As with most things, the opinions expressed in this post are my own. Consider this as just one data point, and not as a guide to your career.
I've been working in the Data/AI space for 5 years now and I've seen hundreds of starry eyed people wanting to work in A.I. because they want to work with the latest and coolest cutting edge technology. But I want to share with you a few reasons why A.I. is not a good career choice.

1. A.I. positions could end up like the "data scientist" position. Looking at the history of the data scientist position, in 2010-2020, the hype around data science made it so that millions of people flocked to that position. Companies eventually realized that most them actually didn't need data science, and the impact of the position didn't always help them profit. The demand of the job has plummeted in recent years, leaving millions of aspiring data scientists unemployed or needing to pursue a different career.
2. A.I. positions will be less than .0001% of tech engineering jobs. In the next few decades, the demand for software and data engineering roles will be much more needed at most companies that A.I. roles. Only a small group companies will a be pursuing A.I. initiatives, while the majority of companies will still need software and data engineers. But because 90% of tech news is A.I. related, there will be a massive influx of people trying to enter the space.
3. The barriers to entry are huge. To pursue a career in A.I. and machine learning. A person's understanding of statistics and software engineering need to be extremely high. To get to that level of knowledge requires much more dedication and studying than most people imagine. Becoming a decent software engineer or data professional is already difficult for the average person.

Before you decide to pursue this as a career, it's important to consider some of the cons listed below. Perhaps consider taking a smaller step first and trying to land a job as a software engineer or data analyst. If you're already in a technical field, consider not putting all your eggs into one basket, and making sure you know enough skills to stay gainfully employed in the job market.
​
**If you found any of this helpful, consider checking out a referral link. You get additional sign up and welcome bonuses. Signing up and using Rakuten for cash back is free!*\*

• Rakuten is a reputable website/app with millions of users that gives you up 20% cash back on popular stores like Nike, Target, and Petsmart
  • www.rakuten.com/QIANTE3?eeid=44971
• Banking/Investment
  • SoFi is a great online checking/savings bank that offers up to 4.9% interest on accounts(currently).
  • https://www.sofi.com/invite/money?gcp=d8903675-1661-40fb-8ff6-f87843aa727e&isAliasGcp=false
• Credit Cards
  • Amex: Gold: https://americanexpress.com/en-us/referral/PARRYC8P8N?XLINK=MYCP
  • Amex Plat: https://americanexpress.com/en-us/referral/HUIQITJbcu?XLINK=MYCP
  • Capital One Venture X: https://i.capitalone.com/J8Jn8yE0u
• Here I explain my favorite side hustle, step by step.
  • https://www.reddit.com/sidehustlemoney/comments/17jswev/how_i_basically_travel_for_free/

Edit: If you are going to comment on the length of this post, please don't. This is not a simple snark but rather an actual critical think piece about feminism and Taylor Swift.

Introduction

Pertaining to Taylor Swift, "Female Rage" has deviated from its intended meaning after Swift debuted a new performance of The Tortured Poets Department during the Eras Tour. Now, according to Swift's use of the phrase, female rage is interpreted as public backlash against Swift's dating choices rather than as a response to the broader injustices against women and women's rights. This post examines Taylor Swift's flawed feminism, philanthropy, branding, and the controversial trademark petition for the phrase "Female Rage: The Musical". Swift's background as an entertainer, indeterminate politics, and alignment with capitalism over feminism pervades her legacy, again threatening her public tolerance as not just an individual but as a brand.

Once Upon a Female Rage...

If you were cognizant in the early 2010's, you've heard countless jabs at Taylor Swift in the media. Magazines, radio, or online. Music critics did not take her seriously as a songwriter; parents put a woman on an unrealistic pedestal as the ideal role model for their children; she dated too much and used men as lyrical fodder. No matter the story, it inevitably spread, conjoined with everyone's respective opinions, and you'd be left to wonder, "Why does everyone hate this girl so much?"
Taylor's target demographic has always been young or adolescent girls, more so when Swift herself was one. She made music that spoke to the awkward misfit, cultivating a para-social relationship with fans on MySpace, then later twitter, Instagram, and YouTube, where Taylor posted relatable vlogs showcasing the life of a homegrown American girl. Taylor had a delayed public "growing up" and, compared to her female pop contemporaries, Swift never "gratuitously sexualized her image and seems pathologically averse to controversy" (and, apparently, never even had a sip of alcohol until she turned 21). She was more than happy to spin this narrative to allude to an inherent moral superiority above other women in the industry (Better Than Revenge, heard of it?), engaging in the very slut-shaming that she herself endured (the Madonna and Whore archetypes). The victim complex arose with the need to prove Taylor as a different type of pop girl. Based upon her holy and clean image, Swift had been dubbed "a feminist's nightmare", and that "[To Swift] other girls are obstacles; undeserving enemies who steal Taylor’s soulmates with their bewitching good looks and sexual availability." Feminism and Tennessee-Christian country values don't exactly mix, it seems.
Years later, Swift befriended Lena Dunham and thus experienced white feminism osmosis, where Dunham taught Swift that real feminists defend rapists, makes insensitive jokes about rape and abortion, and prioritize all-white casts. Swift then declared herself a feminist in 2014, saying,

"Becoming friends with Lena – without her preaching to me, but just seeing why she believes what she believes, why she says what she says, why she stands for what she stands for – has made me realize that I’ve been taking a feminist stance without actually saying so."

I suppose the male-centric songwriting subject that permeates Swift's discography contained covert feminism and that we just didn't see that. Perhaps, the "Bad Blood" song and music video were written only in jest and not about poor Katy Perry, for Swift, as a feminist, would "never make it a girl fight" or tear other women down (though all Katy did was date your terrible ex-boyfriend and allegedly steal three backup dancers from your tour). In 2013, Swift said, in response to Tina Fey and Amy Poehler's joke towards her serial dating, "There is a special place in hell for women who don't help other women."
There was that time in 2015 Taylor said that Nicki Minaj was "invited to any stage [she is] on" (as if Taylor expects to have access to every stage, award, and platform that Nicki might not otherwise have as a black female artist...yikes!) in response to Nicki's criticism of the white + thin VMA nominations. Later, Nicki responded with confusion, as Swift continued, "It’s unlike you to pit women against each other. Maybe one of the men took your slot..". Of course, this 'beef' was 'squashed' when Nicki performed with Taylor at the VMAs, with Nicki quite literally only having 38 seconds of stage time without Taylor. Maybe all that parading around with a legion of famous white women - similar to the way Taylor might've done with her numerous 1989-era handbags - was in fact a stance against gender inequality, and that this display of "girl power" should be enough to constitute Swift as a feminist icon.
Even while Swift says that Dunham informed her feminist outlook, she dances around the exact contents of those beliefs: "what she believes, what she says, what she stands for" is not exactly insightful towards what beliefs Swift might have inherited. Taylor never broaches women's rights topics such femicide, FGM, forced pregnancy & marriage, sex trafficking, women in slavery, women's financial and political oppression, women's educational rights, women's health, or women's autonomy, so we can assume she only gives a fuck about "girls supporting girls" (whatever that fucking means).
Despite some questionable (and sometimes vindictive) behavior, Taylor as a young woman did not deserve every media lashing that she received. We cannot deny that most headlines and criticisms perpetuated a misogynistic rhetoric which has plagued Swift for a majority of her career. Acknowledging events such as the development of her ED, her sexual assault trial, "Famous" lyric and MV depiction of Taylor, and the explicit Twitter deepfakes, for example, as both disgusting and unfortunate things that happened to a young woman in Hollywood does not negate the fact that Taylor is mostly a performative feminist.

Get Your Fucking Ass Up and Be a Philanthropist, It Seems Like Nobody Wants to Be a Philanthropist These Days

In 2013, Taylor Swift cut the ribbon at the grand opening of the Taylor Swift Education Center at the Country Music Hall of Fame in Nashville, Tennessee. The donation amount - $4 million - was the largest individual artist gift ever donated to the Country Music Hall of Fame, which is, of course, mentioned on Swift's website. The two-story facility features three classrooms, an instrument room, and an interactive children's exhibit gallery. Swift also performed at "All for the Hall" charity shows and has donated numerous artifacts from her career (such as notable guitars, tour costumes, etc) to the museum.
This was over 11 years ago, and it is still the only notable philanthropic contribution Taylor Swift has made.
For a woman of her net worth and stature, and a woman who recognizes the difficulties for women in film and music, you would think that Taylor Swift might establish a scholarship program for women to study the arts or something. Perhaps Swift might even consider becoming a member of organizations that support female artists, or one that supports LGBTQ+ causes (since she is now proudly an ally), yet she remains superficial with her graces. Broader philanthropy, such as donating relief aid to Palestinian women or women impacted by violence and discrimination will probably never receive any financial support from Miss Swift because then she'd be using her money towards philanthropies involving anyone but white entertainers.
She even says herself in Miss Americana, "My entire moral code as a kid and now is a need to be thought of as 'good'." Well, she's certainly thought of as good, though her actions say otherwise. She's more than happy to do a vaguely altruistic song and dance for a clip-worthy interview quote and mass appeasement, then fuck off to one of her mansions on a 20 minute private jet flight, rather than actually contribute to anything pertaining to the causes she has endorsed. Yet, far too many people continue to give a woman such as her their money, time, and energy, and she hoards these resources to herself.

I Like Some of the Taylor's Songs, But What the Fuck Does She Know About Feminism?

Swift continued with her self-proclaimed feminist campaign, positioning herself as a political activist and LGBTQ+ ally in the Miss Americana documentary. The primary focus of the documentary consists of the sexual assault trial, Andrea Swift's cancer diagnosis, Taylor's ED and body dysmorphia, media scrutiny, and, largely, finally speaking up about her politics publicly, mostly her opposition to the 2018 Tennessee Republican senate candidate, Marsha Blackburn, and Blackburn's beliefs. Swift says, following a scene discussing her experience during the trial,

"I just couldn't really stop thinking about it. And I just thought to myself, next time there is any opportunity to change anything, you had better know what you stand for and what you want to say."

