I’m a 61-year-old single librarian and ‘proud’ Democrat from Maine. Should I move to Florida like Jeff Bezos?

I finally have something in common with Jeff Bezos. He is moving to Miami. I too am thinking of moving to Florida in the next year or so. My parents retired there 25 years ago; my father passed away in 2019, but my mom is still alive. I am also nearing retirement, and thought I would follow in their footsteps. I have a house in Maine, which I intend to sell when I finally make the move. I’ve lived here for 11 glorious years, and made a lot of friends. I’m a librarian, but don’t believe anything or everything you have heard about librarians, we are a social lot.

I’m 61 and earn $85,000 a year, and have a lot of friends. But I reckon my mom has only a few good years yet, and she is slowing down. I bought my house for $160,000 and it’s now worth $350,000 or thereabouts, if I can sell it with the way interest rates are going. If not, I could rent it out. So my question is: Should I retire to Florida like Jeff Bezos? I’ve been window shopping for properties around Sarasota and Tampa, but I’m flexible. I am proud to live in a blue state, but I also want to be within an hour or so of my mom, so I can see her as often as possible.

I’ve been feeling restless and, frankly, glum lately. And I thought this change would do me good. Am I mad? Is this a good move?

Florida Bound

Related: My ex-husband is suing for half of our children’s 529 plans — eight years after our divorce. Is he entitled to plunder these accounts?

“No matter how many billions of dollars you have in the bank, there’s one thing that money can’t buy — time.”


MarketWatch illustration

Dear Florida Bound,

You and Jeff Bezos do share that one concern about wanting to be near your aging parents. No matter how many billions of dollars you have in the bank, there’s one thing that money can’t buy — time. The Cape Canaveral operations of his space company, Blue Origin, are also in Florida, so it’s a convenient business move and a tax-savvy one. Maine has a capital gains and income tax; but Florida, like Washington, has no state income tax; unlike Washington, it has no capital-gains tax. You and Bezos will be following in the footsteps of former president Donald Trump, who lived in New York before he tax domiciled at his Mar-a-Lago Palm Beach estate.

Billionaires — not unlike retirees — tend to move out of states with estate taxes, according to a recent study by researchers at the University of California, Berkeley and the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. The trend grows stronger as billionaires grow older. But whether you’re a billionaire or a mild-mannered librarian, when you move, you should move. If you spend more than 183 days in Maine per year and/or still have a home there, and you do not spend a similar amount of time in Florida, the tax folks in Maine could ask you to pay Maine income tax. You may have to keep records of your comings and goings (airline tickets and credit-card receipts etc.), but tax agencies can also subpoena your cell-phone records.

Should you move to Florida? Be prepared for the humidity — and the culture shock. You may be used to those lovely 78°F/26°C summers in Maine. Try swapping that for 95°F/35°C. Florida is a very different place to Maine, both culturally and politically. You may find yourself living next-door to an equally proud Trump supporter. If you enjoy living in a blue state, assuming you are a supporter of President Joe Biden, how would that make you feel? Or are you living in a Democratic blue cocoon (or lagoon)? Do you have friends across the political divide? We have a presidential election in November 2024. Expect nerves to be frayed.

The good news — yes, I have good news too — house prices in Maine and Florida are almost identical. The average price hovers at $390,000 in both states, according to Zillow
Z,
-1.58%
.
Just be aware of the rising cost of flood and home insurance in the Sunshine State. You are also likely to be surrounded by people your own age: Florida is the top state for retirees, per a report released this year by SmartAsset, which analyzed U.S. Census Bureau migration data. A warm climate and zero state income taxes consistently prove to be a double winner: Florida netted 78,000 senior residents from other U.S. states in 2021 — the latest year for which data available — three times as many as Arizona, No. 2 on the list.

I spoke to friends who have retired to Florida and they say it’s not a homogenous, one-size-fits-all state. “It’s not all beaches, hurricanes, stifling year-round temperatures, and condos,” one says. “It’s possible to escape northern winters without committing to these conditions.” One retiree cited Gainesville in north-central Florida, the home of the University of Florida, as “diverse and stimulating,” but noted that the nearest airports are in Jacksonville (72 miles), Orlando (124 miles), and Tampa (140 miles). Another Sarasota retiree was more circumspect, and told me: “Be careful how you advertise your political affiliation.”

Perhaps where you belong for now is close to your mother. Spending time with her is a top priority, but brace yourself for a new living experience in Florida (and, while we’re at it, alligators). The siren call of home grows stronger as we get older, but “home” also means different things to different people. For some, it’s a place where they can live comfortably, and within their means. For others, it’s where they have a strong sense of community, be that friends, family, or like-minded individuals, or those with whom we can respectfully disagree. People who have a support system around them tend to live longer, so keep that in mind too.

We can change so much about our circumstances: buy a new car, try a new hairstyle, even go to a plastic surgeon for a new face. There are all sorts of remedies at our fingertips. If all else fails, there’s a pill for that. Or an app that will change our life, or at the very least lull us to sleep with the sound of whales or waves. We may be tempted to believe that if we could change our circumstances, our house, our job, our bank account, or even the town, city, state or country where we live, that we could reinvent ourselves in our own eyes and the eyes of others, and turn our frowns upside down.

There’s just one, not insubstantial problem: we take ourselves — and all of our neuroses — with us.

You can email The Moneyist with any financial and ethical questions at [email protected], and follow Quentin Fottrell on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter.

Check out the Moneyist private Facebook group, where we look for answers to life’s thorniest money issues. Post your questions, tell me what you want to know more about, or weigh in on the latest Moneyist columns.

The Moneyist regrets he cannot reply to questions individually.

Previous columns by Quentin Fottrell:

If I buy a home with an inheritance and only put my name on the deed, does my husband have any rights? 

I cosigned my boyfriend’s mortgage, but I’m not on the deed. I didn’t want to marry again after a costly divorce. How do I protect myself?

My mother claims I’m in her will but refuses to show it to me. Should she put my name on the deed to her home?



Source link

#61yearold #single #librarian #proud #Democrat #Maine #move #Florida #Jeff #Bezos

‘COVID isn’t done with us’: So why have so many people started rolling the dice?

Hersh Shefrin, a mild-mannered behavioral economist at Santa Clara University, still wears a mask when he goes out in public. In fact, he wears two masks: an N95 medical-grade mask, and another surgical mask on top. “I’m in a vulnerable group. I still believe in masking,” Shefrin, 75, told MarketWatch. It’s worked so far: He never did get COVID-19. Given his age, he is in a high-risk category for complications, so he believes in taking such precautions.

But not everyone is happy to see a man in a mask in September 2023. “A lot of people just want to be over this,” Shefrin, who lives in Menlo Park, Calif., said. “Wearing a mask in public generates anger in some people. I’ve had people come up to me and set me straight on why people should not wear masks. I’ve had people yell at me in cars. It might not match with where they are politically, or they genuinely feel that the risks are really low.”

His experience speaks to America in 2023. Our attitude to COVID-related risk has shifted dramatically, and seeing a person wearing a mask may give us anxiety. But how will we look back on this moment —  3½ years since the start of the coronavirus pandemic? Will we think, “There was a mild wave of COVID, but we got on with it”? Or say, “We were so traumatized back then, dealing with the loss of over 1.1 million American lives, and struggling to cope with a return to normal life”?

We live in a postpandemic era of uncertainty and contradiction. Acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, or SARS-CoV-2, is back, yet it never really went away. Roughly a quarter of the population has never tested positive for COVID, but some people have had it twice or three times. Few people are wearing masks nowadays, and the World Health Organization recently published its last weekly COVID update. It will now put out a new report every four weeks.

‘I’ve had people come up to me and set me straight on why people should not wear masks.’


— Hersh Shefrin, 75, behavioral psychologist 

People appear sanguine about the latest booster, despite the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommending that people get the updated shot. Fewer than a quarter of Americans (23%) said they were “definitely” planning to get this shot, according to a report released this week by KFF, the nonprofit formerly known as the Kaiser Family Foundation. Some 23% said they will “probably get it,” 19% said they will “probably not get it” and 33% will “definitely not get it.”

