disciples did. so when God Empower them is he empowering you in the same way. and you're making choices that maybe you shouldn't make that you will impart and say the Lord is leading me someplace else when in fact maybe it isn't. it's just a better offer. if the Bible in the New Testament was reading a little bit different than Stephen left the ministry at this point or James left the ministry at this point because of something I think we need to be very very careful and why I say that is that as we work internationally.”
SO, there is a lot of guilt and shame about leaving to pursue other interests or meet needs. Guilt and shame about wanting to leave to advance and develop professionally. For this reason, many remain “loyal” and stay at the ministry.
So there is lots of control and manipulation in the work culture.
*Weekly worship meetings:
These are mandatory and there are some legitimate concerns:
Top management seems to have misconceptions about true worship and worship experiences. They often reduce worship to singing by their communication, the way “worship” is used. Worship is seen as something we do on occasion - once a week, when we gather at work for the mandatory worship time. Top management, by ignoring other styles, seems to believe that there is a single style of worship which is correct for Christians.
And it seems like just about anyone can lead worship or be on the team: anyone that can play an instrument. Top management does not require a worship class or agreement to biblical principles concerning worship as a prerequisite for employees who desire to plan and lead worship experiences. So you end up with people who have different views/philosophies on the worship team. Unfortunately, many who lead do not take the time/effort to plan and lead worship experiences, to discern from songs that are better suited for individual or private worship from songs that are corporate or public worship, to discern songs that are controversial/questionable (have bad theology, weak theology), songs that are theologically ambiguous or songs that lean more towards “feminine” attributes. Most, if not all, of our modern “Christian” worship music is written at a simplistic level of understanding and comprehension. Most music tends to appeal to our emotions. Many songs appeal mostly to women. So there is a great need for teaching on the biblical principles concerning worship. Also a need to choose theologically balanced songs with music appropriate for the people. Unfortunately, many of the songs chosen are theologically incorrect (e.g., having elements from the Word Of Faith movement, New Apostolic Church, New Age). Songs are often not theologically balanced. Songs seem to be chosen for their emotional impact, to make employees feel good; many focus on just one aspect of God (e.g., love). Many promote self-centered worship.
Most of the worship leaders just sing the songs: They do not actually “lead” people into worship. They do not help people connect the lyrics of the song to where they are at in their personal life, to teach them something about God or help the people understand what this song means and what God wants them to get out of it, so they're not just singing songs and just doing, going through the motions or help them understand the depth and the richness of what lyrics mean and how it applies to their life. What matters to them seems to be whether songs are impactful, moving, and beautiful. (Whatever that means.) Whether songs make employees feel good. They don't seem to care whether the songs actually reflect truth: Do the lyrics line up with Scripture? Do the songs glorify self or God? How would new Christians or nonChristians interpret the song?
Theology is the study of God and it's very important doxology is an expression of praise to God so the point here is that all theologies should ultimately lead to doxology if theology doesn't lead to doxology then we've actually missed the point of theology so if you have theology without doxology you just have dead hold orthodoxy which is horrible. On the other side you have the people who say “forget about theology I just want to praise.” But if you have doxology without theology you actually have idolatry because it's just a random expression of praise but it's not actually informed by the truth of who God is so God is
concerned with both he's concerned with an accurate understanding of him and that accurate understanding of him leading to a response of praise adoration and worship towards him.
*Leadership quality:
Top management has more respect for donors and guests than their employees.
Management lacks basic core leadership principles/values:
Unfortunately, many employees are not given power or resources: Management just gives them the responsibility to get things done. Before responsibility is given, employees should be equipped: be empowered, have the authority, be given resources and have the experience. Employees are not empowered as individuals to solve their own problems using their own solutions. Micromanagement is often required every time the situation changes or problems arise. Employees are not inspired to act as leaders for themselves, delivering amazing performance without guidance. They have coaching sessions but only when there’s a problem. True coaching occurs regardless of whether the individual is crushing their goals or falling behind. Management does not seem to care about unlocking a person’s potential and getting the most of their performance. They seem only interested in producing more followers, not more leaders.