We must ask ourselves, though: when has Swift ever spoken up to change anything? Okay, pulling her entire catalogue from Spotify because they didn't pay their artists enough and similarly pulling her catalogue from Apple Music are changes that she leveraged due to her revenue potential and power, but they are not pertinent to the average woman's rights. Moreover, these are issues that directly impacted Taylor's income, which was enough reason for her to protest in the first place. Swift has sold the most units for a female artist in first week sales, is the first female artist with 100k monthly Spotify listeners, is the first female artist to win the Album of the Year Grammy 4 times, and is the first female artist to do X, Y, and Z, all while being inoffensive and family-friendly to boot. The actual Taylor Swift seems unwilling to compromise the brand of Taylor Swift by contributing in meaningful ways to feminist causes, especially if it is for women outside of America and Hollywood.
The reason political anthems such as "The Man" and "Only the Young" of the Lover era feel disingenuous and corporate is because, well, it is. Taylor has taken every opportunity to advance her career or public image at the expense of other women. What is truly genuine to Taylor's outlook on other women is vying for male attention, taking down female competition, and vocalizing feminist injustices only if they directly impact her and her money. Some will argue that it's satisfactory for a woman with such a huge platform to even TALK about feminism, but that just isn't enough. It's even less impressive when you candidly look at the scope of her feminist lens: "If I was the man, then I'd be THE MAN", or "I really resent the ‘Be careful, buddy, she’s going to write a song about you’ angle, because it trivialises what I do", and, of course, "We all got crowns". Feminism, but only when it happens to me. It gets worse when you look at Taylor's track record of copying other famous women and removing other female artists as potential threats to her pop prowess.
It's good for PR to align yourself with certain blanket feminist and political beliefs, therefore good for branding, therefore good for ticketing and merchandise sales, therefore good for business. And Taylor Swift is a business.
She's not a feminist. Taylor Swift is a capitalist.

I Can't Pay Those Sweatshop Workers a Livable Wage or Benefits! How Else Would I Make My Billions?

Recently, Taylor's team filed to trademark the phrase "Female Rage: The Musical" after Taylor said during Paris N1 of the Eras Tour,

"So you were the first ones to see The Tortured Poets at the Eras Tour...or as I like to call it, 'Female Rage: The Musical'."

This trademark petition was filed last week on Saturday, and news comes about just as numerous unofficial fan-made merch designs have cropped up with this phrase plastered on Fruit of the Loom basics. I'm of the opinion Swift's team motioned for a trademark so that they can send out cease & desists to all those that make knockoff merch, which disrupts potential sales for Bravado, UMG's choice merchandising company; however, since it was filed earlier, perhaps Swift has bigger plans with the bizarre use of the gendered phrase. One Swiftie referred to the phrase "female rage" as "a funny Eras Tour joke". Could it be a possible fourth version of the Eras Tour Movie? Whatever the reason, the motion to capitalize off of such a concept is disgusting, but not unsurprising, for a woman that profits on her vain feminism.
Swift, through her company, TAS Rights Managements, has also trademarked over 200 phrases, including "1989", where she owns the property rights to this calendar year on keychains, phone cases, sunglasses, stationary, bags, beverage ware, clothing, entertainment services, your subconscious, and, of course, Christmas ornaments.
The vapid consumerism in Swiftie culture is, frankly, disgusting. Bravado's sustainability statement is non-existent, the quality control is abysmal, and the materials they use are horrible. The materials, such as acrylic and polyester, are made from petrochemicals. This means they are non-renewable, shed microplastics, and are quite toxic in production. The manufacturing process to make all of those lazy-rushed Eras Tour logo graphic tees is a huge blow to environmental well-being. Apparently, though, Swifties don't give a fuck. They sell out products in seconds and either have to face the manufactured scarcity or buy from a scalper that resells for 200% of the already ridiculous retail price. This doesn't include the environmental impact of vinyl records, CD, and cassette production, of which Taylor produces many variants that sell unsustainable amounts.
If we're talking about women's rights violations, why is no one acknowledging the women that work in the inhumane sweatshop conditions that have to pump out fugly t-shirts and hats? The millions of plastic microfiber dander they are inhaling, or the toxic dyes that touch their bare skin? Are they being compensated fairly for their skilled labour and are they in safe working environments? Do these women have minimal bargaining power, and do they have authority over their worker's rights? Is Taylor Swift female raging at their injustices? Does Taylor Swift ever feels bad that her wealth was built on the backs of women of color, disadvantaged by the demands of the global economy and garment industry? Do you think she ever says a little white feminist prayer for them before she goes to sleep at night?
What's even crazier is not that Taylor herself doesn't care, it's that Swifties don't care. There CANNOT BE ethical billionaires. You only make a billion dollars if you are exploiting other human beings for capital gain. Based on public perception of the possible "Female Rage: The Musical" trademark, it seems like Swifties are already asking for merch with this phrase. "If Taylor made it, I'd buy it." Oh, cool. So not only do you champion Miss Swift's avarice and billionaire status, but you also are unashamed to admit to your blind consumption of her music and merchandise, no matter where they might originate in production or sincerity. Just as Swift takes and takes and takes, Swifties' consumerism of Taylor Swift cannot be quelled.
The tortured artist's most vulnerable and sincere poetry...available now in 21 different versions!

I Am Tortured Poet, Hear Me Whinge

Look - even if Taylor's intention is to characterize TTPD as more "tortured" and "angry", the main thread of the album is "I was ghosted by my decade-long situationship with a controversial indie boy and my fucking stupid fans wrote a 'Speak Up Now' open letter prompting me to drop him" anger, which is adequately expressed in the lyrics and performances. The extent of Taylor's "female rage" on TTPD is on tracks such as "Who's Afraid of Little Old Me?", which contends with relentless media scrutiny; "But Daddy I Love Him", where Swift firmly states she'll date whoever she likes no matter how "Sarahs and Hannahs" may react; and "The Albatross", a track mythologizing her reputation and the consequences of dating her. Of course, these coincide with deep psychological wounds that formed during Swift's early years in the media, and so, from her feminist perspective, these subjects tackle the misogyny and double standards that she faced.
Yet Taylor Swift still has no grounds to be claiming that TTPD best exemplifies female rage and therefore she, in the context of this album, is female rage incarnate. As the daughter of a stock broker and mutual fund marketing executive, Taylor was born into wealth and allowed privileges like trips and subsequent relocation to Nashville all so that she might get a record deal. Her father even invested at least $120,000 into the then-fledgling label, Big Machine Records, which ensured Taylor's place with Borchetta after leaving her dead-end development deal with Sony. The fact that her parents were able to buy her a fucking brand new guitar for Christmas and pay for music lessons says so much about the financial security and safety of her childhood.
Money is privilege and protection, and despite Swift's experiences with misogyny and loser boyfriends, she does not know what female rage is.
Her rage is derived from her frustrations with her obsessive fans pulling the moral superiority card on Taylor in response to her rebound with Matty Healy. That's literally it. She's just pissed that the monster she created is no longer obediant, it's become a feral, sovereign entity that depletes the world of its natural resources and thinks it is more intelligent than it actually is because it's mommy has started to talk to it with big words. Apparently, 'illicit', 'elegy', 'nonchalant', and 'precocious' are considerably big words for the oafish monster, and I find it strange that this level of literacy is present in a group of fans that allegedly have GPAs of 3.5 or higher, but I digress.
Taylor Swift has never been one paycheck away from destitution. Taylor Swift has never experienced racial discrimination. She may have instances of gender discrimination, but she possesses the ideal white, blonde American beauty standard and therefore reaps the benefits of being a conventionally attractive woman. Taylor Swift has sufficient social capital. Taylor Swift is a billionaire woman prolonging her victimhood though she, as a woman, has mostly had control over her image and music (unlike her contemporaries). Taylor Swift is NOT entitled to be championed for her "female rage", nor should she be. Taylor Swift has never even been the struggling artist, for fuck's sake. I don't give a fuck if she's trying to fill the empty lunch tables of her past. Taylor Swift purporting herself, her unpolished album, and her lukewarm feminism as a musical bleeding with female rage is asinine.

Sigh Try and Come For My Job, Poors

Out there in the world right now is a 23-year-old woman, a recent college grad, who works as a barista. She has to wake up and get ready to go into a minimum wage job because she cannot get a job in her field. She doesn't have healthcare benefits or sick time, so she has to go into work no matter how she's feeling. All day long she is berated by vicious customers and creepy men, and, exhausted from being on her feet, she knows she has to go home to her shitty roommate that never does the dishes and her roommate's shitty dog. To comfort herself, she considers getting a treat, but thinks against it when she remembers that matcha lattes cost $15 and they taste like milky dirt. She knows that she needs to buy groceries this week, and so the woman resolves to go home, but notices that her gas tank is low. She goes to put gas in the car, but the pump stops at $27.86 because that's all that she has in her checking account. The woman, bereft and reeling, sinks into the driver's seat. "Well," she thinks, her head in her hands, "at least I don't have Taylor Swift's job. I just couldn't imagine."
Fame is somewhat of a choice. If at any moment Taylor feels that she is misunderstood, misconstrued, or overwhelmed by public opinion, she can LEAVE the public eye - Lord knows she has the retirement fund and residuals to do so. In "I Can Do It With a Broken Heart", the TTPD song about meeting the demands of your career-zenith mega-tour while in the relationship trenches, Taylor ends the song by rambling,

"You know you're good when you can even do it with a broken heart...you know you're good...and I'm good, cause I'm miserable, and no one even knows!...try and come for my job."