Do we throw caution to the wind and treat fall and winter as flu, RSV and COVID season? It’s hard both to avoid COVID, many people contend, and to lead a normal life. The latest wave so far is mild, notwithstanding recent reports of extreme fatigue. Scientists have voiced concerns about potential long-term cognitive decline in some severe cases, but most vaccinated people recover. Still, scientists say it’s too early to know about any long-term effects of COVID.

Amid all these unknowns are many risk-related theories: The psychologist Paul Slovic said we evaluate risk based on three main factors. Firstly, we rely on our emotions rather than the facts (something he calls “affect heuristic”). Secondly, we are less tolerant of risks that are perceived as dreadful and unknown (“psychometric paradigm theory”). Thirdly, we become desensitized to catastrophic events and unable to appreciate loss (“psychophysical numbing”).

Shefrin, the behavioral economist, said these three theories influence how we cope with COVID. “Early in the pandemic, the ‘dread factor’ and ‘unknown factor’ meant we all felt it was very risky,” he said. “But we began to see that the people who were most affected were older with comorbidities. The dread factor is way down because of successful vaccinations. We certainly feel that the unknowable factor is down, but with new variants there is potentially something to worry about.”

Hersh Shefrin: “We certainly feel that the unknowable factor is down, but with new variants there is potentially something to worry about.”


c/o Hersh Shefrin

Habituation and status quo lead to inaction

The profile of risk has changed dramatically since the pandemic began. Vaccines protect the majority of people from the most serious effects of COVID — for the 70% of Americans who have gotten the two initial COVID shots. So should we focus on living for today, and stop worrying about tomorrow? Or, given all the unknowns, are we still rolling the dice with our health by boarding crowded subway trains, socializing at parties and stepping into the office elevator?

The number of people dying from COVID has, indeed, fallen dramatically. Weekly COVID deaths in the U.S. peaked at 25,974 during the week of Jan. 9, 2021. There had been 60 COVID-related deaths during the week of March 14, 2020 — when the WHO declared the outbreak a worldwide pandemic — far fewer than the 607 deaths during the week of Sept. 23, the most recent week for which data are available. But in March 2020, with no vaccine, people had reason to be scared.

“COVID deaths are actually worse now than when we were all freaking out about it in the first week of March 2020, but we’re habituated to it, so we tolerate the risk in a different way. It’s not scary to us anymore,” said Annie Duke, a former professional poker player, and author of books about cognitive science and decision making. “We’re just used to it.” Flu, for example, continues to kill thousands of people every year, but we have long become accustomed to that.

A dramatic example of the “habituation effect”: Duke compares COVID and flu to infant mortality throughout the ages. In 1900, the infant-mortality rate was 157.1 deaths per 1,000 births, falling to 20.3 in 1970, and 5.48 deaths per 1,000 births in 2023. “If the 1900 infant-mortality rate was the same infant-mortality rate today, we’d all have our hair on fire,” she said. “We think we would not live through that time, but we would, as people did then, because they got used to it.”

‘COVID deaths are actually worse now than when we were all freaking out about it in the first week of March 2020.’


— Annie Duke, former professional poker player

Duke, who plans to get the updated booster shot, believes people are rolling the dice with their health, especially concerning the long-term effects. The virus, for example, has been shown to accelerate Alzheimer’s-related brain changes and symptoms. Could it also lead to some people developing cognitive issues years from now? No one knows. “Do I want to take the risk of getting repeated COVID?” Duke said. “We have this problem when the risks are unknown.”

When faced with making a decision that makes us uncomfortable — usually where the outcome is uncertain — we often choose to do nothing, Duke said. It’s called “status quo bias.” There’s no downside to wearing a mask, as doctors have been doing it for years, but many people now eschew masks in public places. Research suggests vaccines have a very small chance of adverse side effects, but even that highly unlikely outcome is enough to persuade some people to opt out.

And yet Duke said people tend to choose “omission” over “commission” — that is, they opt out of getting the vaccine rather than opting in. But why? She said there are several reasons: The vaccine comes with a perceived risk, however small, that something could go wrong, so if you do nothing you may feel less responsible for any negative outcome. “Omission is allowing the natural state of the world to continue, particularly with a problem that has an unknown downside,” she said.

Here’s a simple example: You’re on the way to the airport in a car with your spouse, and there’s a roadblock. You have two choices: Do you sit and wait, or do you take an alternative route? If you wait and miss your flight, you may feel that the situation was beyond your control. If you take a shortcut, and still miss your flight, you may feel responsible, and stupid. “Now divorce papers are being drawn up, even though you had the same control over both events,” Duke said.

Annie Duke: “COVID deaths are actually worse now than when we were all freaking out about it in the first week of March 2020.”


c/o Annie Duke

Risk aversion is a complicated business

Probably the most influential study of how people approach risk is prospect or “loss-aversion” theory, which was developed by Daniel Kahneman, an economist and psychologist, and the late Amos Tversky, a cognitive and mathematical psychologist. It has been applied to everything from whether to take an invasive or inconvenient medical test to smoking cigarettes in the face of a mountain of evidence that smoking can cause cancer.

In a series of lottery experiments, Kahneman and Tversky found that people are more likely to take risks when the stakes are low, and less likely when the stakes are high. Those risks are based on what individuals believe they have to gain or lose. This does not always lead to a good outcome. Take the stock-market investor with little money who sells now to avoid what seems like a big loss, but then misses out on a life-changing, long-term payday.

As that stock-market illustration shows, weighing our sensitivity to losses and gains is actually very complicated, and they are largely based on people’s individual circumstances, said Kai Ruggeri, an assistant professor of health policy and management at Columbia University. He and others reviewed 700 studies on social and behavioral science related to COVID-19 and the lessons for the next pandemic, determining that not enough attention had been given to “risk perception.”

So how does risk perception apply to vaccines? The ultimate decision is personal, and may be less impacted by the collective good. “If I perceive something as being a very large loss, I will take the behavior that will help me avoid that loss,” Ruggeri said. “If a person believes there’s a high risk of death, illness or giving COVID to someone they love, they will obviously get the vaccine. But there’s a large number of people who see the gain and the loss as too small.”

‘If a person believes there’s a high risk of death, illness or giving COVID to someone they love, they will obviously get the vaccine.’


— Kai Ruggeri, psychologist

In addition to a person’s own situation, there is another factor when people evaluate risk factors and COVID: their tribe. “Groupthink” happens when people defer to their social and/or political peers when making decisions. In a 2020 paper, social psychologist Donelson R. Forsyth cited “high levels of cohesion and isolation” among such groups, including “group illusions and pressures to conform” and “deterioration of judgment and rationality.”

Duke, the former professional poker player, said it’s harder to evaluate risk when it comes to issues that are deeply rooted in our social network. “When something gets wrapped into our identity, it makes it hard for us to think about the world in a rational way, and abandon a belief that we already have,” she said, “and that’s particularly true if we have a belief that makes us stand out from the crowd in some way rather than belong to the crowd.”

Exhibit A: Vaccine rates are higher among people who identify as Democrat versus Republican, likely based on messaging from leaders in those respective political parties. Some 60% of Republicans and 94% of Democrats have gotten a COVID vaccine, according to an NBC poll released this week. Only 36% of Republicans said it was worth it, compared with 90% of Democrats. “When things get politicized, it creates a big problem when evaluating risk,” Duke added.

Risk or no risk, “COVID isn’t done with us,” Emily Landon, an infectious-diseases specialist at the University of Chicago, told MarketWatch. “Just because people aren’t dying in droves does not mean that COVID is no big deal. That’s an error in judgment. Vaccination and immunity is enough to keep most of us out of the hospital, but it’s not enough to keep us from getting COVID. What if you get COVID again and again? It’s not going to be great for your long-term health.”

Source link

#COVID #isnt #people #started #rolling #dice

Here’s everything coming to Amazon’s Prime Video in September 2023

Amazon’s Prime Video has high hopes for its September lineup, which includes the return of “The Wheel of Time” and a spinoff of “The Boys.”