No method to hold management accountable to core values listed in their own Employee handbook. Employees are expected to abide by the procedures and rules described in the handbook but top management can choose to ignore it when it is convenient for them.
-Top management are NOT learners: No desire to develop and improve their skills.
-They do not ask employees: What’s one thing you see me doing—or failing to do—that you think I should change?
-They do not ask how they are doing as leaders. Or ask employees how they’re doing.
-They do not ask what employees need from management that they are not giving them.
-No performance evaluations for both management or non-managment.
-They often fail to emotionally connect with employees.
-They do not speak to employees' needs first.
-They do not focus on what they can put into people rather than what they can get out of them.
-They do not understand basic psychology, how people think and behave.
-They are often resistant to (and even hate) change: Perhaps because they fear losing control. In fact, new information, objective facts, research, stats, and even new ideas are often ignored in favor of what's easiest to do or because of tradition. If something has been done and “works”, top management does not see a reason to question it or to improve on it. If something was tried 5, 10, 20, even 50yrs before and failed, top management does not see a reason to try it again even if the exact circumstances have changed.
-They do not empower or give the means, the power or opportunity to do to employees.
-They do not trust others to follow through managing processes and performing tasks.
-They do not lead by example.
-They do not know when to move forward and when to back off, what to improve and how radical those improvements should be.
-They often fail to see options, and plan and prioritize.
-They fail to develop leaders around them.
-Their communication is often poor.
-Their listening is also poor: do not listen for more than facts, but also the feelings, meanings and undercurrents.
-They do not take the time to get to know the people they lead: no weekly check-ins which top organizations have to discuss how employees are doing professionally and personally. Management doesn't ask “what was good this week? What was not good this week? How is your well-being? How is your family?”
Competence in leadership skills is also poor.
-They are not teachable: not willing to keep learning, growing, improving in leadership and management practices: FCBH has a yearly “leadership” summit. But, the way it is set up, it reinforces weaknesses instead of challenging leadership growth.
The summit is also just for a select few in top management. Not every employee is seen as a leader so most employees are excluded.
Top managers attend the summit but there is no followup, no post accountability by other managers and especially by the employees that are under the managers. No discussion on how management will apply what was learned.
Some of the past speakers have had questionable characters and even questionable teachings (Judah Smith). Leadership qualifications and theological background seems to be ignored in favor of charismatics, dynamics, popularity.
-Top management does not take responsibility for their part of a disagreement or failure and apologize.
-They often embrace a victim mentality.
-They often limit yourself by your job title.
-They do not invest in better tools or processes.
-They are content with the status quo.
-They allow their past achievements to stagnate their desire to keep learning.
-There is a lack of discernment, finding the main cause of problems/issues.
-They do not anticipate problems.
-They do not accept the truth of the problem: Do not face up to the reality of the situation;
-They get bogged down in the details.
-They often avoid problems.
-They don’t deal well with problems.
-They do not have their team study all angles.
-They often do not value nontraditional thinking: Don’t embrace change, ambiguity and uncertainty well.
-They do not work well with differences.
-They do not have their own mentors or provide mentorship to others.
-They do not invest to improve their own professional or leadership skills.
-They are often insecure, constantly seek validation, acknowledgement and love.
-They limit employee's success and recognition:
-They do not seem interested in making people successful: Don’t attempt to remove barriers that prevent employees from being successful.

• They often feel threatened by accomplishments by employees who are not management:

If an employee who is not management has a great idea to improve the work, management often does not support it and may secretly try to shut it down.
When a team succeeds, management will not give other people credit and instead take the credit themselves.
It seems like some of the people working there were given the title of management, the position, and that alone made them qualified. Management or leaders assume that their position alone qualifies them to make critical decisions where they may not have the best data, insight, wisdom, skill, experience. Just because one may have the word “manger” in the job title, does not automatically make them a great leader. Leadership is about dealing with people, and the dynamics between those people, and influencing people.