Yeah, obviously we wouldn't know, you recently passed the billionaire threshold and are the most famous and in-demand performer in the world right now. Taylor Swift makes an estimated $10 to $13 million dollars A NIGHT on the Eras Tour. Furthermore, the Eras Tour movie grossed $261.6 million globally, (which, as the producer, Taylor takes home 57% of the ticket sales) not counting the streaming revenue from Amazon Prime Video and the estimated $75 million deal that Disney paid to have it on Disney+. We're not even considering the income from cheap plastic popcorn buckets and drink cups plastered with colored squares in her Era-specific likeness.
It's funny. Taylor Swift often said that being famous wasn't hard, that she "isn't complaining". I'm sure it is difficult to always have to present in a good mood, else you'll end up misrepresented in the media, and I'm sure it's invasive to virtually have no privacy or semblance of anonymity. Still, Taylor Swift shows up each night of tour and performs. For a majority of her career, she has penned her sad songs while on the road. Most of "Red", her breakup album, was written in the thick of the Speak Now World tour. Now, some Swifties say they almost "feel bad" for attending the Eras Tour with Swift's revelations in this song, that they have had a 'dimmed experience' upon hearing Taylor's misery whilst performing. Despite the fact that Taylor said that "this was the happiest she's ever been" at Gilette Stadium in May, the lyrics "boohoo, woe is me, smile for the cameras and make the fans happy!!!" are jarring for Eras attendees.
While Taylor Swift was making double-digit millions a night in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and feeling miserable, Ana Clara Benevides Machado passed away due to heat exposure. The concert promoters, Time For Fun, are now the subject of a criminal investigation due to their lack of adequate hydration and safety. Taylor Swift cancelled the Sunday show that was to follow and offered VIP tent tickets to Benevides Marchado's family, which was a kind gesture, but perhaps incongruous to the incident of which they were offered as consolation. Everyone grieves differently, of course, but I'm not sure attending the very show at the very same venue that my daughter or sister passed away in two days prior, where the singer CONTINUED the show despite her death, would be healthy for closure.
There was no female rage at the show as Swift never saw Benevides Machado pass out. There was no female rage towards the disregard for fans as humans while Swift elected to proceed with her Brazil tour dates despite the country being in historic heatwaves (at risk of overheatting herself). If Taylor Swift was so shaken by touring with a broken heart or a fan's passing, she wouldn't have added an additional North American leg of Eras just two months after the Matty breakup. She's brokenhearted but willing to mend the cracks with your money and move onward with her worldwide female rage induced pillaging.
No matter what happens, even if you die at a Taylor Swift concert, Taylor collects a big fat check and flies away. She doesn't know you as anything other than a conversion rate or earning potential despite what her nearly 20-year long parasocial relationship with fans might otherwise indicate. She knows that, while some Swifties are without disposable income, they feel obligated to spend on a "48 Hours Only!" exclusive vinyl variant instead of necessities because they are so entrenched in Taylor Swift's intoxicating celebrity, they'll prioritize materialistic fandom before their needs. This is good enough for her because this means she can expand her real estate portfolio and finance her cat's lavish lifestyles. They're worth an estimated $100 million dollars. Her three cats could pool their net worth and solve world hunger.
While you and I might be denied bereavement leave and barely surviving the current political and economic climate, Taylor Swift has to, instead of gets to, perform for stadiums at full attendance for three nights in a row across the globe. You and I might be replaced by AI at our longtime jobs, but Taylor Swift is threatened with losing more and more money each time you listen to a "Stolen Version" of her songs. If we don't buy every variant of all of her albums, then who is going to pay for the fucking cats?
It is tone deaf to spend as she spends and lives as she lives in this economy, but this is her reality. She was able to donate $100,000 to all of her tour truck drivers, and that's wonderful, but it leads me to wonder about the ethos of the 2020s where one woman can hoard such life-changing amounts of money. Remember in 2014 when she gave a fan $90 ($120 in today's money) to get Chipotle because she had no fucking clue how much it cost? This is a 34-year-old woman who is increasingly out of touch with the reality for working class people and women in general. Normal everyday adults must wake up and go to their thankless jobs, and yet Taylor Swift, despite all her riches, incessantly references the lows of her life and career as a public figure and entertainer to farm sympathy and drive sales. And still, the corporate women have latched onto "I cry a lot, but I am so productive! It's an art!" as their cubicle battle cry.
Do you think that, from up in her private jet, Taylor Swift gazes at the world through her poetic, tortured eyes, and thinks, "All the little people, in their cars, walking, going about their lives...all those girls that don't support girls...do they know that I've made an album about female rage?"

Conclusion/TLDR

Thank you for reading. I would love to hear your critical insights towards this entire ordeal: TTPD, the trademark, the implications of it all.
TLDR: Taylor Swift is a bad feminist and is delusional to think that the TTPD eras set exemplifies female rage at women's injustice.

To preface this post, I want to give the disclaimer that like many things, there is not a black and white answer the question. I'm writing this as an experienced tech professional, and the information provided is based on opinion.
To start with. A little bit of history..
The golden age of software engineering(and similar jobs) is over. At least for the next 5 - 10 years. I don't think this is an unpopular opinion. The reason why between the years of 2010 - 2022, these jobs exploded, was because of the boom of the internet for commercial and personal use.
This is different from the dotcom boom of 2000s, where the internet was just starting and most of the products being created were for basic things like: putting banking on the internet, putting videos on the internet, etc.
The boom in the 2010s was related to the widespread popularity of commercial and personal products. Things like Uber, Spotify, and Salesforce. With the sudden increased usage of the digital world, there were MILLIONS of companies rushing to create digital products.
However, we're starting to see the rise and fall of some of these products, millions of startups failings, and less VC funding. In case you don't know, VC stands for Venture Capital, which are basically investment companies that give money to other companies to help them grow and develop, in return for partial ownership of the company.
As the industry began to mature, successful companies started to emerge, and many more started to fail.
The present day..
Software engineering and like jobs will continue to be important, and there will be a high demands for these engineers. Nearly every company will still need a website, a place to manage their data, and people to manage their hardware. BUT.. the basic technologies they need to run their company will become more efficient. AND there will be less research and innovation because the a lot of the trial and error already occurred.
We're in a weird spot where the demand for workers is now decreasing from it's recent peaks, and the supply of workers is now increasing because of how all the benefits of being a software engineer in the past decade.
This has really unfortunate consequences for any recent graduates or others trying to break into the tech field. There are WAY more beginning career people than jobs available. Which is made even worse with the amount of layoffs there are, where mid-level employees are now having to settle for entry level jobs.
What can we do?
I have two pieces of advice for people interested in the topic, or wanting to break into the field but can't. Try breaking in from a adjacent field, where you can get some exposure to tech. Things that data entry, analytics(this can be finance, supply chain etc). Then try to learn as much as you can from the tech people at your company.
The second piece of advice. Go into a different field. Software engineering is not for everyone. You have to learn and understand some relatively complex topics, and it's becoming harder and harder to be competitive in the industry. Healthcare, supply chain, and many other industries are booming right now.
Understanding history, you can see that certain industries will rise and fall. For the near future, technology might be one of the harder careers to break into. Something like healthcare would be that's expected to grow exponentially. The average population of the world is getting older, as less and less people are wanting to have kids. There will be higher demand for healthcare professionals and healthcare technology.
Do your best to review and understand these trends, and hopefully you can create a good life and career. Best of luck!
​
**If you found any of this helpful, consider checking out a referral link. You get additional sign up and welcome bonuses. Signing up and using Rakuten for cash back is free!*\*
​

• Explaining why travel hacking is my favorite side hustle, along with step by step instructions.
  • https://www.reddit.com/sidehustlemoney/comments/17jswev/how_i_basically_travel_for_free/

​

• Rakuten is a reputable website/app with millions of users that gives you up 20% cash back on popular stores like Nike, Target, and Petsmart
  • www.rakuten.com/QIANTE3?eeid=44971
• SoFi is a great online checking/savings bank that offers up to 4.9% interest on accounts(currently).
  • https://www.sofi.com/invite/money?gcp=d8903675-1661-40fb-8ff6-f87843aa727e&isAliasGcp=false

Hey everyone, amidst the thousands of rants, in light of Nick's movement, I think it's time for me to say something, maybe no one cares, I don't have a major platform to get my word out, but I still think that it's good to get these things out here and perhaps the best thing all of this can do is change the way we perceive the game as a player base. This will be long, so those of you willing to, bear with me.
Let me tell you something from a point of view of someone who loved the game for a long time. We're a bunch of very versatile people from all over the place and maybe it can also teach us a lesson or two. On one hand, you have kids who play it for the same reason I played it some good 15 years ago, and you've got us, the older players, who loved the game for what it was growing up because it was the best football themed game out there in many aspects, although FIFA entries weren't the only good thing about that era (shoutout to PES 2006 and 2010). It's a game that I used to enjoy because I love football as a sport, I used to play it basically on a professional level, this is the best "active" form for me to engage with the game. I'm probably too stupid for Football Manager though I believe it's only a matter of watchin a few videos to get into it and understand the in-depth mechanics. I always tried playing it and got lost in the menus within 5 minutes. But for what it's worth, I understood FIFA, I understood FUT and the shell of what it once was, the grind was fun to me, using players from past and present that I like, well, until it all got burned to the fucking ground within a year. I was never an Elite div or Rank 1 or even Rank 2 player. But I had certain results, I would get 9 to 11 wins most of the time and with enough free time I could always climb to atleast div 2 in Rivals. Sure, many of you are better and I realize that, but it's not about that. To me it was always about getting better at the game for myself, on my own terms, there would be some progression to it and getting better throughout the years always made me happy. Adult life is adult life and it's very individual, some of us have more free time on our hands, others don't. In my case, I barely have time to do my daily play matches, some SBCs and play Champs on the weekend because of work.
But the question is - how can I consistently enjoy the game if:

• a) every single thing and tactic that I figure out, gets nerfed within a few months - and I'm not talking about ratty shit, I'm talking things like finesse shots, trivelas, some useful passes, just gameplay stuff
  
• b) they don't do shit to fix broken things in-game, like OP cutbacks, I came to peace with them, but still, it's too OP, or doing things to somehow nerf or balance situations when people pass between the GK and CB from the 70th minute onwards. Idk how many of you were around when they banned Kurt, but they pulled up a whole statement about policies regarding in-game toxicity for building towards a fun experience for everyone, yet they don't do shit with the game itself.
  
