In my area, condos and townhomes are generally not lower cost/more affordable options. DH and I have looked into condos and duplexes and have found that their cost/sq foot is higher than a single-family home. In addition, they are often associated with high fees--security, landscaping, property management, etc.

I haven't seen statistics on variation in size, but the average size was definitely smaller 100 years ago. Even in 1970, only 49% of the houses in the US had 3 or more bedrooms. The median sq footage of a house built before 1960 is only about 1500 (as it stands today after any expansion). There may have been a high standard deviation because of a few very large houses, but the majority of the houses in the US were small two-bedroom houses

Does the .pdf appear one time in the entire spreadsheet? Or once in each row? If it is once in each row, is it always in the same column?

Is there one occasion of a ".pdf" appearing in the row? Or, might it appear multiple times and you want to know all of the cells in which it appears?

Housing varies widely from family to family and location to location. It is easy to read a lot more into these headline/statistics than what the story is really telling us. What does it mean that baby boomers own a larger percentage of large homes than they did in the past? First of all "large home" is defined in this study as 3 or more bedrooms--so my parents 1600sq ft house was a "large home" but an 1800 2 bedroom house with a study and an exercise room is a "small home" These statistics do not necessarily point to "elderly" living in 3000 sq ft houses. DH and I are baby boomers living in a "large home"--two blocks from my work--we count in the statistic. Also, it is easy to jump from statistics that we are short on affordable housing in the US, when these statistics are based on the availability for a household living below the poverty line to find housing that is no more than 30% of their income to "we are short for middle class families to find a 3-bedroom home with a yard, in a good school district in Seattle that they can afford". Both are significant issues, but they are very different issues with different causes and different possible solutions.

One of the colleges I applied to had a one page "why are you interested in attending Univ X?" (which I did not go to); that was the closest thing I ha to write to an application essay. Neither one of my children (who are in their 20s) wrote an essay about a future possibility. One wrote something about "how do you define success" and the other wrote something about a "significant experience".

If you are going to make a distinction between sharing profits with workers of the company and suppliers to the company, you must also consider how companies decide whether to use another company to provide a service or whether they hire their own employees to to provide the service/work. Suppose you have Pharmaceutical Co A and Pharma Co B. A scientist at Pharma A develops a vaccine that results in a significant increase in the company's profits. The person cleaning the floor at Co. A is working no differently and contributing to the profitability of the company no differently than the person cleaning the floor at Co. B. Should the person doing this job at A be compensated more than the person at B doing the same job, simply because the person happened to be lucky enough to be employed by the company where the scientist made the discovery? Should the person doing the job at B receive less than the person at A because that person was unlucky enough to choose to work at a company where a scientist didn't make the breakthrough? And, what if one company hires cleaners as its own workers and the other company hires an outside cleaning service? If the person cleaning the floor should be compensated (through profit sharing) for the contribution to the company whose floor is being cleaned, why would the contractual arrangement of employment change this?

Ben and Jerry's was a privately-held company. The salary of the top employees was originally no more than 5 times the lowest salary, then it was increased to 7 times the lowest salary. When Ben Cohen retired (in 1994), the company could not find a CEO who was willing to come to work for the company at that salary and the salary structure was abandoned. When the company was sold, the original owners (who did not take a high salary when they were working for the company) received a large payment; thus, instead of taking a high salary while they were working, they delayed the compensation until they sold the company (and the workers did not receive a percentage of that compensation).

There are issues such as what is fair compensation and how would it be determined, what is a fair return on capital, what is a fair return for taking risk which raise interesting ethical issues and are worthy of discussion by society. The answers to those questions are much more philosophical than mathematical. Those questions must be addressed before any mathematical formula is derived. Jumping to a formula before the other issues are discussed can lead to odd and perverse outcomes. For example, companies do not have to pay dividends. They can keep the money in retained earnings and the owners of the company then profit from the increase in the stock price (capital gains) rather than receiving dividends. Dividends are not considered expenses of a company but interest payments are, and dividends are paid out of profits. Say a company has $1m in profits and pays $250,000 in dividends, paying a % of profits and dividends would mean paying a % of $1.25 million--with the $250,000 being counted twice. This scheme would change business decision making; companies would be more likely to finance their project using debt rather than shareholder equity. This would change the capital structure of companies, making them more risky (which would impact the stability of workers jobs).

The interaction between income, wealth, and lifestyle is complex and there are many different situations that individuals find themselves in. Many people really do struggle to pay medical bills, buy food, pay for childcare, and save. At the same time there are a lot of people living paycheck to paycheck who justify spending $10 at Starbucks and $500 on a purse because it isn't enough to matter. However, if you put $10 per month in a retirement account earning 7% for 45 years (ages 20-65) you will have about $38,000 in the account when you retire (if you earn 8% that increases to $53,000). That is only about 33 cents per day of savings. Making those small decisions at the margin, especially when young, can really add up.

According to the Census Bureau, in 2020, 58.1% of Americans between the ages of 56-64 owned a retirement account. If a man works and has a retirement account, although his wife may have a claim to benefits from it, he is considered the owner of the account; if the wife has not worked, or has worked without contributing to a retirement account, she is counted in the 42% without account ownership. it is difficult to determine how many people do not have access to retirement savings because "ownership" of the account is attributed to one person.