*Dead end career path:
For the most part, top management assumes that team members are fine and "settled", rather than taking the time to understand their true feelings and needs. They do not ask employees where they are struggling, where they are having trouble, what frustrates them the most?
Management does not seem interested in making employees better both personally or professionally. They do not have a growth plan or professional development plan for employees. No job related training. They do not provide what is needed to help employees to grow and improve. They don't provide opportunities for employees to apply their talents and expertise. They don’t ask how they can better support employees. Employees don’t check on each other.
One is expected to work until health deteriorates and skills become obsolete so you leave in a worse place than you started. For most employees, there is no long term future with the organization. Management does not let employees know how they are doing and what the future looks like for them. What the opportunities are. They do not take the time to learn from employees what they want to be. No honest conversations to understand employees goals and ambitions. So, because there is no growth or development plan, no career path, once your skills are outdated, they will probably let you go or they will keep you in the same position and your salary will max out.
Management does not coach employees on how to manage their time, priorities, and energy; no teaching on how to problem solve, or make better decisions, or how to set boundaries or how to minimize context switching and zoom fatigue.

Can you get in state tuition after living and working during your first year of UWM? I'm planning on moving to Milwaukee 2 months before starting in September and working while studying, I thought I would get my residency after my first year and then pay in state tuition for the rest of my time there (3-4 years), but somebody told me you must have your residency before applying? I'm really confused and already made plans on moving milwaukee and working while studying until I get in state tuition, and if I can't even get in state tuition at all then it's going to ruin everything I planned. I'm not a resident of Wisconsin and was planning on becoming one while studying at UWM so I could get reduced fees after my first year

In a lot of sci-fi, people often dismiss surface defenses, or make them overpowered or ridiculous. Orbital bombardment's effectiveness is quite overstated when we look at the history of warfare. In particular wet navies at sea get overlooked. Certain writers will fight tooth and nail to keep infantry, tanks, planes, and artillery in a story, then laugh at the idea of a space marine ever setting foot in water. But why? Submarines are naturally stealthy, and theoretically can avoid getting shot from orbit by diving. Yet they'll be dismissed or ignored. A surface vessel has 71% of the globe to maneuver in, it can carry a large reactor and plenty of weapons of any kind. Yet it is generally taken for granted that all surface vessels would be sunk immediately in any conflict, and are worthless. Other criticisms abound, yet the most common threads are presumption or omission. There is an undercurrent that consistently believes the ability to destroy a planet will make all enemies submit, when that hasn't stopped us since Trinity. I submit that naval vessels are underutilized, and could be more useful than expected, as a mobile source of energy and firepower that's bigger than anything ever put on land, and through their maneuverability have an advantage no stationary installation can match in terms of survivability and strategic deployment.
The arguments generally made against naval vessels are that a wet navy ship can't hide. You can't throw a tarp over it like you can infantry, tanks, or planes. Critics will insist that a seagoing vessel will be instantly lit up, it will be a target that will immediately be destroyed. If a submarine pops up to fire, they'll get nuclear depth charge'd or shot with a laser. Here's a few questions; what's the difference between that and infantry? Why have ground forces at all? Some critics will ask that exact question. In some circles it's presumed that space warfare makes all other kinds of conflict obsolete, or that significant firepower does the same thing. The ability to destroy a planet has done nothing to dissuade us from having conventional war. But that's what we've always said with any new weapon. The Templin Institute video on planetary invasion had a great description of this.
https://youtu.be/XgN5yq362_s
Before WWII, strategic bombing was seen as a game ender. It's effects on breaking the enemy's will to fight is dubious at best. Strategic bombing and nuclear weapons did nothing to end war, or force the enemy to surrender. Even with Hiroshima and Nagasaki, that was a country at its breaking point after fifteen years of near-constant conflict, and five years of a global war. And still, some holdouts tried to stage a coup to prevent the emperor from surrendering.