After a two-year layoff, Season 2 of the sprawling fantasy epic “The Wheel of Time” (Sept. 1) picks up with Moraine (Rosamund Pike) and Rand (Josha Stradowski) now scattered and forced to regroup as the Dark One turns out to be far from defeated. Season 1 was one of Prime’s most-watched series ever, and Season 2 will reportedly be darker and more action-packed, spanning the second and third books of Robert Jordan’s series.

The end of the month will bring the premiere of “Gen V” (Sept. 27), set in “The Boys” universe and following a group of students with extraordinary abilities at a prestigious — and extremely competitive — college for superheroes-to-be. It looks every bit as depraved and violent as the massively popular “The Boys,” for better or worse.

Also see: What’s coming in September to Netflix | Hulu

Amazon’s
AMZN,
+1.08%

streaming service also has “Kelce” (Sept. 12), a feature documentary about Philadelphia Eagles All-Pro center Jason Kelce’s 2022-’23 season, which will serve as a prelude to the return of NFL Thursday Night Football (Sept. 14), which kicks off with the Eagles against the Minnesota Vikings.

Here’s the complete list of what else is coming to Prime Video in September (release dates are subject to change):

What’s coming to Prime Video in September 2023

Sept. 1

Spin City S1-6 (1997)
The Wheel of Time Season 2
10 Things I Hate About You (1999)
2001: A Space Odyssey (1970)
21 Grams (2004)
23:59 (2011)
A Bullet for Pretty Boy (1970)
A Force of One (1979)
A Man Called Sarge (1990)
A Matter of Time (1976)
A Rage to Live (1965)
Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein (1948)
After Midnight (1989)
Alakazam the Great (1961)
Alex Cross (2012)
All About My Mother (2000)
Amazons of Rome (1963)
American Ninja (1985)
American Ninja 2: The Confrontation (1987)
American Ninja 3: Blood Hunt (1989)
American Ninja 4: The Annihilation (1991)
Anaconda (1997)
And Your Name Is Jonah (1979)
Angel Eyes (2001)
Apartment 143 (2012)
April Morning (1988)
Arabian Nights (2000)
Are You in the House Alone? (2022)
Army of Darkness (1993)
As Above, So Below (2014)
Back to School (1986)
Bad Education (2020)
Bad News Bears (2005)
Bailout at 43,000 (1957)
Balls Out (2015)
Beer (1985)
Behind the Mask (1999)
Belly of an Architect (1990)
Berlin Tunnel 21 (1981)
Bewitched (2005)
Billion Dollar Brain (1967)
Blow (2001)
Body Slam (1987)
Born to Race (2011)
Bowling for Columbine (2002)
Boy of the Streets (1937)
Breakdown (1997)
Brides of Dracula (1960)
Brigadoon (1954)
Broken Embraces (2010)
Buster (1988)
Calendar Girl Murders (1984)
California Dreaming (1979)
Campus Rhythm (1943)
Captain Kidd and the Slave Girl (1954)
Carpool (1996)
Carry on Columbus (1992)
Carve Her Name With Pride (1958)
Chasing Papi (2003)
Cheerleaders Beach Party (1978)
Children of Men (2007)
Child’s Play (2019)
China Doll (1958)
Chrome and Hot Leather (1971)
Cocaine: One Man’s Seduction (1983)
Committed (2000)
Conan the Barbarian (2011)
Condor (1986)
Confidence Girl (1952)
Courage Mountain (1990)
Crossplot (1969)
Curse of the Swamp Creature (1966)
Curse of the Undead (1959)
Cycle Savages (1969)
Dagmar’s Hot Pants, Inc. (1971)
Damned River (1989)
Dancers (1987)
Danger in Paradise (1977)
Dangerous Love (1988)
Deep Blue Sea (1999)
Defiance (2009)
Deja Vu (2006)
Desert Sands (1955)
Desperado (1995)
Detective Kitty O’Day (1944)
Detective School Dropouts (1986)
Devil (2010)
Devil’s Eight (1969)
Diary of a Bachelor (1964)
Dogs (1977)
Don’t Worry, We’ll Think of a Title (1966)
Double Trouble (1992)
Down the Drain (1990)
Dr. Heckyl and Mr. Hype (1980)
Dracula (1931)
Drag Me to Hell (2009)
Driving Miss Daisy (1990)
Dust 2 Glory (2017)
Edge of Darkness (2010)
Eight Men Out (1988)
Eight on the Lam (1967)
Electra Glide in Blue (1973)
Elephant Tales (2006)
Europa Report (2013)
Evil Dead (2013)
Explosive Generation (1961)
Extraction (2015)
Face/Off (1997)
Fanboys (2009)
Fashion Model (1945)
Fatal Charm (1978)
Fearless Frank (1969)
Finders Keepers (2014)
Flight That Disappeared (1961)
Flight to Hong Kong (1956)
Fools Rush In (1997)
For the Love of Aaron (1994)
For the Love of It (1980)
For Those Who Think Young (1964)
Four Weddings and a Funeral (1994)
From Hollywood to Deadwood (1989)
Frontera (2014)
Fury on Wheels (1971)
Gambit (1967)
Ghost Story (1981)
Gigli (2003)
Grace Quigley (1985)
Grievous Bodily Harm (1988)
Hangfire (1991)
Haunted House (2023)
Hawks (1989)
Hell Drivers (1958)
Here Comes the Devil (2012)
Hollywood Harry (1986)
Honeymoon Limited (1935)
Hostile Witness (1969)
Hot Under the Collar (1991)
Hotel Rwanda (2005)
Hugo (2011)
I Am Durán (2019)
I Saw the Devil (2010)
I’m So Excited! (2013)
Inconceivable (2017)
Innocent Lies (1995)
Intimate Strangers (2006)
Invisible Invaders (1959)
It Rains in My Village (1968)
Jarhead (2005)
Jeff, Who Lives at Home (2011)
Joyride (2022)
Juan of the Dead (2012)
Kalifornia (1993)
Khyber Patrol (1954)
La Bamba (1987)
Labou (2009)
Lady in a Corner (1989)
Ladybird, Ladybird (1995)
Legally Blonde 2: Red, White and Blonde (2003)
Legend of Johnny Lingo (2003)
Little Dorrit (Part 1) (1988)
Little Dorrit (Part 2) (1988)
Little Sweetheart (1989)
Lost Battalion (1960)
Mama (2013)
Mandrill (2009)
Masters of the Universe (1987)
Matchless (1967)
Meeting at Midnight (1944)
Men’s Club (1986)
Mfkz (2018)
Midnight in the Switchgrass (2021)
Miss All American Beauty (1982)
Mission of the Shark (1991)
Mixed Company (1974)
Mystery Liner (1934)
National Lampoon’s Movie Madness (1983)
New York Minute (2004)
Nicholas Nickleby (2002)
Night Creatures (1962)
No (2012)
Observe and Report (2009)
Octavia (1984)
October Sky (1999)
Of Mice and Men (1992)
One Man’s Way (1964)
One Summer Love (1976)
Operation Atlantis (1965)
Overkill (1996)
Panga (1990)
Passport to Terror (1989)
Phaedra (1962)
Play Misty for Me (1971)
Portrait of a Stripper (1979)
Powaqqatsi (1988)
Predator: The Quietus (1988)
Private Investigations (1987)
Prophecy (1979)
Pulse (2006)
Quinceanera (1960)
Raiders of the Seven Seas (1953)
Red Dawn (1984)
Red Eye (2005)
Red Riding Hood (1988)
Red River (1948)
Reform School Girls (1969)
Riddick (2013)
Riot in Juvenile Prison (1959)
River of Death (1989)
Rocky (1976)
Rocky II (1979)
Rose Garden (1989)
Roxanne (1987)
Rumble Fish (1983)
Runaway Train (1985)
Running Scared (2006)
Safari 3000 (1982)
Season of Fear (1989)
Secret Window (2004)
Sense and Sensibility (1996)
Sergeant Deadhead (1965)
Seven Hours to Judgment (1988)
Sharks’ Treasure (1975)
She’s Out of My League (2010)
She’s the One (1996)
Sin Nombre (2009)
Sinister (2012)
Slamdance (1987)
Snitch (2013)
Son of Dracula (1943)
Space Probe Taurus (1965)
Spanglish (2004)
Spell (1977)
Stardust (2007)
Step Up (2006)
Sticky Fingers (1988)
Stigmata (1999)
Sugar (2009)
Summer Rental (1985)
Surrender (1987)
Sword of the Valiant (1984)
Tangerine (2015)
Tenth Man (1988)
The Adventures of Gerard (1978)
The Adventures of the American Rabbit (1986)
The Assisi Underground (1986)
The Bad News Bears (1976)
The Beast with a Million Eyes (1955)
The Birdcage (1996)
The Black Dahlia (2006)
The Black Tent (1957)
The Bourne Identity (2002)
The Bourne Legacy (2012)
The Bourne Supremacy (2004)
The Break-Up (2006)
The Cat Burglar (1961)
The Chronicles of Riddick (2004)
The Clown and the Kid (1961)
The Diary of a High School Bride (1959)
The Dictator (2012)
The Evictors (1979)
The Fake (1953)
The Family Stone (2005)
The Final Alliance (1990)
The Finest Hour (1991)
The Frog Prince (1988)
The Ghost in the Invisible Bikini (1966)
The Incredible 2-Headed Transplant (1971)
The Invisible Man (1933)
The Jewel of the Nile (1985)
The Late Great Planet Earth (1979)
The Legend of Zorro (2005)
The Little Vampire (2017)
The Living Ghost (1942)
The Locusts (1997)
The Machinist (2004)
The Manchu Eagle Murder Caper Mystery (1975)
The Manchurian Candidate (1962)
The Mask of Zorro (1998)
The Mighty Quinn (1989)
The Misfits (1961)
The Motorcycle Diaries (2004)
The Mouse on the Moon (1963)
The Mummy (1932)
The Naked Cage (1986)
The Night They Raided Minsky’s (1968)
The Possession (2012)
The Prince (2014)
The Program (1993)
The Ring (2002)
The Sacrament (2014)
The Savage Wild (1970)
The Secret in Their Eyes (2010)
The Sharkfighters (1956)
The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants (2005)
The Spiderwick Chronicles (2008)
The Sum of All Fears (2002)
The Winds of Kitty Hawk (1978)
The Wolf Man (1941)
The Young Savages (1961)
Three Came To Kill (1960)
Three Kinds of Heat (1987)
Through Naked Eyes (1983)
Time Limit (1957)
To Catch a Thief (1955)
Tough Guys Don’t Dance (1987)
Track of Thunder (1967)
Transformations (1991)
Transporter 3 (2008)
Trollhunter (2011)
True Heart (1996)
Underground (1970)
Unholy Rollers (1972)
Unsettled Land (1989)
V/H/S (2012)
War, Italian Style (1967)
Warriors Five (1962)
We Still Kill the Old Way (1968)
When a Stranger Calls (2006)
Where the Buffalo Roam (1980)
Where the River Runs Black (1986)
Wild Bill (1995)
Wild Racers (1968)
Wild Things (1998)
Windows (1980)
Woman of Straw (1964)
Young Racers (1963)
Zack and Miri Make a Porno (2008)