• c) the game itself wants you to feel bad about your gameplay and even tries to pass off DDA as skill issue. Of course, at times it really comes down to your skills, but how often do you hear the commentators praise you? At times even when you're leading, they keep repeating how it's a matter of time until you concede an equalizer. You know those graphics on the pitch itself? The win probability stuff. It shows up only when you're losing, even if you are let's say one goal behind and it's the 65th minute, they'll show you a whole statistic all over the fucking pitch, telling you that you have a 2% chance to win the game. To demoralize you. To make you feel like you need to keep upgrading and upgrading and upgrading and once you run out of fodder and luck, to go dump your money into store packs. And even that doesn't help you, the pack weight is shit, you just get quick fodder for unreasonable money, and the theories that spending money on the game improves your gameplay, it's all bogus. To put it simple, if you achieve something, you will not see anything positive. No congratulations screen, just infographics, but when you do something bad, God forbid, you will get fact-bombed about how shit you are. From a psychological point of view, this game is toxic to it's core and it's very, very, very unhealthy for one's mental health. If you're an adult, trying to relax after tons of stressful shit in your daily life, this is not the place for proverbial relaxation. If you're a kid who's going through your teen years, those years are stressful for many reasons and once again, this cannot possibly help you. I hold no grudge towards many players as I am aware that many players are very young (less than 18) and perhaps that generation is simply like that and there's nothing we can do about it. I'm talking only about FUT, I believe that Pro Clubs are probably way more lighthearted and fun and I treat Career Mode which has been abandoned, as a separate game basically.
  
• d) Obvious gambling issues. Enough has been said. I am one of the minority in thinking that there is nothing wrong with buying a pack here or there if you're an adult and if it doesn't impact serious aspects of your life. If you earn money, it's entirely up to you how you spend it. Some people like fine dining and dump money on food. Some people collect stuff and dump money on collectibles. Some people overspend to impress their s/o. So, in theory, there is nothing wrong with spending money on or within a game as a concept. But what is wrong is how it works in this game in particular. You get new packs over and over again, the store is full of things to spend money on, but the core game itself is neglected gameplay-wise. Content is okay, SBCs are okay, with exchanges and stuff, it's really good actually. I am one of those who actually enjoy both the menus and the gameplay itself, equally. All of it is a part of the experience. But you have really bad things going on with your games and the only thing that you do as a dev is dump packs? And even those packs, the pack weight is absolute shit, it's turned into a casino, a slot machine, because it's all rigged towards you ending on a loss, thus having the psychological effect of you not getting your dopamine shot of packing something nice, often you're not in a situation to buy another one, so this will linger in the back of your head, that you didn't complete the process and you need to see if next time you'll finally get something good. Or, you bought it with coins and now you lost a good amount of coins, so you think of buying the next one with FP, or even worse, you can afford it and you just successfully gave them twice the intended amount of money. This is a serious, self-destructive behavioral pattern, take it from someone who has some education in a field very close to all of that. Teach children that and you can legitimately ruin their lives. Say, if you knew what you're getting, exactly what, or atleast if you knew that there is a smaller pool of what you can pack, or guaranteed something for a symbolic amount of money, I'd say it is what it is, since we truly do live in an era full of microtransactions and that's just something that's a part of online gaming nowadays. The bad part is overspending on something that will just not reward you anyhow or grant you any sort of benefit. Even games with battle passes have better options in this regard. You're getting better progression in exchange for a symbolic amount of money.
  
• e) The game itself doesn't work properly! You're getting DNFs left and right, you can't even navigate through SBCs and your club without the game freezing multiple times. EA keeps fucking up with "unintended rewards" first it was Messi, I did the SBC, got nothing, life goes on. Several times I had issues where objectives didn't count, whatever, life goes on, it's a game. Or some rewards got bugged and fucked me over multiple times, whatever, life goes on. This most recent L1 red pick stuff, that was honestly the last straw, not even the fact that I didn't get them simply because I have a life and don't camp in front of my console each Friday to sweat my ass off for the very start of the Champs Finals, but because they finally spilled the beans, told us we were never supposed to get good cards out of it with a decent percentage and on top of that, they ruined the small amount of fun I had playing with Paletools between meetings at work (by that I mean killing the droprate and nerfing pack weight).
  

The whole situation is very stupid, because there is no viable alternative in terms of football games, and frankly, playing FIFA is a habit and something I've been doing for one half of my life. It's tough for me to get invested into an online competitive game, though I used to play League, Overwatch, stuff like that, but those games became shit over the years as well. That's why, though I'm only one of way too many, from my point of view, my actions bear some value, because as of today, I just don't want to feel like shit because of a game anymore atleast on a weekly basis. As things stand, dumping my time into this game is simply pointless. If I want to play Weekend League, I'll get shat on by the servers, or the gameplay will be horrendous and my cards will feel like freezers getting dragged across the pitch by a rope. Cards with great finishing, will feel like bronze cards, whatever. We're not supposed to get good rewards, and the game will call us out for being "bad" when we get DDAd. At this point, there is nothing positive about it. I will perhaps return for Futties, not that anyone cares, but building fun cards is kinda fun and good, so I'm looking forward to that. Otherwise, I will return only if all of this actually changes something. If the assholes from EA release a statement and actually change something, then I will return earlier, and even then, I'm not giving them a single euro this year. And maybe, for the first time in way too many years, I won't even preorder, maybe I'll play it later on, if it turns out to be better and different. Other than that... there's no point playing if the game is like this. I'm done with feeling negative emotions because of a game designed to gaslight and manipulate us into feeling like shit.
Sorry for the long post, I guess I just felt like I needed to tell someone.

The global inflation trend
Recent data shows inflation slowing slightly in major economies. Though the downtrends of inflation seem to emerge in areas like the US, it still remains above the target of 2% set by central banks. According to the IMF, global inflation rate is forecast to 5.9% in 2024 and 4.5% in 2025. Even as it declines steadily, consistent high inflation globally remains a primary concern for the economic and market outlook.
How does it impact investors?
As for Investors, they are usually not huge fans of inflation since high inflation shrinks the buying power of savings and assets. Your house and real estate holdings become less valuable. The bonds you’re holding are less favorable. As high inflation continues, wealth preservation is a real thing and investors should take it seriously. Without proper management, pensions and long-term savings plans also face inflation risk. That’s why finding investments that outpace inflation has become critical for protecting your wealth.
How to protect and increase your wealth against inflation
Several ways of investments can inspire investors to adjust their portfolios and generate returns against inflation.
· Contracts for difference (CFDs) trading: CFDs allow investors to profit from price movement without owning the underlying assets. Investors with high-risk tolerance can profit whether markets rise or fall and potentially make significant returns during inflation.
· High-yield savings accounts: Earn higher interest than traditional accounts by exploring different options and finding the best rates.
· Reallocate bonds: During high inflation, readjust bond holdings to equities. For example, 35% of the S&P 500 is in tech and communication sectors, which are capital-light businesses. Generally, they tend to outperform during high inflation.
· Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities (TIPS): TIPS are a type of bond designed to adjust in value based on inflation so returns keep pace with rising prices.
· Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs): REITs offer higher yields than bonds and growing income streams through rents and leases. Unlike real estate, REITs are more liquid investments and normally their prices are resistant to inflation.
For safe, secure CFD trading, JRFX can be one of the options among investors. Founded in 2010, JRFX is a regulated online broker offering a wide range of trading assets and advanced trading tools. With 0 commission fee, competitive spreads, and 24/7 customer support, it empowers investors to explore their potential gains and provides an effortless trading experience. The transparency, the ability to deposit with $1, and the accessibility via desktop and mobile app make it one of the best user-friendly trading platforms.


Trading CFDs carries a degree of risk, and it may not be suitable for all investors. It is essential to conduct thorough research, seek professional advice, and understand the risks involved before engaging in any investment activity.

Hi guys, I’m here to share my thoughts and experiences about my addiction. Since 2010, I’ve been fapping to porn on the Internet. I remember that I was a really innocent kid without knowledge about what a real relationship is, so I watched many videos throughout my life and jerked off.
I grew up with low self-esteem and negative thoughts about my social skills with girls. Through this frustration, I started watching videos of Julien Blanc, and at one point, he shared the book by David Hawkins. I’ve known about Hawkins' literature since 2016.
Right now, I’m still using porn and fapping to escape the negative feelings that come when I think about girls not liking me. However, I’ve had relationships with pretty girls who loved me, but my insecurity about myself led to breakups, and I ended up in the same place—trying to find a girl who likes me. But let’s be honest, desire and ego are behind it all.
I’ve used apps like Tinder to try to meet a girl, but those apps encourage users to invest in subscriptions to get likes. So I feel frustrated because no pretty girl likes my profile. I go to the gym and talk with some buddies, but I feel scared and anxious to say hi to a girl that I like. Maybe she is not interested in me, but I think it would be cool to talk about something without trying to flirt.
In the last 10 months, I’ve let go of those emotions, and it has really helped me because I feel comfortable in some situations. However, the energy behind girls, sex, and porn is really huge, and sometimes I feel really sad because I don’t know when those feelings will stop.
I really appreciate the time you spent reading this post. If you have any advice or recommendations, I would be grateful.

I just got my bond back which was deposited all the way back in 2010 as I was in a very long tenancy.
I deposited $715 and got back $715. With not a cent of interest.
Checking the ATOs inflation calculator, $715 in 2010 is worth about $1000 in 2024, so effectively I've lost almost $300.
Where did that money go? Presumably the government invests the bond money it holds, it doesn't just sit there doing nothing, and it nust be a very nice income stream for the state budget considering how many folks rent, so why aren't security deposits adjusted at least for inflation?
If a taxpayer ever owes the government any money you can bet your very last dollar it will definitely always be inflation adjusted.
I realise that my situation is out of the ordinary and it's probably not very high on the list of priorities given the extent of the housing crisis, but it's just one more example of people, the very government which is supposed to look after us in this case, profiting from the crass exploitation of powerless tenants.