After WWII, there were those who believed the nuclear age put an end to conventional war. The air force insisted the Navy and Marines were obsolete. This was part of a conflict that would be known as the Revolt of the Admirals. Air Force General Frank A Armstrong was quoted in Nathan Miller's "The US Navy: A History":
"You gentlemen had better understand that the Army Air Force is tired of being a subordinate outfit. It was a predominant force during the war, and it is going to be a predominant force during the peace, and you might as well make up your minds whether you like it or not, and we do not care whether you like it or not. The Army Air Force is going to run the show. You, the Navy, are not going to have anything but a couple of carriers that are ineffective anyway, and they will probably be sunk in the first battle. Now as for the Marines, you know what the Marines are, a small bitched-up army talking Navy lingo. We are going to put those Marines in the Regular Army and make efficient soldiers out of them."
This was accompanied by:
"In the age of atomic warfare, the fast carrier task force was regarded as an anachronism, and such a massive concentration of ships was seen as being more vulnerable to the bomb than any other weapon system...some strategists doubted that the navy would have an important part to play in the future...Admiral Nimitz, then chief of naval operations, pointed out the same thing had been said about the navy when the submarine, the torpedo, and the airplane were introduced. 'While the prophets of naval doom are shouting themselves hoarse, the Navy will be at work to make the changes needed to accommodate American sea power to the new weapons,' he declared..."
They can't think of a war without nuclear weapons. Then the very first war we came across after WWII, Korea, they could not use nuclear weapons at all. Political, economic, or military reasons could all make orbital bombardment less than desirable in certain situations. The situation might prevent it politically. There's limited wars, there's rules of engagement, there's resources you need, there's stuff you want. On the other side of the equation the weapons might not show the results you expect. They might not be accurate, they might be affected by some new flaw, they're just not what you hoped. Or the enemy is more capable than you expect.
Heinlein said in Starship Troopers that "War is not violence and killing, pure and simple; war is controlled violence, for a purpose." Clausewitz once said that "War is a mere continuation of policy by other means". And I say that the ability to destroy a planet is insignificant compared to the power of "why on earth would you do that". If your goal is to conquer a planet, simply glassing it won't get you anything. If you wish to conquer and seize land, you need to send troops. You need someone to hold it and die for it.
So why in the world must this apply to everything but the wet navy? You will see people with big garrisons, you'll see Bolo cybertanks with megaton-per-second firepower, you'll see infantry doing guerilla warfare, you'll even see aircraft. Why is the wet navy seen as so obsolete in sci-fi circles? The largest vehicle ever built in the real world is the ship Seawise Giant, nearly twice the size of the Hindenburg, the largest flying machine ever built, and longer than the largest aircraft carriers ever. This means that a future battleship, carrier, or other vessel could be just as big and carry enormous weapons. Yet still folks insist that because surface ships can't throw a tarp over themselves, that they'll be sitting ducks.
Submarines I've noticed in some circles are a solution. They are small, sneaky, and can use lasers as much as missiles. Others say that they're vulnerable when launching, hence the laser idea. One cool idea I've seen is a boat that extends out big laser arrays on the surface connected by a tether to the sub hiding deep underwater, so that if the laser is shot the submarine is safe beneath the waves. Yet just as often when this idea is proposed, it is claimed that if a submarine pops up, they'll be bombed, insisting that satellites have advanced too far. I don't know enough to speak to that, but there's a lot of ocean. What do you gain by wasting ammo dropping rocks on 71% of the planet just to be sure they don't have a submarine hiding? Wouldn't that be an excellent reason to have submarines, just so the enemy has to waste ships patrolling and not hitting the land targets?
The arguments eventually circle around to "we can nuke it". First of all, the ocean is big and it is deep. You'd trash the environment, including things you might want to conquer, if you vaporized thousands of square kilometers of sea water to kill a single hundred-meter sub. As I must repeat, the ability to destroy a planet is insignificant compared to the power of "why on earth would you do that?" During the Cold War, despite having the ability to glass the planet, we still built tanks, ships, and artillery, because there are certain kinds of war, certain modes of operation, certain things that don't involve total annihilation, because so often that's not what war is about. If you want to conquer a planet, you have to take it. The Soviets being able to annihilate Washington didn't magically alter the fact that they didn't have the ships to move any troops to hold it.