Sept. 5
One Shot: Overtime Elite

Sept. 7
Single Moms Club (2014)

Sept. 8
Sitting in Bars with Cake

Sept. 12
Inside (2023)
Kelce

Sept. 14
Thursday Night Football

Sept. 15
A Million Miles Away

Wilderness

Written in the Stars

Sept. 19
A Thousand and One (2023)

Sept. 22
Cassandro (2023)

Guy Ritchie’s The Covenant (2023)

Sept. 26
The Fake Sheikh

Sept. 29
Gen V

Source link

#Heres #coming #Amazons #Prime #Video #September

‘I worry about outliving my money’: I’m a 65-year-old widow in good health. Should I wait until 70 to collect my pension?

I am a 65-year-old widow in good health, and just started collecting my late husband’s Social Security benefit of $4,000 per month. When I turn 70, I will switch to my benefit since it appears it will be around $100 higher every month at that time. My current expenses are running high at about $10,000 per month due to some house maintenance projects I am doing. My son and his family will inherit everything when I’m gone.

I estimate my monthly expenses will drop to $5,000-$6,000 within the next year. I supplement my monthly income by drawing off interest, dividends and some profit-taking from my traditional IRA account which is worth about $2.5 million. I also have a Roth IRA of about $60,000 and bank CDs of $200,000. I also have another traditional IRA account worth $350,000, which I have designated as my long-term healthcare account in case I have to go into a nursing home at some point.

‘I’m not sure if it makes sense to wait two to five years to collect my pensions if I am going to be drawing my RMD just a few years later.’

I have two pensions that I am debating about when I should start collecting. If I collect now, I will receive $1,400 per month. If I wait until I am 67 it will be $1,620 and at 70 the pension will pay $2,100 per month. However, when I turn 73 and start my minimum required distributions from my IRA, the annual RMD along with my Social Security should be more than enough for me to live on.

I’m not sure if it makes sense to wait two to five years to collect my pensions if I am going to be drawing my RMD just a few years later. If I collect my pensions now, then it would reduce the amount of money I need to siphon off of my investments and could leave them relatively untouched for a few more years.

‘Money was always tight for us growing up and a struggle for my parents as they got older and needed healthcare assistance.’

So the question is, should I collect my pensions now and reduce the amount of money I am currently drawing off of my IRA? Or wait a few years and get the higher monthly payout? Everything I read encourages people to wait as long as they can to collect their retirements. My calculations show that if I collect now, my break-even point is about age 82. If I live longer than that, then waiting to collect would pay me more over the long term. Both my parents lived into their early 90s so longevity is a potential concern.

I realize that I’m in a good financial situation, which is the result of my husband and I working extremely hard all of our lives and consistently saving and investing during good times as well as during recessions, job losses, and raising a family. But money was always tight for us growing up and a struggle for my parents as they got older and needed healthcare assistance, so I don’t think I will ever shake that off. I worry about outliving my money. I just want to make the right decision.

Thank you for your help.

To Withdraw or Not Withdraw

Dear Withdraw or Not Withdraw,

Let’s start with the good news. Whatever you do — start withdrawals now or wait — you are in a pretty strong financial position. If you can afford to wait — and you can — and you expect to live into your 90s, do that. That extra $700 a month will give you comfort as you age. You have $2.5 million in your IRA, and you will pay tax on those withdrawals regardless, but you can afford to use that as a buffer before your higher pension payments kick in.

A financial adviser will help you crunch your numbers, but $4,000 a month in Social Security is a good start. Cutting your $10,000 monthly expenses to $6,000 is smart, and an adviser can help you see where you could make further cuts in your expenses, especially as you age. For some perspective: This survey found that working Americans ages 45 and older on average believe it will take $1.1 million to retire comfortably, yet only 21% say they’ll reach $1 million.

Another reason to withdraw from your IRA now? Gains from an IRA, as you know, are taxable. Gains from a Roth IRA are not taxable if the account has been up and running for five years and you are over 59½. One of the big advantages to a Roth is the flexibility it affords. If you have a medical emergency, you could use your Roth IRA as a backup. (CDS are not typically useful for this as cashing out early results in a penalty, which could negate your interest earned over the period of the CD.)

‘Whatever you decide will be the best decision for you at this time.’

Dan Herron, a partner at Better Business Financial Services in San Luis Obispo, Calif., agrees you should wait. “Since longevity appears to be on your side thanks to good genes from your family, it is probably beneficial to postpone taking benefits as long as you can to maximize your pensions,” he says. “The reason being is that given the uncertainty surrounding Social Security, your pension may be your best hedge against any potential Social Security cuts down the road.”