The abundance of dwarves, humans, and elves in The War Within thus far has ignited a whole new wave of debate across WoW social media on the supposed faction favoritism of the devs. This is a tale as old as time. Whether it was BfA showing "Horde favoritism" by repeating the Horde-centric story of MoP where the Alliance are just sort of along for the ride of a Horde rebellion, Legion showing "Alliance favoritism" for the prevalence of humans, elves, and draenei throughout its core themes, or hell, how BfA's "Horde favoritism" wasn't the "favoritism" the Horde needs because it makes them out to be irredeemable monsters regardless of player input, so BfA was actually "Alliance favoritism" and round and round it goes.
So now we come to TWW and the arguments have started up all over again. But both sides of this debate tend to overlook what exactly is going on with the story, and in the process being vocal about the wrong kind of problems with the storytelling that need to be addressed. What's been happening isn't any kind of faction favoritism. It's race favoritism.
The only playable races that get consistent advancements in story from expansion to expansion are humans, orcs, and elves. Anyone else typically spends their time waiting around for the devs and writers to glance in their general direction and hopefully toss them a crumb of content. A patch that uses their race's aesthetic. Possibly even an expansion that puts them at the forefront. And they just have to pray that whatever story they are given is good, because they won't be getting any more for years after. Otherwise we get something like the retaking of Gilneas: A story Worgen players had been begging for since Cataclysm that ultimately ended up being incredibly short and barely focusing on the Gilneans at all.
Generally what this means is that a race will suddenly get that aforementioned crumb of story, only to be surrounded by people of the opposing faction calling out faction favoritism, when the race in question has not had any story in years. It's happening currently with dwarves. TWW is finally doing something with story threads that were sewn and then left to dangle all the way back in Cataclysm. Dagran is no longer an infant. Dwarven politics are being explored. And a new tribe related to the dwarves is at the forefront of marketing. Again, this is the first time since Cataclysm that dwarves have been given anything to work with, but their role here is being decried as "Alliance favoritism" as if the dwarves had been getting story all along.
Often even when the story would theoretically be most suited to a certain non-human/orc/elf race, we will get new lore making them fit in, or otherwise attach a main character of those races to the story so that players don't get too "lost." The return to Argus, the home of the Draenei, should have been a huge deal for Draenei everywhere. And Velen himself was prominent. But we didn't really get any other Draenei stepping up to play major roles in this Argus storyline. Instead, we reintroduced Turalyon and Alleria. Turalyon is now the leader of the otherwise-Draenei group known as the Army of the Light. He actually is the one who introduced Elekks to their army. Meanwhile Alleria's connections to the void take center stage in Eredath: The zone that is the former main hub of Draenei civilization. Or look at TWW. An expansion entirely underground calls to mind none of the three "main" races WoW likes to focus on. Instead, it makes sense to shift the focus to dwarves, goblins, gnomes, and also other non-playable races. But a whole expansion not focusing on the faves of the writers is unthinkable, so we have to introduce Hallowfall: An underground civilization of humans, elves, and half-elves who have immediate ties to the main plot and quickly take over the focus of the story from the Earthen and Kobolds of the first two zones. Notably, every press release on TWW has said Anduin and Alleria are the main characters of the expansion, not Moira, Dagran, Magni, Gazlowe, or others.
It's also worth noting how the only allied race leaders who have consistently gone on to appear in important story roles after their introduction are the humans and elves. Turalyon and Alleria continue to be important, while Captain Fareeya (I'm sure you're asking "Who?") still has yet to get a defined personality. Thalyssra of the Nightborne immediately went on to play a major role in the Naz'jatar zone of BfA, and has since married Lor'themar, while Mayla occasionally shows up with glazed over eyes to say "Hey, Baine is pretty cool, right?" Talanji actually got a book after BfA, but then disappeared in the actual game in the following expansions. Her appearance in the background of the first TWW trailer turned some heads, only for it to be revealed that she was a placeholder for a new race that seem to be more tied to the Night Elves than anyone else.
There are a few different ways in which an underutilized race can get a story boost:
1) Human/Elf/Orc ties:
Often times we'll start to see a race appear more if they are given explicit ties to one of the three races I talked about. Genn Greymane did appear in many stories beginning with the Legion expansion, though none were really about the Worgen people or Gilneas. Genn himself prefers to stay in his human form, and he is far more invested in Anduin's story than the plight of his people for most of his run as a recurring character. The retaking of Gilneas saw Genn even abdicate the throne to his daughter, Tess, who does not even have a Worgen form. I would not be surprised if Gilneas became a much more prominent part of the story moving forward now that their figurehead is more human. Notably Darius Crowley, someone who is very important to Worgen lore, consistently stays in his Worgen form, and is canonically the leader of the effort to retake Gilneas from Cataclysm to Dragonflight, has been on the bench since his debut and was not even included in the ultimate culmination of his work.
Or how about the Forsaken? Most Forsaken story was not about them, but about Sylvanas Windrunner: An undead High Elf who by virtue of plot is able to not have any visible rotting or traditional Forsaken traits on her body. When BfA and Shadowlands happened, there was some hope among Forsaken players that future Forsaken story could actually be about the average undead, only for them to immediately be tethered to Calia Menethil, another undead who by virtue of plot is able to not have any rotting or traditional Forsaken traits on her body. And we all know how much people love Calia.
2) Complete separation from their race:
Sometimes a character from a race not usually focused on will rise to main story prominence, but only because they no longer have strong ties to their race. Therefore, they can get some story without having to also advance the story of their race. We've already talked about Genn staying in human form most of the time and acting as Anduin's advisor, but he's not the only example. When Magni returned as the "Speaker of Azeroth," there was no shakeup in dwarven society to address. The only place we actually saw some acknowledgement of the shakeups this could cause was in a short promotional comic for Legion where he wakes up, tells Moira he won't want the throne back, and leaves. From Legion to now, Magni has not had a hint of a connection to his people, and we're only now addressing that in TWW.
Baine's biggest roles in the story never have anything to do with him being a leader to his people. Instead, it's when he needs to play the diplomat to Jaina and Anduin. The uncertain foil to Sylvanas or Garrosh. Baine, and the Tauren as a whole, exist as supporting characters in stories not their own. In fact, there's a long history of races only existing to prop up the story favorites. They had to write into the lore that Gelbin Mekkatorque specifically chose to ignore his own people's plight and support the wider Alliance in the hopes they'd one day return the favor. They never have.
3) The story of their debut expansion is focused on them:
Finally you sometimes get an expansion that is dead set on tying its new playable race to the story of its expansion. I speak primarily of the Pandaren and the Dracthyr. Two races introduced in expansions focused on the introduction of their people to the Alliance and Horde, and the problems erupting in their homes. Unfortunately, as we saw with the Pandaren, the buck stops there. Once Mists of Pandaria ended, so did any drive to tell the Pandaren's story. They have remained playable. They remain able to occasionally appear as a background NPC who is drunk or something because that is the one characteristic they're now known for. But any focus on them as a people is gone. Time will tell if the Dracthyr will see the same fate once Dragonflight officially ends, but I don't like their odds.
Conclusion:
All of this is to say, I hesitate to paint with a broad brush and declare something like "Alliance favoritism" or "Horde favoritism." Because that would be to ignore how stagnant the stories of so many of the races in those factions have been for so long. To ignore that Dagran, the supposed next ruler of a united Dwarven people has only just now graduated from a generic baby dwarf model despite being introduced in 2010. To ignore that Gazlowe was casually handed leadership of the Bilgewater Cartel with one line of dialogue while humans and orcs get whole expansions dedicated to a transfer in power. To ignore that "For Gnomeregan" has been the battle cry of a still homeless Gnome population since Vanilla WoW. To ignore that the Draenei, introduced in 2007, are finally confirmed to be thinking about building a new home in our current year of 2024.
I'd like to believe things have changed. I'd like to be excited that Dwarf storylines are being told at the start of Khaz Algar, and there is seemingly setup for a Goblin-centric patch in our future. But I know this franchise's history.

As with most things, the opinions expressed in this post are my own. Consider this as just one data point, and not as a guide to your career.
I've been working in the Data/AI space for 5 years now and I've seen hundreds of starry eyed people wanting to work in A.I. because they want to work with the latest and coolest cutting edge technology. But I want to share with you a few reasons why A.I. is not a good career choice.

1. A.I. positions could end up like the "data scientist" position. Looking at the history of the data scientist position, in 2010-2020, the hype around data science made it so that millions of people flocked to that position. Companies eventually realized that most them actually didn't need data science, and the impact of the position didn't always help them profit. The demand of the job has plummeted in recent years, leaving millions of aspiring data scientists unemployed or needing to pursue a different career.
2. A.I. positions will be less than .0001% of tech engineering jobs. In the next few decades, the demand for software and data engineering roles will be much more needed at most companies that A.I. roles. Only a small group companies will a be pursuing A.I. initiatives, while the majority of companies will still need software and data engineers. But because 90% of tech news is A.I. related, there will be a massive influx of people trying to enter the space.
3. The barriers to entry are huge. To pursue a career in A.I. and machine learning. A person's understanding of statistics and software engineering need to be extremely high. To get to that level of knowledge requires much more dedication and studying than most people imagine. Becoming a decent software engineer or data professional is already difficult for the average person.

Before you decide to pursue this as a career, it's important to consider some of the cons listed below. Perhaps consider taking a smaller step first and trying to land a job as a software engineer or data analyst. If you're already in a technical field, consider not putting all your eggs into one basket, and making sure you know enough skills to stay gainfully employed in the job market.
​
**If you found any of this helpful, consider checking out a referral link. You get additional sign up and welcome bonuses. Signing up and using Rakuten for cash back is free!*\*

• Rakuten is a reputable website/app with millions of users that gives you up 20% cash back on popular stores like Nike, Target, and Petsmart
  • www.rakuten.com/QIANTE3?eeid=44971
• Banking/Investment
  • SoFi is a great online checking/savings bank that offers up to 4.9% interest on accounts(currently).
  • https://www.sofi.com/invite/money?gcp=d8903675-1661-40fb-8ff6-f87843aa727e&isAliasGcp=false
• Credit Cards
  • Amex: Gold: https://americanexpress.com/en-us/referral/PARRYC8P8N?XLINK=MYCP
  • Amex Plat: https://americanexpress.com/en-us/referral/HUIQITJbcu?XLINK=MYCP
  • Capital One Venture X: https://i.capitalone.com/J8Jn8yE0u
• Here I explain my favorite side hustle, step by step.
  • https://www.reddit.com/sidehustlemoney/comments/17jswev/how_i_basically_travel_for_free/

