- In one case you write (p/100) and in the other (totalDiscount/100). It wouldn't matter because the end result is the same mathematically, but the apparent meaning is different. But anyway...
- Now the calculated total price is 30, but it should be 70. totalPrice = basePrice * (1 - totalDiscount/100)
Probably gonna get some hate here. Really, another CSS framework? People, can we make our minds and stay on one and perfect it instead keep chasing the next 'better' alternatives?
Bulma is like 10 years old at this point, it’s been around forever.
You’re wrong because there’s no one size fits all: some prefer the design of Bulma, some prefer Bootstrap, some prefer Chakra…
The advantage of these frameworks is they come with a ready to use theme, which is why there are so many, not everyone likes the same thing. The disadvantage of these frameworks is that they’re often difficult to customize which is why headless frameworks like Radix and abstractions like Tailwind are taking over (but they will never replace the former framework because sometimes you want to use a pre-made design).
why pivot from airform to visualdb?? It kind of does everything now, so I don't know what exactly what it is for. what is the most used visualdb feature by users?
We prioritize features based on user input, especially now that core features are in place. But the idea for the initial set of features were based on our own needs, and our frustration with existing products.
For example, there are lots of reporting tools, but we could not find even one that has good time series analysis. If you want to analyze your personal stock market investments, good time series analysis is essential, so we filled the gap in the market with our own product.
Blazer (https://blazer.dokkuapp.com) does reports and targets non-tech users (preferrablly knows Sql) you should check it out, but yours does more and better.
A lot of people focus on the process instead of the participating entities.
The focus when designing the system should be on the entities (Customer, Payment, Bill, Order, Inventory) instead of the processes (ordering, billing, fulfillment). I summarize that by saying "Nouns over Verbs".
The state of each of the entities is affected by the processes, but the effect happens from changes in other entities, Customers place an Order. Customers get a Bill for the Order, Customers make a Payment, etc.
The states of each of these entities is independent of the others and reacts/changes only as a result of two things, either an external "Command", or an "Event".
Commands are events that occur outside of the system boundary, usually visible as part of an API (if RESTful) that uses POST/PUT/DELETE or they are imperatives from one entity to another.
Commands are imperatives, Place Order, Pay Bill, Fulfill Order, etc.
Events are records of occurrences in the system, expressed in the past tense and are immutable. Order Placed, Bill Paid, Order Fulfilled.
Customers place an Order by POSTing to /orders (or potentially /customers/uuid/orders).
Events are generated from entities inside the system. (Order being placed generates an order_placed event).
The difference is that by focussing on the entities, and their state, independent of other entities, the entities can be created, tested, installed, evolved independently of other entities in the system.
The thinking about them is simplified and focussed, they are naturally decoupled because they can only find out about other entities by inquiring or affect other entities by generating a Command or an Event.
Any events they generate are processed asynchronously and can have multiple consumers.
Event-driven: At runtime, the client tells the system what has happened, the system stores the event and is configured in advance for how to react to it.
CRUD: Imperative. Client tells us to create/update a specific entity with some data.
$500K is BEFORE sell the house with capital gains. If you do decide to sell, the number is $3750/month average costs per month to living the house you own after 30 years. Still better than renting, but not as most of home owner had imaged.
Thanks for sharing. How about purchasing home for primary resident? Most people who buy home for personal residence believe they are making a sound investment. I contend that the opposite is the case.
A lot of people in America use the word “investment” to mean something more holistic than just “financial investment”. A house is commonly referred to as:
- An investment into the future (guaranteed housing, assuming they can pay the bills)
- An investment for their children (safe neighborhoods, good schools, etc)
- An investment into the community (homeowners tend to stay in their house for much longer, and are more interested in participating in community politics as a result)
You seem to be fixated on houses as a financial investment. They aren’t a great investment, you’re right. But you also can’t keep yourself warm and children sheltered with a million dollars in stocks.
Most personal finance experts recommend viewing your primary residence as a liability, not an investment. Although housing prices generally increase over time, it's never a guarantee. Plus, you are always paying something on it over the course of ownership, such as mortgage interest, taxes, maintenance costs, renovation costs, utilities, etc. Over the time that you live in the house, those costs can (and often do) outpace the gains made by a rising real estate market.
There is a sub-branch of real estate investment, however, that has come to be known as "house hacking" where you explicitly DO treat your primary residence as an investment. Typically this includes buying a home larger than you need and renting out the extra space to roommates. Or buying a duplex and renting the other half. Purchased right, these can cover the cost of the mortgage, meaning you're sort-of living in your own home rent-free.
Another thing people do is move into a run-down house bought at a discount, live in it for two or three years, fix it up the whole time, sell it at a profit, and then move onto the next one.
Neither of these are usually palatable to those with families, but they are pretty popular as a way to get into real estate investing for those that are young, motivated, and have otherwise stable jobs.
It's definitely cheaper to own than rent in the long run, but like 15+ years.
House appreciates and keep up with inflation, but not a great investment vehicle because the nearly break even ROI. It's not all sunshine and roses contrary to common wisdom.
In my view, owning a home primarily acts as a safeguard against inflation, it represents a "safe" investment option for "lazy" individuals who reluctant to learn more complex investment strategies that could yield higher, riskier return.
Owning a home works out financially better than renting which is what you should be comparing it to. You can't compare it to a financial investment because its unrealistic to have $0 housing budget and put it all in the S&P 500 or anything else like that. I think you're getting hung up on the "owning a home is an investment" catch phrase and taking that literally.
Your example is based on averages, which in the real world don't exist. In a growing area, single family detached homes (i.e. not townhomes or anything with shared walls) are going to out-appreciate others types of homes. And location matters more than anything. Good schools, low crime, close to amenities, shopping, etc. and those houses will go up faster than townhomes or condos in a higher crime, worse school area. You can also help the appreciation on a home by doing improvements to it and the property. Convert a 3rd floor attic to live-able space by adding a bedroom and bath and you could see a house bump up into the next range of comparables for that neighborhood/area.
> It's not all sunshine and roses contrary to common wisdom.
No it’s definitely not. Things break, seemingly in a coordinated manner. One year your maintenance costs might be basically 0, another year they could be 5 figures.
> In my view, owning a home primarily acts as a safeguard against inflation, it represents a "safe" investment option for "lazy" individuals who reluctant to learn more complex investment strategies that could yield higher, riskier return.
Yeah go find an actual homeowner in person and say that to their face. As a homeowner I can tell you that there’s nothing “lazy” about the home-buying process. It’s stressful, emotional, and challenging. I too dabble in “complex” investing strategies and I can tell you that something like covered calls or “The Wheel” is way easier and more predictable than the typical home-buying process.
At the end of the day, investing is about allocating risk. You keep some % of your money invested in low-risk, stable-return assets. A house is a great example. And you ESPECIALLY don’t invest money loaned on margin in high-volatility assets.
reply