He also sees the tax benefits in siphoning funds from what is already a very healthy IRA. “While you draw from your IRA now, you are reducing the balance of the IRA, which then (potentially) reduces the required minimum distribution amounts,” he says. “This could potentially be beneficial from a tax perspective.” And he suggests staggering your pension benefits, making withdrawals from one in two years, while leaving the other until you hit 70.

Whatever you decide will be the best decision for you at this time. No future is guaranteed, but your No. 1 priority right is peace of mind to secure a long and healthy retirement.


MarketWatch illustration

Readers write to me with all sorts of dilemmas. 

You can email The Moneyist with any financial and ethical questions related to coronavirus at [email protected], and follow Quentin Fottrell on Twitter.

By emailing your questions, you agree to have them published anonymously on MarketWatch. By submitting your story to Dow Jones & Co., the publisher of MarketWatch, you understand and agree that we may use your story, or versions of it, in all media and platforms, including via third parties.

Check out the Moneyist private Facebook group, where we look for answers to life’s thorniest money issues. Readers write to me with all sorts of dilemmas. Post your questions, tell me what you want to know more about, or weigh in on the latest Moneyist columns.

The Moneyist regrets he cannot reply to questions individually.

More from Quentin Fottrell:

‘How to travel for free’: I spent $500 hosting my friend for a week. Should she have paid for food and utilities?

‘I’m 63 and desperately hate my work’: Should I pay off my mortgage, claim Social Security and quit my job?

‘He’s content living paycheck to paycheck’: My husband won’t work or get a driver’s license. Now things have gotten even worse.



Source link

#worry #outliving #money #65yearold #widow #good #health #wait #collect #pension

Would reparations lead to irresponsible spending? Studies on other cash windfalls suggest not, new report says.

The perception that people often succumb to misfortune and bad decision-making after suddenly receiving large amounts of cash isn’t based in fact, researchers said in a report published Thursday by the Roosevelt Institute, a progressive think tank.

That means potential reparations payouts to Black Americans are unlikely to result in reckless spending, financial ruin and reduced labor productivity, the report’s authors wrote after undertaking a review of prior research concerning consumer behavior after lottery windfalls and inheritances, as well as more minor cash transfers through tax refunds and guaranteed-income programs.

“There’s what we really describe as kind of an urban myth … that people who receive lottery winnings squander the money very quickly,” reparations scholar William “Sandy” Darity, a Duke University professor of public policy and economist who co-authored the report, said in an interview. “The best available evidence indicates that that’s not the case.”

Whether Black residents and descendants of enslaved people in the U.S. are owed reparative payments has been debated for centuries. But as the country has grown more economically unequal while a stubborn racial wealth gap persists, the reparations movement has picked up traction.

In California, a first-of-its-kind state task force on reparations approved a slate of recommendations for lawmakers this month that, if implemented through legislation, would potentially provide hundreds of billions of dollars in reparative monetary payments to Black Californians to address harms caused by factors including racial health disparities, housing discrimination and mass incarceration. San Francisco, which has its own reparations task force, is also considering one-time reparative payments of $5 million for eligible people.

Read more: California task force approves sweeping reparations potentially worth billions of dollars

Still, detractors say that granting reparations to Black Americans — as was done for Japanese Americans incarcerated in internment camps during World War II and, on a state level, for survivors who owned property in the town of Rosewood, Fla., before a race massacre destroyed it — is unwise.

Some argue that giving people reparative payments without requiring certain parameters or personal-finance courses could result in irresponsible spending behavior, or that reparations proposals are themselves racist in suggesting that Black people need “handouts.”

‘One of the important things that lottery winners do with the money is that they frequently set up trust accounts or the equivalent for their children or their grandchildren.’


— William ‘Sandy’ Darity, a leading reparations scholar

The authors of the Roosevelt Institute report, for their part, said the assumption that Black Americans would be unable to handle sudden windfalls is rooted in racism — noting the racial wealth gap wasn’t created through “defective” spending habits but through policies that pumped money into white households, including unequal land distribution and subsidies for homebuyers.

“Widely held, inaccurate, and racist beliefs about dysfunctional financial behavior of Black Americans as the foundation for racial economic inequality leads to a conclusion that monetary reparations will be ineffective in eliminating the gap,” they wrote. “According to this perspective, if eligible Black Americans do not change their financial mindset and behavior after receiving financial reparations, the act of restitution will be empty.”

How people spend lottery winnings and inheritances

Even so, there’s not really “any carefully drawn-out study of what has happened to folks who have received reparations payments,” Darity said. It’s “impossible to understand” the impacts of such programs, because there haven’t historically been “systems in place that give money directly to individuals” — allowing “anecdotal cynicism and urban mythology” to drive the narrative, the report’s authors wrote.

“The best that we could do is try to think about other types of instances in which people have received windfalls where there has been some follow-up on what the consequences have been,” Darity said.

To see how people really react when they’re granted new amounts of money, the authors examined outcomes both from people who had received “major” windfalls — ones that immediately and majorly change a person’s wealth status, like winning the lottery — and “minor” windfalls, or those that affect a person’s income but don’t meaningfully shift their wealth status, like the stimulus checks doled out earlier in the COVID-19 pandemic.

Darity, who directs Duke University’s Samuel DuBois Cook Center on Social Equity, worked alongside the report’s lead author, Katherine Rodgers, a former research assistant at the Cook Center who currently works as a senior associate at the consulting firm Kroll, as well as Sydney A. Grissom, an analyst for BlackRock. Lucas Hubbard, an associate in research at the Cook Center, was also an author of the report.

They found that while a person’s behavior can vary based on the windfall amount and how it’s framed to the recipient, as well as their previous economic status, their reactions tend to buck stereotypes.

For example, only 11% of lottery winners quit their job in the findings of one 1987 study that examined 576 lottery winners across 12 states — and none of the people who got less than $50,000 left work, according to the Roosevelt Institute report. However, people were more likely to quit their jobs if they won a sum worth $1 million, had less education, were making under $100,000 a year, and hadn’t been in their job for more than four years.

Studies of lottery winners in other countries have found similarly muted labor responses, the report said. A separate U.S. study from 1993 of the labor effects on people who had received inheritances ranging from $25,000 to $150,000 or more also found that only a “small but statistically significant percentage of heirs left their jobs after receiving their inheritance,” with workers most likely to leave their jobs if they got a big payout.

But it’s still “less than what the stereotype would say,” Hubbard said in an interview: 4.6% of individuals quit their jobs after receiving a small inheritance of less than $25,000, compared to 18.2% of workers who got an inheritance of more than $150,000, he noted.

Instead, studies have shown that people who get windfalls may be more likely to become self-employed, participate in financial markets, save, and spend money on necessary goods like housing and transportation, the report’s authors wrote.

“One of the important things that lottery winners do with the money,” Darity said, “is that they frequently set up trust accounts or the equivalent for their children or their grandchildren.”

Small windfalls, including those offered through monthly checks from guaranteed-income pilot programs, have also been shown to be used for essentials like food and utilities without negative effects on employment. The framing of the money received can also have an effect on how it’s spent, the authors said: People who get a payout from bequests or life insurance tend to have more negative emotions about the money and will use it for more “utilitarian” purposes, according to one 2009 study.

From the archives (March 2021): Employment rose among those in California universal-income experiment, study finds

Reparations wouldn’t unleash ‘flagrant spending,’ researchers say

Despite their findings, “windfalls are not magical panaceas for all financial woes,” the authors emphasized.

For example, a 2011 study cited in the report found that among people who were already in precarious financial positions, lottery winnings delayed, rather than prevented, an eventual bankruptcy filing. Another report from 2006 found that “large inheritances led to disproportionately less saving,” the researchers noted in the Roosevelt Institute report.

“Research over the past two decades has demonstrated that their bounties are not limitless, and, crucially, that informed stewardship of received assets is still necessary (albeit, not always sufficient) to achieve and maximize long-term financial success,” the authors wrote.

But they added that reparations, particularly if “framed not as handouts but rather as reparative payments” to Black Americans, would not unleash “flagrant spending on nonessential goods” based on studies on windfalls, and could instead improve recipients’ emotional well-being and financial stability.