Hey you guys, I could really use some advice. I've had my 2010 Audi for about 7 years now and I just paid it off last year. Unfortunately I got the common oil leak issue and had ton deal with a shitty mechanic a few months ago who apparently only temporarily fixed the issue. Now im faced with a $7,000 bill to basically rebuild the engine and replace my turbo as well. Im thinking long-term this would be a great investment to just keep maintaining the car and to avoid financing a new one which in the end would cost me more. I really love this car, its my first Audi, and it's been good to me overall. Should I continue to invest in her or get rid of her? Below is the breakdown of the bill 🥲 :
​
3 - Engine Oil TECH: J Sioch
Note: Severe oil leaks from several areas, including rear vacuum pump assembly front upper and lower timing covers oil filter housing and turbo assembly. codes
range from system lean, multiple misfires, and under boost conditions. smoke testing engine reveals severe leaks from multiple spots including rear main seal,
timing covers, oil filter housing, oil pan. coolant leak from rear heater hose assembly as well. turbo charger has play on waste gate assembly. there is also no boost
felt and when using scan tool, demanded psi is not reached. technician suspects failure between turbo and wastegate. best options for this vehicle is to remove
engine to perform full reseal and turbo replacement, then rerun for possible fuel smells.
Labor:
Remove & Replace Long Block. Consists of a Cylinder Block fitted with Pistons, Rings,
Connecting Rods, Crankshaft and all Bearings, Cylinder Head(s), Camshaft(s), Timing Chain or
Belt and Sprockets or Gears.
Includes (where applicable): Clean and transfer Fuel and Electrical Assemblies, Engine Mounts,
Manifolds, Valve Cover(s), Oil Pan, Oil Pump, Timing Cover(s), Water Pump, Clutch and Flywheel.
Adjust Valves.
22.38 hrs $2,887.02
walnut blast intake valves 1.00 hrs $149.00
Parts: Engine Timing Cover 1 $156.95
Engine Crankshaft Seal Kit 1 $126.46
Engine Crankshaft Seal Kit 1 $46.54
Engine Intake Manifold Gasket 1 $63.85
Vacuum Pump 1 $403.30
Engine Oil Filter Adapter Gasket 1 $29.17
Engine Oil Pan Gasket Set 1 $45.54
Engine Oil Pressure Switch 1 $40.86
, Aluminum Engine Water Pump 1 $427.73
Borg Warner, OE Replacement - 100% New, Upgraded Design Turbocharger 1 $1,737.99
Mahle Turbocharger Mounting Gasket Set 1 $116.14
Fuel Injector Seal Kit 3 $116.73
Engine Crankcase Vent Valve 1 $349.00
Fuel Injector Seal Kit 1 $44.00
Vacuum Pump Gasket 1 $41.62
, Molded HVAC Heater Hose 1 $200.00
APPROVE or DECLINE Subtotal $6,981.90 + est. Tax $453.82 $7,435.72

Boys, I want to hear any and all reactions to this. Mind I live in NYC.
once upon a time the Everyman could go out at night and practice the dark arts of game, befriend many people, get some numbers, get some kisses, and maybe even take home a pretty lady. While this is still possible, I believe that the era of night game essentially ended with Covid, after a slow multi year decline.
Today, night game is a fools errand. Women will entertain attention, but in my observation, and experience, it is rare for them to leave their girlfriends and go home with a guy. Any girl that just wants to get smashed is going to open up bumble rather than leave her friends group on a Saturday night. Even if you're doing literally everything right and she's into you, the barriers are just so great. And it’s also not as common for a phone number to convert to a date. So many phone numbers I get now lead absolutely nowhere.
There are many forces at play here. And I think we all know what they are so I won’t even go there. Notably, I'm not hopping on the doomerist bandwagon about "the end of dating" or whatever we see on youtube. While this may have a bit of truth and even relevancy, I'm trying to observe and discuss what I believe I see happening on the ground in nightlife. I’ve been in the field in and out for 15 years now. And I seen some things. While things have improved n some ways, I’d say overall it’s shittier for the median male today in nightlife than early 2010's. So much so that I’m calling the end of night game.
Even with with the relative increased success of East Asians and Blacks today, the bias towards literally any average white dude in Nyc is jaw dropping. It’s honestly shocking how easy any basic white guy in Nyc has it, but I digress. Still relatively hard for South Asians imo, surprisingly.
Maybe I’m just old and worn out, maybe. But I’m throwing in the towel on night game. It’s just no longer a good time investment. Open to ideas on how to reposition myself.

Hey everyone 32 Male here, debating going "back" (Did 1 semester after high school lol) to college.
I enrolled in my local community but now I'm extremely lost what to do from here, I reached out by email but basically just got a response saying I need to register for a "placement" test.
The thing is I graduated in 2010 and have never even had to *Think* about ANYTHING I learned in high school.
My parents owned a jewelry business I got into immediately after school, my father has since passed away, I now run everything. Its been good to me but I'm bored, over it, don't like the overhead costs of everything weighing on my head. Plus at the end of the day I'm really only walking away making $120,000-$150,000 at best. I'm tired of being capped at this amount and want the opportunity to grow more, work for a company, remove the overhead stress, etc...
Fast forward to today, I in no way, shape or form feel ready for any kind of placement test? But how do I even begin to prepare? the closest thing to schooling I've done since high school was flight school getting my private pilot last year, fun times, hard work, at least I know I'm capable to still learn, but zero clue what or how I should be studying for school?
Not even really sure what kind of business aspect I would like to get into but it would HAVE to be able to make more than where I am at now for it to even make putting any effort / time into this. Otherwise there is zero point and I may as well keep at what I'm doing.
So far I have debated :
Coding / Cyber security
Finances / taxes / investments
other than these options I'm pretty lost to be completely honest.
My plan in my head is to complete community then transfer to a true 4 year and get an associates / bachelors knocked out?
Thanks... appreciate the help.

Hi guys, 21 years old this year looking to dip my feet into ETFs. Some investment goals i have would be Saving up for a house & renovation, getting a car and having enough for monthly expenses and ultimately, FIRE.
Some info about me:

1. Non-US resident
   
2. Investing horizon to be 20 - 25 / 30 years
   
3. Risk tolerance not that high yet as I've never done this before
   

I'm looking to put in approx. 370 USD every month into VOO & QQQ (ratio) *VOO* because of it's low expense ratio (0.03%), high AUM (1.1T), high trading volume (avg. 5.7M) so high liquidity in case im looking to sell if i need cash urgently. It's past performance of 14.00% since inception (2010) is also a good track record imo.
Although it was a hefty expense ratio of 0.20%, I would like *QQQ* due to it's potential for long-term growth seeing it's 10y is 18.10% but since inception 9.48%. (Why the lower % compared to VOO tho?) Similar to VOO with it's high AUM and high trading volume.
I would like to ask a few questions with regards to what is typed above:

1. Are my choices ok for long-term investing of 20 - 25 / 30 years but of course having to cash out here and there for other investment goals mid-way while maintaining majority of my positions.
   
2. I am more tuned towards 'popular' etfs that has an established track record as i'm rather sensitive when it comes to $$$.
   
3. Should i choose QQQM over QQQ or would QQQ be okay for me? Yes i know that QQQM has a lower expense ratio but i feel like QQQ would be right for me due to it's trading volume.
   
4. Is it ideal for me to set up an auto invest plan that spreads out my monthly 370 USD into a daily recurring buy in the spirit of DCA. Or would it be better for me to buy bi-weekly / every month-end (before ex-dividend date to claim some dividends even though 30% is gone due to withholding tax)
   
5. Do y'all have any tips or anything else i should look into when it comes to ETF research as it's kinda confusing for me since im new. Right now, i do know of some parameters to look out for like expense ratio, AUM, trading volume, the fact sheet with info like the top holdings, sectors invested in and most importantly, performance (%).
   
6. Any recommendations for ETFs to add into my portfolio. I value total returns over dividend but I'm open to any!
   
7. VOO and QQQ's fund overlap by weight is 46%, is it too much?
   

Yes i do know past performance do not indicate the future but it serves as a good benchmark at least.
VOO and QQQ are some of the most famous and also favorited ETFs by many so i thought it would be good for me to get into since it's tracking reputable indexes with their top holdings are companies I can get behind of.
THANK YOU FOR READING IF YOUVE MADE IT THIS YEAR ❤️😊 Would appreciate if yall can help me with the questions I have and if possible, , leave some advice for a young one going into the world of investing and FIRE. Many thanks lads!

Hi guys, 21 years old this year looking to dip my feet into ETFs. Some investment goals i have would be Saving up for a house & renovation, getting a car and having enough for monthly expenses and ultimately, FIRE.
Some info about me:

1. Non-US resident
   
2. Investing horizon to be 20 - 25 / 30 years
   
3. Risk tolerance not that high yet as I've never done this before
   

I'm looking to put in approx. 370 USD every month into VOO & QQQ (60/40?) *VOO* because of it's low expense ratio (0.03%), high AUM (1.1T), high trading volume (avg. 5.7M) so high liquidity in case im looking to sell if i need cash urgently. It's past performance of 14.00% since inception (2010) is also a good track record imo.
Although it was a hefty expense ratio of 0.20%, I would like *QQQ* due to it's potential for long-term growth seeing it's 10y is 18.10% but since inception 9.48%. (Why the lower % compared to VOO tho?) Similar to VOO with it's high AUM and high trading volume.
I would like to ask a few questions with regards to what is typed above:

1. Are my choices ok for long-term investing of 20 - 25 / 30 years but of course having to cash out here and there for other investment goals mid-way while maintaining majority of my positions.
   
2. I am more tuned towards 'popular' etfs that has an established track record as i'm rather sensitive when it comes to $$$.
   
3. Should i choose QQQM over QQQ or would QQQ be okay for me? Yes i know that QQQM has a lower expense ratio but i feel like QQQ would be right for me due to it's trading volume.
   
4. Is it ideal for me to set up an auto invest plan that spreads out my monthly 370 USD into a daily recurring buy in the spirit of DCA. Or would it be better for me to buy bi-weekly / every month-end (before ex-dividend date to claim some dividends even though 30% is gone due to withholding tax)
   
5. Do y'all have any tips or anything else i should look into when it comes to ETF research as it's kinda confusing for me since im new. Right now, i do know of some parameters to look out for like expense ratio, AUM, trading volume, the fact sheet with info like the top holdings, sectors invested in and most importantly, performance (%).
   
6. Any recommendations for ETFs to add into my portfolio. I value total returns over dividend but I'm open to any!
   
7. VOO and QQQ's fund overlap by weight is 46%, is it too much?
   

Yes i do know past performance do not indicate the future but it serves as a good benchmark at least.
VOO and QQQ are some of the most famous and also favorited ETFs by many so i thought it would be good for me to get into since it's tracking reputable indexes with their top holdings are companies I can get behind of.
THANK YOU FOR READING IF YOUVE MADE IT THIS YEAR ❤️😊 Would appreciate if yall can help me with the questions I have and if possible, , leave some advice for a young one going into the world of investing and FIRE. Many thanks lads!