"Living paycheck to paycheck" is an expression that means different things to different people and is not a precise economic description. In general terms, it refers to people who would have difficulty in paying their bills if they lost their employment. There is no set length of time of how long it would be before the family has difficulty paying a bill. Someone whose savings would be deplleted after 3 to 6 months of unemployment can still be considered "living paycheck to paycheck". In the general sense of the term, if we work for a laving, we are living paycheck to paycheck. The lifestlye that working provides for us is not really the relevant measure.

I don't think that the book you linked is a product of OpenStax (which is affiliated with Rice University). It looks like it is published through OpenIntro which is a different organization. I am not familiar with OpenIntro, but I have used some items from OpenStax. I have not found any more typos than with other published materials, but I think the quality varies from discipline to discipline.

I am having a diffcult time seeing how this could ever be implemented. Do workers today (who were not working for the company 2 years ago), get a salary based on the average profits of the company for the past 5 years? Or, do workers get paid 3-5 years after they have worked, once we have an idea of how productive those workers were? What happens when a worker is with a company for one year? Do they get a wage based on a an average of years when they had nothing to do with the comapny? How is all of this split when there is not the same number of workers year-to-year, much less montht-to-month, or week-to-week? What happens if the 3-5 year average profit is zero? What about workers in a not-for-profit sector? More importantly, is there any evidence that workers, in general, prefer a profit-sharing pay scheme to a contractual wage/salary?

Yes, this is one of the most important lessons I wanted my children to learn when they learned about financial management. A $20 allowancce soulds fun, but it isn't fun when you have to spend $10 on club dues and $5 on underwear and only have $5 of discretionary spending money on that "luxury" item.

I have never seen a statistic that points to a high poportion of debt being medical. Credit card debt is a much larger percentage of average family debt than "other" debt. People could have charged medical bills to their credit card; it is difficult to know what was purchased on credit with a credit card.

If you look at the list of the top wealth-holders in the US, they did not make their money working as CEO at JP Morgan, or in similar positions. Zuckerberg, Bezos, Gates, Waltons built their wealth from starting businesses or inventing products.

DH tried it and thought he might have some marginal improvement. Sometimes he was more sore after the injections than others. It was not enough to keep him from having problems, and he had a knee replacement last October. It wasn't a miracly cure for him, but he thinks it may have delayed his surgery and he said he does not regret trying it. One thing he felt helped him the most was the motion of cycling; he thought the injections helped enough that he was able to continue cycling.

DH is retired; I am not. Retirement for him has looked different than we expected for several reasons. We have not traveled as much as we expected, mainly because of COVID. He thought he would play a great deal of golf during retirement, but has not, partly because of knee problems and a couple of surgeries. DH is seriously working on a novel; that is a big change for him. He has started on a major project of organizing and digitizing all of our family pictures at least four times. He thought he would do some consulting or adjunct teaching in retirement, but has turned down most of the opportunities that have come his way. We have never led a structured, routine lifestyle. As college professors our scheduled changed from semester-to-semester, sometimes with night classes, sometimes with weekend classes, etc. There never seems to be a "typical day" in our house. Although I am still working full-time, I have significantly cut back on a lot of the extra workk responisbiltiies I have taken on in the past; I have stopped teaching any summer courses I enjoy my work and don't know how long it will be before I retire. I enjoy an adult ballet class, playing duplicate bridge, cooking, gardening, and I am learning how to quilt. I do not think I will have any trouble filling my time when I do retire.

So, in years that a corporation has negative profits should wages be based on the percent of a negative number, and workers receive negative wages?

I live in a warm client so have limited experience with base layers, but I have a Smart Wool set that I got at REI on sale that I love. DH has an REI brand set that he really likes.

I had a wide range of experiences in courses. I had some courses with a midterm and a final. I had other courses that had a final exam and some other assignments which were maybe only 10% to 20% of the grade (so the final was 80%-90% of the grade). The majority of my courses in undergraduate would have 3 or 4 exams; some courses had major papers; some courses had pop quizzes. I can't remember any class that had graded homework assignments.

I would not have called DH in the situation you described unless I thought there was information that I needed to convey or information from him that I needed. I also know that as my mom has aged she has become more anxious and everything is more extreme. She will call and be shocked that I am going out in the rain, the cold, the heat, the dark....--yes, mom, I am going to work--these will be situations that I know my dad would have gone to work in. I have an aunt that is one of the least controllling people I have ever met. Just in the last couple of years she has started asking that we let her know when we get home after visiting. I am more of a "no news is good news", but I try to comply with their requests simply out of respect. I try to keep in perspective that it is their anxiety, their lonliness, their feeling of being out of control and not able to take care of things like they once did, that is causing their behavior. While I might find it annoying and irritating, I try to not take it personally.

Do the module percentages add up to 100%? I am wondering if it is an asynchronous course with modules set up with material, dates, and weights, which are intended to be provide the outline/information for a course that a syllabu would contain.

Did the professor perhaps mean "study" time as time focused on this class, rather than outside time in addition to the in-class portion of the class. If 8 hours of outside time is reasonable, and 4 hours per week are in biology class, then the student is focused on, studying, biology? I would look at the course syllabus and see what the time commitment looks like? Is there a great deal of reading? Are there a number of assignments? Busy work? How many exams are there? This gives a student a better gauge, given their particular strengths and weaknesses, of what is going the time commitment is going to be.