“Of course, the merits of making such payments should not be assessed solely on the basis of the anticipated economic effects,” the authors said. “Moreover, using the absence of evidence of this type as a justification for delaying reparative payments, such as those to Black descendants of American slavery, is inconsistent with the fact that other groups previously have received similar payments in the wake of atrocities and tragedies.”

From the archives (January 2023): How to pay for reparations in California? ‘Swollen’ wealth could replace ‘stolen’ wealth through taxes.

Source link

#reparations #lead #irresponsible #spending #Studies #cash #windfalls #suggest #report

‘We’ve become a renting nation’: Landlords benefit from high house prices, but millions of renters find themselves trapped

When Nashville, Tenn., native Stephen Parker recently listed a mobile home that he owns on the rental market, he received about 30 applications in one week. “I priced it competitively,” he said.

Parker, who is also a real-estate agent, said that he sees rent growth staying strong as many people find it too expensive to purchase homes, a situation made worse by low inventory and high interest rates.

He bought his first investment property in 2020, and his portfolio of rentals has since grown. He owns various properties, including a small mobile home park, a duplex and several single-family homes.

“We’ve become a renting nation,” Henry Stimler, an executive in the multifamily capital-markets division at the real-estate firm Newmark, told MarketWatch.

Renters have more flexibility and fewer of the responsibilities that come with home ownership, Stimler said, and they can more easily move to other cities and states. “I don’t think it’s a bad thing,” he said.

Nashville, for its part, was ranked one of the hottest real-estate markets of 2023 by Zillow
Z,
-0.72%
.
But with the surge in interest rates and demand, new residents may find buying property in that city expensive.

Stephen Parker, a landlord and real-estate agent from Tennessee, said demand for his rentals has been strong.


Stephen Parker

With homeownership continuing to be out of reach for many, landlords like Parker are poised to benefit. “You may be better off renting, especially if you don’t know if Nashville is where you’re going to be forever,” Parker told MarketWatch.

Mortgage rates began climbing after the U.S. Federal Reserve began raising interest rates in early 2022. On Wednesday, the Mortgage Bankers Association said the 30-year rate was averaging 6.48%, up from 3.22% in early 2022.

Higher rates have added hundreds of dollars in interest costs to home buyers’ monthly payments. Buyers have subsequently seen the amount they can afford to pay for a house shrink, even as there are fewer homes for sale.

The U.S. economic outlook remains unclear — a situation compounded by the crisis in the banking sector. Many Americans are worried about job security and financial stability and are reluctant to purchase a home, according to Fannie Mae
FNMA,
-1.41%
.

Some good news: Rents appear to have stabilized. The government’s analysis of the housing sector shows that rents grew 0.8% in February, pushing the increase over the past year to a 42-year high of 8.8%. However, research from private sources — such as Apartment List — indicates that rent growth has slowed. After five straight months in which rents fell, national rents rose by 0.3% in February, the company said.

‘I just want roots’

Jennifer Mark, a 49-year-old autotransfusionist in Goshen, Ind., lives in a $625-a-month one-bedroom apartment with her adult daughter and her husband. She’s been selling cupcake toppers on Etsy to bring in extra money.

But thanks to medical bills that are weighing on her credit score, Mark is not yet able to qualify for a Federal Housing Administration-backed loan and can’t purchase a home, although she has a budget of about $150,000.

Finding a two-bedroom to rent would make homeownership an even more distant prospect. The higher monthly rent would make it difficult for her to save for a home and to pay off the debts that are keeping her credit score low.

The average rent for a two-bedroom apartment in Goshen is $925 per month, up 12% from a year ago, according to Rent.com. For a decent apartment, the cost is closer to $1,200. “My God, rent is so high,” she said.

Renting also comes with restrictions. “If I’m going to be paying this much for rent, then I may as well own and be able to do what I want with my house and not have someone tell me, ‘Oh, you can’t have a cat. You can’t have a dog,’” she said.

She needs to pay off medical bills so she can achieve a credit score of at least 580 — a level she’s already surpassed on newer credit-scoring models not often used by mortgage lenders, like FICO 8 — and qualify for a loan.

Renting does have some perks, she said. She doesn’t have to worry about paying for plumbing or furnace issues, for instance. But owning a home is still her dream, and it remains out of reach. “I just want roots,” Mark said.

A generation of renters?

The data shows a mixed picture for renters: While the U.S. is building a ton of apartments, home prices aren’t expected to fall enough to make owning one affordable for many lower-income Americans.

There are currently over 940,000 apartments under construction in the U.S., up 24.9% from a year ago, which is helping to address demand. The number of multifamily units under construction is at its highest level since 1974.

But the supply is not helping all Americans equally. The U.S. is short approximately 7.3 million affordable, available rental homes for extremely low-income tenants, according to the National Low Income Housing Coalition.

One of Stephen Parker’s rental units.


Stephen Parker

Newer units, meanwhile, have been targeted at higher-income renters, wrote Whitney Airgood-Obrycki, a senior research associate at the Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies, in a blog post this month.

And while rent growth has moderated for more expensive apartments in more sought-after neighborhoods, Airgood-Obrycki wrote, prices were rising faster at the end of last year for the lowest-quality units.

Landlords are slowing rent increases, Redfin
RDFN,
-5.08%

deputy chief economist Taylor Marr said in a recent report, “because they’re grappling with a rise in vacancies as an influx of new apartments hits the market.”

Renters — particularly in the multifamily sector — are more likely to stay put due to high interest rates, Stimler said.

“Those who bought apartment buildings last year and locked in historically low rates before rates started rising, they’re going to be okay, because less and less of their tenants are going to leave and become homeowners,” Stimler said.

Some Americans feel like they are becoming a generation of permanent renters, losing out on the “American dream” of owning a home and building wealth through real estate. But Stimler said he did not think that was necessarily a bad thing.

“Our parents got married at 21 or 22, settled down, bought a home, got on the property ladder, and that was their first property purchase,” Stimler said. “That was a huge milestone then. Today, we don’t have that need anymore.”

“Millennials are much more transient,” he said. “They want to be able to pick up and leave, and go anywhere [and have] the ability to work from anywhere. All of these factors have led to a decline in the demand for single-family homes.”

Wherever you stand on that particular debate, one thing is clear: Landlords are benefiting from an increasingly unaffordable housing market, while millions of renters in the U.S. find themselves trapped.

“One man’s meat is another man’s poison,” Stimler said.

Source link

#Weve #renting #nation #Landlords #benefit #high #house #prices #millions #renters #find #trapped

Tindered out? How to avoid creeps, time wasters and liars this Valentine’s Day

Michelle has had her fair share of bad dates.

A divorced mother of four children, Michelle, 52, resolved to maintain her sense of humor when she returned to the dating market, and signed up for Hinge, an online dating service that includes voice memos, in addition to audio and video functions that enable two interested parties to talk to each other without sharing their phone numbers.

Given that she had not dated since she was in her 20s, Michelle, who asked for her surname to be withheld, was thrown into the world of online dating, right swipes, ghosting, men who were actually living overseas, married men, men who lied about their age and men who posted photos that were 10 years old. She split from her husband of nearly two decades in 2014.

Hinge is part of Match.com’s
MTCH,
+1.22%

group of apps along with OKCupid, Tinder, Bumble, and Christian Mingle, among others. The company promotes itself as the app that is designed to be deleted by its users. It’s a bold statement in the era of online dating, when people scroll through profiles — swiping right for yes and left for no — in search of their perfect mate.

But Hinge, like many other dating apps, introduced a video function in 2020 to help push people to “meet” during the worst days of the coronavirus pandemic. Dating experts advise applying the same rules you would to a Zoom
ZM,
+3.06%

call: dress smartly, use an overhead light rather than a backlight that casts you in shadow, and don’t sit in front of yesterday’s pile of dirty laundry.

‘It’s amazing how many guys use a picture from 10 years ago. You can barely recognize them when you meet them.’