A submarine is one thing. If that can survive, why not a surface ship? Again, that tarp thing would be the answer. "They're sitting ducks!" One must ask why? During the Cold War, carriers were vulnerable, sure, but we still built them, and they can carry nukes too. And they can do a lot more things than a battleship can, from disaster relief to moving the crew's cars. A surface ship can be stealthy, just not as much as a sub. They can carry larger weapons than a sub, with more power to put through them.
While it's said a surface ship can't hide, neither can a starship, it's sitting up there shedding heat like mad. A surface ship has the whole planet to play with.
http://www.rocketpunk-manifesto.com/2009/06/space-warfare-i-gravity-well.html
One scenario pitched to me recently is a bunch of corvettes and frigates loaded down with missiles and lasers that shoot their wad in the opening salvos like a lot of Cold War plans. But does it have to be that small?
Let me be clear. Current generations of naval vessels likely wouldn't stand a chance. But they create an interesting precedent, because there exist multiple anti-satellite(ASAT) weapon projects that we could extrapolate for use on a surface vessel. We have a ton of projects, from the MIRACL directed-energy weapon, to the ASM-135 air-launched missile, the YAL-1 Airborne Laser(ABL), to the RIM-161 Standard Missile 3(not technically anti-satellite, it's an anti-ballistic missile that has been used in ASAT roles). These are ground-based, air-launched, and sea-based. We also can think about space guns, i.e. weapons used to launch projectiles into space. Project HARP in the 1960s used modified 16-inch naval guns to launch projectiles high into space. They succeeded, and a mass driverailgun would likely be able to get the same performance out of a smaller package. Keep in mind, these weapons don't need to achieve orbit, they just need to hit something in orbit, so they can be much smaller. They were flawed, and less than accurate, but they do exist. So this means that we can speculate on the future of these weapons if they were more mature. And all of these could be mounted on relatively conventional platforms. Size isn't everything, yet a war machine's power isn't in just its armor, but in its ability to deliver offensive power as much as defensive power.
The MIRACL was ground-based, and not mobile; they tried to use it to shoot at a satellite. It didn't work well, they ended up using a smaller less powerful weapon for the job. The YAL-1 ABL was a 747 modified with a weapon of the same output as the MIRACL, only airborne. The ASM-135 was attached to a squadron of unmodified F-15s that would go into supersonic zoom climbs to launch the missiles. The RIM-161 is an anti-ballistic missile mounted on standard AEGIS VLS cells that has successfully intercepted satellites. 16-inch guns have been used on battleships for years. And with newer technologies, you don't need anything that dramatic, or that big. In the 1970s, the US experimented with an eight-inch gun mounted on a destroyer. That project didn't go very far, but it did function, and it means big guns can be mounted on small ships.
So, let me lay it out. F-15s(which people have considered using for aircraft carriers), conventional VLS cells, and cannons have precedent for being able to intercept spacecraft. Modern stealth systems do exist even for surface vessels, they can't hide as well, but they can carry a larger variety of weapons, and more powerful reactors than a sub. This creates precedent that modern destroyers, or something similar, and aircraft carriers, could serve a role in space warfare. As for surviving orbital bombardment? Super-cavitation is a process for reducing drag on a ship or a weapon's hull as it travels through the water. We also have hydrojets, hydrofoils, and other technologies that are deployed or in the works. Increasing the speed of a surface ship could be the difference between life and death for it.
A futuristic carrier group might consist of a carrier, smaller than ours perhaps, equipped with futuristic air-breathing aircraft, protected by destroyers and submarines. These destroyers are armed with energy weapons, missiles, and cannons capable of firing at targets in orbit. The submarines can do the same thing. The carrier can provide air support to land-based units and fire at the enemy in space without having to worry about needing specialized runways or that they might get hit in a first strike. The escorts can shoot at the enemy, provide gunfire support when needed, and light out at a hundred knots to escape the blast of an orbital bomb.