To preface this post, I want to give the disclaimer that like many things, there is not a black and white answer the question. I'm writing this as an experienced tech professional, and the information provided is based on opinion.
To start with. A little bit of history..
The golden age of software engineering(and similar jobs) is over. At least for the next 5 - 10 years. I don't think this is an unpopular opinion. The reason why between the years of 2010 - 2022, these jobs exploded, was because of the boom of the internet for commercial and personal use.
This is different from the dotcom boom of 2000s, where the internet was just starting and most of the products being created were for basic things like: putting banking on the internet, putting videos on the internet, etc.
The boom in the 2010s was related to the widespread popularity of commercial and personal products. Things like Uber, Spotify, and Salesforce. With the sudden increased usage of the digital world, there were MILLIONS of companies rushing to create digital products.
However, we're starting to see the rise and fall of some of these products, millions of startups failings, and less VC funding. In case you don't know, VC stands for Venture Capital, which are basically investment companies that give money to other companies to help them grow and develop, in return for partial ownership of the company.
As the industry began to mature, successful companies started to emerge, and many more started to fail.
The present day..
Software engineering and like jobs will continue to be important, and there will be a high demands for these engineers. Nearly every company will still need a website, a place to manage their data, and people to manage their hardware. BUT.. the basic technologies they need to run their company will become more efficient. AND there will be less research and innovation because the a lot of the trial and error already occurred.
We're in a weird spot where the demand for workers is now decreasing from it's recent peaks, and the supply of workers is now increasing because of how all the benefits of being a software engineer in the past decade.
This has really unfortunate consequences for any recent graduates or others trying to break into the tech field. There are WAY more beginning career people than jobs available. Which is made even worse with the amount of layoffs there are, where mid-level employees are now having to settle for entry level jobs.
What can we do?
I have two pieces of advice for people interested in the topic, or wanting to break into the field but can't. Try breaking in from a adjacent field, where you can get some exposure to tech. Things that data entry, analytics(this can be finance, supply chain etc). Then try to learn as much as you can from the tech people at your company.
The second piece of advice. Go into a different field. Software engineering is not for everyone. You have to learn and understand some relatively complex topics, and it's becoming harder and harder to be competitive in the industry. Healthcare, supply chain, and many other industries are booming right now.
Understanding history, you can see that certain industries will rise and fall. For the near future, technology might be one of the harder careers to break into. Something like healthcare would be that's expected to grow exponentially. The average population of the world is getting older, as less and less people are wanting to have kids. There will be higher demand for healthcare professionals and healthcare technology.
Do your best to review and understand these trends, and hopefully you can create a good life and career. Best of luck!
​
**If you found any of this helpful, consider checking out a referral link. You get additional sign up and welcome bonuses. Signing up and using Rakuten for cash back is free!*\*
​

• Explaining why travel hacking is my favorite side hustle, along with step by step instructions.
  • https://www.reddit.com/sidehustlemoney/comments/17jswev/how_i_basically_travel_for_free/

​

• Rakuten is a reputable website/app with millions of users that gives you up 20% cash back on popular stores like Nike, Target, and Petsmart
  • www.rakuten.com/QIANTE3?eeid=44971
• SoFi is a great online checking/savings bank that offers up to 4.9% interest on accounts(currently).
  • https://www.sofi.com/invite/money?gcp=d8903675-1661-40fb-8ff6-f87843aa727e&isAliasGcp=false

Not sure if this is a sensible place to share my politics essay- please delete/remove this if so. Please feel free to use this in regards to benefitting your revision on political parties and feel free to give advice/opinions (this is an A scoring 24/30)
Evaluate the view that the current conservative party has moved away from Thatcherism? (30)
Thatcherism is a marriage of neo-conservatism and neo-liberalism which advocated for a strong force on law and order, free-market coupled with laissez-faire economics and privatisation. However, under Boris Johnson’s government, the tory government has diverged away from thatcher’s economic view as Johnson advocates for more state intervention which contradicts thatcher’s position.
Firstly, Thatcherism held a negative view on trade unions claiming that they negatively effected the economy due to the fact that workers could unify and strike which was seen to harm the economy. The passage of the Trade Union Act (1984) was seen as a way to tackle this issue by making it harder for workers to strike. One could argue that under Johnson’s government, it contradicts Thatcherites ideology as Rishi Sunak announced a £170 million investment package in 2020 to help boost and stimulate economic growth and establish the furlough scheme (£69 million to prevent unemployment). This was part of Johnson’s ‘levelling up the north’ scheme in which it aimed to reduce the divisions between the rich and poor. This aligns with one-nations ideology of an organic society to try and reduce the ‘distance’ between the rich (south) and the poor(north). This contradicts Thatcher’s view that ‘unemployment should be left to market forces’ which highlights that the tory government has shifted from Thatcherism. Moreover, Sunak’s passage of increasing NI tax to 1.25% (historically high) would help to invest into health and social, this its evident that Johnson’s government favours an interventionalist state/government and huge amounts of welfare spending which diverges from Thatcherites ideology as she calls for a minimalist state interference and that people would become ‘dependant’ on the state.
This could be seen as a weak government due to the circumstances-Covid-19. Prior to Covid, the Tory’s manifesto promised to not raise NI, VAT and income tax which aligns with the believe that people should conserve their money which proves to carry on Thatcher’s legacy in keeping tax low. Had there been no pandemic, it could be argued that the Tory’s would move to a more new-right ideology. Furthermore, in 2010, Cameron introduced the idea of a welfare reform via the passage of Universal Credit which he claimed people would be better off in employment and not benefits which led to benefits caps and the ‘bedroom tax’ which tackled the idea of social housing tenants having more rooms/space than needed. This supports the idea that a welfare state creates a dependant society. So, one could suggest that due to Covid, it forced the Tory’s to come up with a short-term response via the furlough scheme as without it, many businesses would fail and create a poor society which would create a ‘dependant society’. So, it could be argued that the Tory’s stance on the state is intertwined with neo-liberalism and one nation as the party wants to decrease corporation tax to boost economy (mirrors Thatcherites) but taxes on lower incomes are too high which will create poverty and lead to a dependant culture. This is evident via Sunak reducing corporation tax from 20% to 19% which is seen to carry on Thatcherism’s ‘legacy’ but due to the high public spending, it highlights that the tory government favours a one-nation stance which is evident in the ‘levelling up’ scheme.
Another factor in which the Tory party has seem to diverged from Thatcherism is the idea of (neo-conservatism) strong forces on law and order to impose social morality. Dominic Raab made plans to repel the HRA to give more power to the government to choose when rights should be upheld (mirrors with neo-conservatisms) as the sentencing policy should be in the hands of the elected government and not the unelected judiciary. This is evident in the introduction of the (2021) Police, Crime, Sentencing and Court Bills which limits the freedom to protest- this act allows for protesters to be ‘shut down’ which emphasises the idea of strong police powers which mirrors neo-conservatism. Moreover, in the 2017 and 2019 manifesto, the Tory’s pledged to alter the HRA with the introduction of a bill of rights which would assert dominance over domestic control and legal matters and national threats like terrorism (the idea that the HRA has been abused and is a proxy for crime and terrorism. However, this could be seen as a weak argument as the party-gate scandal which included numerous MP’s like Johnson and Sunak which is seen as a breach in ministerial code and sets a tone for a weak and lawless society. Lastly, another point in which the current conservative party is a continuation of Thatcherism is the fact of the party being Eurosceptic which ultimately led to Brexit.
In conclusion whilst it may seem like on the economy, the most important aspect of Thatcherism, that the conservatives have moved away from her ideals, in reality this is only a temporary situation. It is clear that the party still remains wedded to her principles.