— Michelle, 52, a divorced mother of four who searched for love online

A video date will reveal a lot more than a profile picture. “It’s amazing how many guys use a picture from 10 years ago,” Michelle said. “You can barely recognize them when you meet them. I discovered that someone who is very quick to ask for your email address or your number is more likely to be a scammer. Unfortunately, there’s a lot of scamming on dating apps.”

She’s not wrong. Nearly 70,000 Americans lost $1.3 billion to romance scams through social media and dating apps last year, up from 56,000 the year before, according to the Federal Trade Commission. That’s broadly in line with the amount of money lost the previous year, but up significantly from the $730 million lost in 2020.

Through her work as a social worker, Michelle has learned to evaluate people and look for red flags. She has used those skills when online dating. She watches out for “goofy stuff” like a man who is writing like a character from a romance novel. “The Lifetime Channel Christmas Love Story is not happening on Hinge,” she said. “Those are the things that I kind of find funny.”

Other red flags: Someone who lies about their age, is unwilling to meet, won’t turn on the video chat function — what have they got to hide? — and a man who is cheap. “Why did I drive 45 minutes to meet you and you can’t even buy me a cup of coffee? I don’t want someone who is stingy. Either they’re really miserly, have poor judgment, or poor people skills.”

The perilous side of handheld love machines

Dating apps are the ultimate love machine, churning out potential partners every two seconds, someone who is taller, younger, hotter, richer, broader, slimmer, sexier, kookier, weirder — and the list goes on. All of life’s parade is a swipe away. Millions of people use dating apps — from Grindr for gay men to Facebook Dating for pretty much everyone.

There is a balance between keeping people swiping and helping them find love. It’s a numbers game, and can be as addictive as playing the slots. EHarmony promotes its Compatibility Score, while OKCupid asks users to answer an almost limitless number of questions in order to match with more appropriate people. But critics say it leads to the gamification of people’s love lives.

Jenny Taitz, author of “How to Be Single and Happy: Science-Based Strategies for Keeping Your Sanity While Looking for a Soul Mate,” said one of the most common complaints about dating apps is the constant game of cat and mouse. Each user is probably talking to several people at the same time, and it’s tough to get people off the apps and into the real world.

If you like someone, she says, move to a video chat to test the chemistry. “It’s time-consuming, but you need to move from a pen pal to an in-person meetup,” she said. “It could be something that you do all the time, so you really have to have limits. If you’re having four dates a week, does that mean you’re not making time for friendships where you have an investment?”

‘The same person who volunteers at a soup kitchen might easily ghost someone. There is so much detachment.’


— Jenny Taitz, author of ‘How to Be Single and Happy’

Anonymity can often lead to ghosting, when people just disappear or stop answering messages. “We need to treat people like they would treat their future child or best friend,” Taitz said. “Bad behavior is so pervasive, and people are not held accountable for their actions. The same person who volunteers at a soup kitchen might easily ghost someone. There is so much detachment.”

Some studies have linked dating apps with depression, while other studies have found that online dating has led to a string of robberies through hook-ups on Grindr, and can also make it easier for sexual predators to find victims. These problems obviously exist in the real world, but social media and dating apps can provide an easier path for bad actors.

Julie Valentine, a researcher, sexual-assault nurse examiner, and associate dean of Brigham Young University’s College of Nursing, analyzed 1,968 “acquaintance” sexual assaults that occurred between 2017 and 2020. She and her fellow researchers concluded that 14% of these sexual assaults resulted from a dating-app’s first in-person meeting.

“One-third of the victims were strangled and had more injuries than other sexual-assault victims,” the study found. “Through dating apps, personas are created without being subjected to any criminal background checks or security screening. This means that potential victims have the burden of self-protection.”

All those coffees take time and money

A spokeswoman for Match.com said it does not release data on how many people have actually used the video chat function. If people did use the function more often without sharing their phone number, it would in theory provide a layer of protection, help weed out bad actors, and help people decide whether a prospective date is compatible early in the process.

Cherlyn Chong, the Las Vegas-based founder of Get Over Him, a program to help women get over toxic relationships, does not believe the video chat function is as widely used as it should be. Chong, who describes herself as a dating coach and a trauma specialist, encourages her clients to use every method available to screen dates, in addition to meeting in a public place.

So what if a man did not want to video chat? “If they didn’t want to video, that’s fine,” Chong said. “But their reaction to the request would be a litmus test. We would know he is probably not someone to date, as he is not flexible. It’s also very telling if a woman explains that it’s a safety issue. The response of the guy in that situation would also be another litmus test.”

“Once you give someone their phone number, you don’t know what they are going to do with it,” Chong said. She said one of her clients encountered a man who shared her phone number with others, and sent it to a spam site on the internet. “You want to believe in the best of people,” she said, “but there are people who misuse your number because they can’t handle rejection.”

‘A couple of cocktails in New York City? You’re looking at $60 to $100, or a few hundred dollars for a pricier meal.’


— Connell Barrett, author of ‘Dating Sucks, But You Don’t’

Connell Barrett, author of “Dating Sucks, But You Don’t,” said video dates are a good first step. “You can see your date, and read their body language,” he said. “Because physical contact is off the table for a video date, it can free both singles to let go and not worry about the pressure about moving in for the first kiss. Good chemistry happens when there’s less pressure.”

Video dating also saves you time and money, especially if you’re the one who picks up the tab. “A couple of cocktails in New York City? You’re looking at $60 to $100, or a few hundred dollars for a pricier meal,” he said. Regular daters could end up spending up to $1,500 a month in bigger cities, if they’re dating a lot and eating out, Barrett added.

How much you spend will clearly depend on your lifestyle. Members of The League, a dating app that’s geared towards professionals, spend up to $260 a month on dates, followed by $215 a month for singletons using Christian Mingle, $198 for people signed up to Match.com, and $174 for Meta’s
META,
+3.03%

Facebook Dating subscribers, according to a recent survey.

A video call allows people to get a sense of the person’s circumstances and personality, and can avoid wasting an hour having coffee with someone you will never see again. Be fun, be playful, don’t ask about exes or grill the other person “60 Minutes”-style, Barrett said. “A big mistake people make in dating is trying to impress the other person,” he said.

Video dating goes back to the 1970s

Jeff Ullman created the first successful video-dating service in Los Angeles in 1975 called Great Expectations. People recorded messages direct-to-camera. “We started with Betamax, moved to VHS, and upgraded to CD-ROMs,” he said. “As long as there are adults, there will be the hunt for love, and there will be the longing for ‘I’m missing someone, I’m missing something,’” he told MarketWatch.

“The best and the brightest did not go into dating services in the 1970s and 1980s,” he said. “I only went into it because I wanted to change the world. What I wanted to do was turn pity to envy. Our videos were 5 or 6 minutes long. There were no stock questions. They had to be ad-libbed. The only similar question was the last one: ‘What are the qualities that are most important in a relationship?’”

He turned Great Expectations into a national franchise where customers paid $595 to $1,995 a year for membership ($1 in 1975 is around $5 today). “We did not hard sell you. We did a ‘heart sell.’ We had all kinds of Type As — doctors, lawyers, studio production chiefs, who all thought they were God’s gift, or God’s gift to womankind, but when they talked about their loneliness, they cried.”

People will always be searching for that perfect mate, Ullman said, whether it’s through videos, words, photos, psychological compatibility, A.I., or through arranged marriages or matchmakers. “But there is no perfect match. My wife Cindy and I are well matched. She’s not perfect. I’m not perfect. The moment either one of us begins to think we’re perfect is the moment we introduce negative forces.”

‘What I wanted to do was turn pity to envy. Our videos were 5 or 6 minutes. There were no stock questions.’


— Jeff Ullman, created Great Expectations, a video-dating service in Los Angeles in 1975

Before TikTok and Skype, people were not as comfortable in front of the camera, particularly if they had to talk about themselves. “We always hid the camera,” Ullman said. The 1970s decor of dark wood and indoor plants made that easier. “When we were finished, they’d say, ‘When are you going to start?’” But they were already on tape. They were, he said, happy with the first take 95% of the time.