Now, there are certainly challenges. What warrants posting a large force like this on a planet that might not have any fighting? I'm not sure that is easy to answer, though one thought is to ask what's the point of the Kansas National Guard? They're not likely to see any combat anytime soon. On the other hand, navies in our world exist to fight potential threats. Depending on a setting, your colony world might only have one faction there. Having a trained naval force might be very useful for disaster relief and keeping the peace.
There's also reason for water-based Marines, with amphibious assault ships and all the bells and whistles therein; big transports, air cushion landing craft, helicopters, etc. What if the enemy lands across the continent? Or across an ocean? Might you need sea transportation? Imagine if you didn't have surface defenses. You have militia to play guerilla, and orbital defenses, and your colony only settled on one of two continents on the planet. The enemy blows up your orbital defenses, then steals some mining equipment and sets up a whole operation on the other side, eating up your planet's resources, sending them off to the war effort, while you're completely helpless because the biggest boat you have is a yacht. You can't fight back without being bombed, but you can't even fight back without that because you don't have any missiles, lasers, or any other weapons capable of hitting their ships, and more than that, you can't even get your four thousand militia over there to destroy the mine. A futuristic carrier group would make all the difference here, with access to amphibious assault equipment and other gear that can move in one go what could take months by helicopter.
One thing that keeps coming back in this debate is "but they could get bombed, why bother investing in them?" In the Cold War, trillions were invested in technologies they knew would get annihilated in any conflict. That a first strike could wipe out all our bombers and missiles in one stroke. And that is what second strike capability is about, the ability to hit back even if they hit you first. No matter how much you destroyed, no matter how many ships you sank, missiles you found, or bombers you shot, you could never ever be sure the enemy couldn't drop a hundred more nukes on you hidden somewhere. If even a single plane, a single fighter jet, with a single pilot, got through, millions would die. So much of modern warfare is based on the idea that this advanced weapon could easily be wiped out in a master stroke.
I submit that wet naval vessels are underutilized in sci-fi circles, and could be more useful than expected, as a mobile source of energy and firepower that's bigger than anything ever put on land, and demonstrate strategic mobility and survivability their maneuverability have an advantage no stationary installation can match. They can respond to threats all over a planet, and engage with the enemy in space. Like how nuclear weapons didn't end the age of the carrier, I doubt orbital bombardment would put an end to the sea.
Let me know your thoughts, or suggestions you have for using sea vessels in the context of space warfare!

Thanks for anybody taking the time to help answer.
My gas sedan is over 100k miles and I’m looking to be proactive so I can sell this current car with no issues. KN is toward the top of the list.
I have a family car for road trip or any other expected long range driving, so this would be for around town work and the longest I can imagine is a few times a month maybe driving to an office that’s 150 miles round trip. Sounds like this 210 (or 250 depending on source?) miles of range would be just fine. I have anxiety about having to charge outside the house, but would definitely just get a home charger. Is there a reason most people would charge away from home if they have the home charger? It’s cheaper and easier right?
For charging: what’s the best way to charge? Do I drive 30 miles during the day and plug it in at night to top it off? If I’m driving that on average a day, do I wait a week and then charge? Obviously days I know I’d be at remote office with the 150mi round trip I would charge the night before all the way.
It seems there is no “subscription” or “upcharge” for lane keep/adaptive cruise. It’s standard. How do you like this? I like adaptive cruise control on family vehicle, but does the lane keep allow me on highway driving to basically barely touch the steering wheel?
I know this car doesn’t qualify for the US tax rebate. Any regrets there? Haven’t looked at financing rates recently, but I’m planning on just buying a year or two old, used in cash. But low rate might change my mind.
Anything to look at for used in terms of battery life? A car under 20k miles has been my “used” rule of thumb in the past. Battery life should be basically the same as new at that point, right?
Anything else I should ask myself or anybody want to share? Thankful for any opinions.