TLDR: I tried to keep this short, it was impossible. A very brief summary: My son is almost 15. I have had physical custody (legally) since he was a baby. My ex-husband sees our son every other weekend from friday around 4-6, until sunday morning. My son does not enjoy going to his dad's house for several reasons (which I think are valid, although I would never tell my son i think they are valid - I really try to build his father up to him). We live in NY, and the price of living has gotten to a point I simply cannot afford it. Child support does not even cover my sons grocery bill. I am getting a sizeable, but not massive, inheritance from my Nan who passed. It is not enough to do anything here, but in NC, where my brother and his wife live, I can put a down payment on a small home or townhouse.
EVen though I had always had our son 97% if the time, and my e x does NOT want custody --- what are my options court wise? Is there something I specifically file for the right to do (move? Had anyone heard of a court forcing someone to stay in an area when visitation with other parent is minimal?)
am so sorry such a big post....
I will try and keep this as unbiased (because trying to plead my case to look the best doesn't help me at all with advice) and as quickly as possible, and in advance, thank you so much for reading, and hopefully give me any advice. I want to move from NY to NC in July to be close to my family, and because honestly - it is just too expensive here. I am getting a small inheritance, but it is enough to put a downpayment on a house in NC. While my ex-husband initially agreed, and he said it was up to our almost 15 year old who he wanted to live with (which was me, since he has always lived with me) today he told me he wanted to go to court.
I had my son in 2009, and I left his father in 2010, when our son was five months old. I left the marriage because my then-husband was emotionally abusive.
After I left, I did not hear from my ex-husband for several months. Then my MIL got in touch asking to see my son, which I, of course, instantly agreed to. Over the next 5 months, my ex-husband started to interact with our son by way of his mother inviting him over when she had our son. I had no issue with this.
Then I got served papers, in which my ex-husband wanted visitation set up. I had no issue with this. My ex-husband did not go for custody, rather visits every other weekend and 2-3 hours once a week. I did not go after spousal support, and accepted $85 a week in child support, despite knowing my son was owed way more, in hopes he would take this a gesture of peace and spend more time with our son.
We lived right down the street from each other, and I did try and push my ex-husband to spend more time with our son so they could bond, but outside of every other weekend (many of which he spent with my ex's family) he asked for no additional time.
I legally have physical custody, his father has visitation Friday evening through Sunday morning bi-weekly. (I can not stress enough how I have never, ever withheld time with our son - I consistently tried to set things up outside of the limited visitation he requested.)
He got remarried when our son was small. When our son was in kindergarten I got a call that I had to come to the school right away. I got there ASAP and they told me the police were coming, and that my son had indicated being touched inappropriately. Long story short - CPS got involved, and requested a restraining order against my ex-husbands wife. Apparently, what we learned over the next year in court was that she has physically restrained my son in front of family by putting him in a "body lock" and in front of my exes family had also disrobed in front of my son. When my sister in law went to hide my sons face, my ex-husbands wife laughed and said, "Oh he's seen me naked lots of times." The court decided he had not been sexually touched (I also don't think she touched him, I just think she overstepped in HUGE ways - especially because I have never, ever used any type of physical force on my son OR taken my clothing off in front of him). CPS was the one that took her to court, however, as his mother I also had to be present. No matter what I say - my ex-husband and his wife think I did this. I am not sure why, it says right in the paperwork that it was the school that alerted the police, who in turn alerted CPS, who got this case brought before a judge. It had literally nothing to do with me. But the fact that all of this happened has made his wife incredibly demeaning towards me when speaking to my son. My son remembers her restraining him, and when his dad asked him why he didnt like his wife, my son said that she scared him. When his dad said, "What can she do to make you feel better?" My son said, "I think if she apologized to me that would help." She refused to apologize, and says she did nothing wrong. So my son, and she, dug their heels in - and they simply do not get along.
My father passed 3 years ago in July, and I took care of him, as he did hospice at home. Shortly after that, my Nana had a serious stroke, which caused pretty advanced dementia. She was in a nursing home right away, and our family asked if I would be willing to move 45 minutes away and care for her. In return, I would receive some money in her will the other grandchildren would not be. I said yes, although I would have without the added incentive of the money. My ex agreed to my moving, with our son, 45 minute away, when i explained that at the end of this - I would have enough for a small down payment.
My Nana passed last July.
I will be receiving around $50,000.00 at the end of June. I live about 30 minutes north of NYC, a standard high ranch here starts at $850k. I can not afford this. Up by ex-husband, homes in a decent school district, start at around $325k, I also can not afford these.
My brother and his wife live down in NC. It is absolutely beautiful, and I love it there. I also take care of my physically disabled mother, and she lives with me. It would be such a benefit to have help from my brother and his wife with my mom should there be any type of emergency.
My son is very intelligent, he tests in the high 90th percentiles, and does all of the extracurricular STEM activities. He loves coding, robotics, science, etc. My brother is very high up in the tech field, and would be such an incredible person to be in my son's day to day life. The school in the district we are moving to is absolutely outstanding. I would be able to put a down payment on a small house that I would own, and be able to put on the line for my son to attend college if I needed to. I can also finish college there, as I did not finish college as I was scouted to model while in college and I took that opportunity, then got married, and had my son. Until my father got ill and coid hit, I ran my own business (wedding florals) which was enough to care for him and myself. When Covid happened, there was no work as there were no weddings. Then my dads health took a turn and I cared for him, and then my Nana. Now -- we are here.
My ex does not want my son to attend college, as he does not feel it is fair for him to pay child support if he is in college (he does not out right say that is why, but through many conversations' about our son post-high school its become pretty clear why). He is pushing trade school endlessly with my son. My son has never bonded with his dad, and simply becomes frustrated, because he does not want to be a plumber (for some reason that's what his dad pushes) he wants to work in the sciences, specifically research. UNC is under 9k a year if you live in state, but over 35k coming from out of state, its a very solid college.
I told my ex several weeks ago that I wanted to move to NC, and the many reasons why it made sense. He initially understood, and said he would be upset not to see his son regularly, but that he understood my reasoning. He agreed that I had done a wonderful job raising our son, and that he was intelligent, kind, empathetic, had never been in any kind of trouble, and overall - is a really great kid. We talked about flying him back to NY in the summers.
Then my ex-husband said, "Well, I have other options here. Why doesn't he live with my Dad and my sisters? Dad retired, he has time. That way I can still see him every other week."
I said, "I think removing our son from me would be traumatic to him. I have been the day-to-day constant in his life. He is who he is because from day one I have put him, and his priorities first. Also, thats a big ask of your family - raising a kid is a massive investment of time and money. I don't think that is a feasible option, Are you saying that YOU would like to raise him?"
At first he said no. Then he said it was a possibility. I brought up that his school district has had several stabbings this year and a school wide "brawl." (The schools words, not mine.) His school district has a massive issue with gangs, and our son is just about the whitest kid with the least amount of street smarts you would ever meet. He was in this school district, in the middle school when I lived in that town, and he was in AP classes, so was pretty insulated, he kind of travelled from class to class with the same 60 kids that were in AP classes. But his last week there, he was grabbed by his sweatshirt and repeatedly thrown into a bank of closed lockers. He isn't sure why, nor was the administration.
So, my ex-husband said that he would go by what my son decided. He said, "Well, he is old enough to have some input on this. Let's talk to him." We brought our son into the conversation, and my ex-husband went through the options, "You could move very far away with Mom, and I wouldn't get to see you, OR you could live with Papa and the Aunties - and the other option is you could live with me and my wife."
Our son was clear on not wanting to attend the school in my ex-husbands district, and said that if he couldn't live with me, he guessed the next best thing would be Papa's, but that he wanted to stay with mom.
Then today, I heard from my ex, saying he wanted to go to court. After we spoke this is what I walked away with:

1. Because a handful (maybe 5 or 6 times?) of times in my sons life, visitation was not possible- he says I withhold our son. I take great offense to this, as I feel I spent years begging him to see our son more. Our son has chronic staph infections after almost dying at 4 years old from going septic with MRSA (I am not sure how he caught it, he came back from an overnight with his dad and his chin was swollen 6x its normal size). The ONLY time I have said he can't go is when he either a. In the hospital for several days b. JUST out of the hospital and in bed sick/recovering or C. When the doctor calls in the creams and antibiotics and prescribed bed rest. When our son is sick, he wants be at home, in his own bed.
2. He does not want to go to court to obtain custody of our son. He simply does not want me to leave.
3. When i explained I really could not afford to live here anymore, and that it would require him helping me out on the difference from a 1 bedroom to a 2 (for our son) he said absolutely not. (the home I currently renting is being sold this summer, I have looked around and prices have risen so high, that a studio in the school district is over $2,000. A studio. And i have my mom here too.)
4. His family is not willing to finish the raising of our son. I did speak with them about a week ago to let them know we were moving, and they were absolutely thrilled, despite being sad they would not see our son as regularly, As my SIL said, and I am paraphrasing, "I am SO happy for you guys, I think this is going to be so incredibly good for you guys. And being near your family is so important. You have always made decisions as you go that give him a better and better life. I am so happy for you."
5. When I said, "You have known I am struggling, even just feeding him has been hard, He is almost 6 feet tall, and eats 3 meals a day plus in between snacks'. I don't want to feed him ramen, I want to make sure he gets veggies and meat, and eats a balanced diet. You have known I sometimes ask for child support a day early to go to the grocery store, and that the child support doesn't even cover his food - much less clothing, shoes, school supplies, rent, electricity, water, him going to the movies with his friends, video games... it doesn't even cover his grocery bill. And I recently saw that you got a very significant promotion around 2 years ago, and another VERY significant promotion very recently. Did you ever stop and think, 'She doesn't know I am making more money, so she isn't asking for more child support. But I know she is having a hard time with the costs of raising our son...?" He didn't say anything. And that hurts. It hurts because I can not imagine witholding anything from our son. Every single penny that I have goes toward shim, I honestly can not remember that last time I spend anything on myself.

I could not leave my son in NY. Just so everyone is aware, my entire life for almost 15 years has been about what is best for him.
And I am not sure if this is important - but my ex-husband's new wife, and my son do not get along. His new wife is very verbally aggressive with our son, very pushy (mostly about the trade school thing) and I have gotten dozens of phone calls from my son hiding in the bathroom crying, begging me to come get him. Which I never have, I just call his dad and ask him to please step in and try and make peace.
Is it possible that a court would force me to stay in NY state, despite the fact that my family support is in NC, our child is almost 15 and is very open about not wanting to live with his father, as he never has, and does not feel welcome when he is at his dad's house? I really, really have an opportunity to better our lives, and I won't get another opportunity in this lifetime to be able to own a small home of our own. It is such an amazing school district for him, especially as he is so incredibly driven academically. I'll have my family down the road, and this small inheritance, in conjunction with my moms inheritance from her mother will do absolutely nothing here in NY, but will go so far down south.
What do I do? Do I call the courthouse and request something? Lik.. I am not even sure what to request? I'm assuming something along the lines of a change of address with my son? Is this something legal aid could help me with? My ex-husband does well financially, as he has been fully focused on his career for the last 14 years, while my focus has been on our son. So while we live in a nice house, I absolutely do not have an extra few thousand dollars to go to court. And it would absolutely break my heart to go through the inheritance I have, as that is the whole reason I am able to move.

Some of you may remember that in approx. 2007-2010, Kurt Barton largely targeted members of the Mormon Church to defraud them of their investments through a Ponzi scheme run under the name of Triton Financial. Barton is out of prison and is involved in what strongly resembles another Ponzi scheme, conveniently targeting athletes, similar to his approach to Triton Financial. The company is Outdoorsmen, Inc. which is affiliated with Barton's current company, Motoclops. Outdoorsmen has a troubled history, as the CEO of the company, Ken Tapp, is involved in a lawsuit claiming he defrauded investors by lying about various SEC filings, user numbers, etc.
I am compiling research and witness testimony to pursue Barton and hold him accountable for paying the $67,000,000+ in restitution he owes his victims, many of which were involved in the Mormon church as well as ensure that he is not scamming more people through Outdoorsmen. I have strong evidence to support that he is taking payments from both Motoclops and Outdoorsmen under the table to avoid these restitution payments. That's not going to fly with me and I will pursue this to hold him accountable, but I cannot do so without the help of others.
If you are familiar with, were impacted by, or know someone who was impacted by Barton's Ponzi scheme, please reach out to me in the comments here or through private message. The more information, witness testimony, and other support I can get will help me to build a case to pursue this to the fullest extent of the law.