Always lived paycheck to paycheck and spent a few years homeless despite working full time. At 30 I made a second attempt at college and succeeded. 7 years later I’m finally master level at that new skill and making money…comparatively. 30/hr. Maybe 2 more years I’ll be closer to 45/hr skill level. I have 35k in student loan debt and no retirement. Cheap apartments are about 1500 around here. It seems like I’m too old now to accomplish financial goals like property ownership and retirement income. I also wanted children but was never economically stable enough to even provide for myself. I also had embarked on a grey area endeavor some years ago with goal to catch up on future planning and purchase a house but the Feds seized my bitcoin wallet. At the time I got payments BTC was low, at 600-1000 or so each and I let it sit there. when it was taken the wallet worth half a million dollars. I claimed initial income on my taxes so it wasn’t IRS reasons they took it and I tried to argue less than 10grand of that was sales from alleged criminal endeavor, the rest was just smart investing. They took it all. I had unique opportunity to own a home. My grandmother passed away and the house wouldn’t qualify for a traditional mortgage because of health/safety. Her kids refused to entertain the idea of selling it to me without a bank involved… and themselves end up with more money long term with less tax liability. they just wanted a pile of money all at once as soon as possible and sold it to a corporation. They split about 120k 3 ways. Now that corporation rents it out for 3,500 a month.
At what point does a person just accept the world and economy is different than it was decades ago and live for today instead of missing out to plan for the future?

• Current cards: (list cards, limits, opening date)
  • Discover IT, $9800, August 2020 (mine)
  • Capital One Savor One, $10,000, November 2022
  • Discover IT, not sure, not sure (paid off in full) (husband's)
• FICO Score: Mine is 641, husband is 688.
• Oldest account age: 4 years, 8 months
• Chase 5/24 status: 1/24
• Income: $70,000
• Average monthly spend and categories:
  • dining $800
  • groceries: $500
  • gas: $200
  • travel: $0
  • rent: $1375
  • bills: $250
  • pet costs: $100
  • misc: $400
  • TOTAL: About $3500 give or take in expenses
• Open to Business Cards: No
• What's the purpose of your next card? Balance Transfer
• Do you have any cards you've been looking at? e.g. Chase Freedom Unlimited
• Are you OK with category spending or do you want a general spending card? No, it's just for a balance transfer.

We (me and my husband) are looking to do a balance transfer for my capital one card. Our total credit card debt is almost exactly $20,000. We have already paid off about $3000 this year so far to get to $20,000. I am in law school, he is a nurse. Our tentative goal is to have our debt paid off by December 2025.
Our monthly budget is not very helpful as I will be working and earning $10,000 (pre-tax) over 8 weeks this summer, almost doubling our income for those 8 weeks. However, I need to set aside $2000 for summer tuition (externship course gets me 2 credits). I really wanted to set aside $600-800 for a new riding helmet and $500 for my club dues for the fall. I also am considering setting aside $1,000-2000 for the patent bar preparation course. So anywhere from $3-5k (after taxes) will go to credit cards.
My husband gets a $3000 bonus (pre tax) in December 2024.
$10,000 of our debt is actually on my father's credit card, he generously did a balance transfer for us with an open card he had. We are tentatively planning on paying him about $300-400 a month, but not sure. The other card is the Savor One. It began accruing interest in March or April so we need to do a balance transfer on that ASAP to avoid more interest. That has a balance of $9000.
I do not know how much I will make with my job next summer, but it will be at least as much as this summer, if not more.
All of that to say, we are trying to budget better with YNAB, but our budget is not consistent for the next couple months, so we are planning on getting that better set up in August.
So considering all this generally.... (1) what card should we get that will allow us to a balance transfer as close to 10k as possible, (2) how much should we pay towards credit cards a month to reach our goal of December 2025, (3) should we close our empty Discover accounts or leave them open and not use them, and (4) should I or my husband apply for the new card?
Thank you! Once I am out of law school, money is going to be a lot smaller of an issue, but my husband's car is getting close to 20 years old and we really want to have our credit card debt paid off before his car dies and we need to take on more debt for a car.