Ullman required his franchisees to give members a three-day right to cancel for any reason — including “I’m not going to tell you” — if they changed their terms of service. “They just had to mail us or fax us their notice. Half of my franchisees were about to revolt.” Until, he said, they realized they could not afford to have a bad reputation in an industry where people were putting their hearts on the line.

It all started with a Sony-Matic Portable Videocorder gifted to him by his parents when he graduated from UC Berkeley in 1972. “They were very expensive, but they were portable. Whenever I went anywhere, whether it was a parade or a demonstration, which were common back then, they always let me in because they thought I was from “60 Minutes.” It gave us a sense of power.”

Fast forward to 2023: That power is in the hands of the $3 billion online dating industry and, perhaps to a lesser extent, in the hands of the singletons who are putting their own messages out into the world through words and pictures. In the 1970s, most people were still meeting in person. These days, your online competition is, well, almost every single person within a 50-mile radius.

Watching out for those ‘green flags’

Video dating has come in handy for singletons like Andrew Kneeshaw, a photographer and publican in Streete, County Westmeath, a small town in the Irish midlands. He’s currently active on three dating sites: Plenty of Fish, Bumble and Facebook Dating. In-app video calls have saved him — and his potential dates — time, gasoline and money spent on coffee and lunch.

“Even someone local could be 15 or 20 miles away,” he said. He’s currently talking to a woman in Dublin, which is more than an hour away. “Hearing someone’s voice is one thing, but seeing that they are the genuine person they are supposed to be on the dating site definitely does help.” He could spend upwards of 20 euros ($21.45) on coffee/lunch, excluding gasoline.

He did go on a dinner date recently without having a video call, and he regretted it. “Neither of us felt there was a spark,” Kneeshaw said. So they split the check as they would likely never see each other again? “That sounds terrible, but yes,” he said. “I go on a date at best once a week. If you’re doing it a few times a week, it does add up very quickly.”

Ken Page, a Long Beach, N.Y.-based psychotherapist and host of the Deeper Dating podcast, is married with three children, and has compassion for people like Kneeshaw who live in more remote areas. In New York, he said, some people won’t travel uptown if they live downtown, and many more people won’t even cross the river to New Jersey.

‘If it’s a video chat, you have the opportunity to get to know them more, and have that old-fashioned courtship experience.’


— Ken Page, a psychotherapist and host of the Deeper Dating podcast

He said green flags are just as important as red flags when deciding to move from a video date to an in-person date. “Is their smile warm and engaging? Are you attracted to the animation they have in their face? You just get tons more data when you see the person. You save money, and you save time before you get to the next step.”

In-person first dates can be brutal. “Your first reaction is, ‘they’re not attractive enough, I’ve got to get out of here,’” Page said. “If it’s a video chat, you have the opportunity to get to know them more, and have that old-fashioned courtship experience where attraction starts to grow. The ‘light attractions’ have more opportunity to grow without the pressure of meeting in person.”

Dating apps are a carousel of romantic dreams. The focus is on looks rather than personality or character. “There are so many people waiting online,” Page said. “That does not serve us. Unless the person really wows us, we swipe left. If you do a video chat, you will be more likely to get to know that person — instead of only getting to know the ‘9s’ and ‘10s.’”

And Michelle? The divorced Californian mother of four said she finally met a guy on Hinge last October, and they’ve been dating since then. “He’s just a fabulous guy. He actually moved slower than what I had experienced with other guys I had dated.” She kept her sense of humor and perspective, which helped. “He said, ‘You’re so funny.’ I didn’t have anything to lose.”

“It’s almost going to Zara
ITX,
+1.55%
,
” she said. “Nine times out of 10 you may not find something you like, but one time out of 10 you do.”

Source link

#Tindered #avoid #creeps #time #wasters #liars #Valentines #Day

‘My stepmother has been less than ethical’: I suspect my stepmom removed me as beneficiary from my late father’s life-insurance policy. What can I do?

My dad passed away in March 2019. My stepmom told me I had an inheritance from my dad.  She ceased communication with me after my dad passed away. I reached out to the Department of Financial Services website for lost life-insurance policies, and received a letter saying my dad was a participant, but had named someone other than me as a beneficiary.

My stepmother has been less than ethical at times. She previously stole money from her sister’s bank account while working for the financial institution that she now runs. Her sister did not press charges, so the matter was dropped by my dad, with whom she was having an affair. Is it possible that she changed the beneficiary, and could have forged anything on behalf of my dad?

My family also suspects she tried to cash another life-insurance policy for which I was a 51% beneficiary. She sent me a check after my dad passed saying it was a “gift,” and called me nearly two years later saying a policy had just been “found” with me as 51% beneficiary. I suspect she was the 49% beneficiary. To make matters worse, that policy was through her place of business.

Suspicious Daughter

Dear Suspicious,

Anything is possible. It sounds like you are dealing with an unknown quantity, and she should not be trusted with other people’s money. Your stepmother does not, from your account, appear to be on the up-and-up, given that she reportedly stole money from her sister’s bank account. It may be that she could not bring herself to cash a policy with you receiving 49% — hence the delay —  but given the division outlined in the policy it seems unlikely that she could have kept the entire policy for herself. An executor has a responsibility to deal with an estate in a timely manner.

It’s not unheard of for people to question an amendment that was made to a trust, insurance policy or last will and testament. Priscilla Presley, the ex-wife of Elvis Presley, the “King of Rock and Roll” who died in 1977, filed legal documents in Los Angeles Superior Court last week, disputing the validity of an amendment to a living trust overseeing the estate of her late daughter Lisa Marie Presley, who died earlier this month. The 2016 amendment removed Priscilla Presley and a former business manager as trustees, the Associated Press reported.

Among the issues cited in the legal filing: Priscilla Presley was allegedly not notified of the change as required, an absence of a witness or notarization, Priscilla Presley’s name was misspelled in a document that was allegedly signed by her late daughter, and Lisa Marie Presley’s own signature was described as atypical, the news agency also reported. Aside from questions swirling over the authenticity of an amendment, changes to wills, trusts and — in your case — insurance policies must always meet certain legal standards.

It’s not unheard of for people to question an amendment that was made to a trust, insurance policy or last will and testament.

“Last-minute changes in beneficiaries can be a red flag for life-insurance companies,” according to LifeInsuranceAttorney.com. “Usually, the person insured by a life-insurance policy can change their beneficiaries whenever they want, so long as the change complies with any specific requirements in the life-insurance policy. However, when the insured person is elderly, severely ill or lacking mental capacity, and the change in beneficiary happens shortly before the insured person passes away, they may have been unduly influenced by others.”

“For example, a caretaker or estranged family member may convince or influence the vulnerable insured person to add them as a beneficiary on the insured person’s life-insurance policy or to remove other beneficiaries,” the firm says. What’s more, “Life-insurance companies may also deny claims if the beneficiary made a change in the beneficiary that did not comply with the requirements of the insured person’s life-insurance policy. Some policies may require that the insured person have a certain amount of witnesses present,” it adds.

Depending on the amount of money involved, you may wish to hire an attorney to see if you have a case and/or to put your mind at rest. The statute of limitations — that is, the amount of time you have to challenge the validity of a life-insurance policy — may vary, depending on the circumstances, the state where you live and/or whether new information has come to light. “The statute of limitations, in most cases, lasts for three years. But not always,” according to the Center for Life Insurance Disputes, an insurance agency in Washington, D.C.

She stopped talking to you after your father passed away: It could be that she was shoring up what was left of his estate, and figuring out what she could take for herself. Or it may be that you did not get along, and a breakdown of communication was inevitable. Or both. Were there any changes made to your father’s policy that would raise a red flag? That much is unclear. Your stepmother may have learned her lesson when she was not prosecuted by her sister for alleged financial malfeasance.

And, then again, maybe not.

Yocan email The Moneyist with any financial and ethical questions related to coronavirus at [email protected], and follow Quentin Fottrell on Twitter.

Check out the Moneyist private Facebook group, where we look for answers to life’s thorniest money issues. Readers write in to me with all sorts of dilemmas. Post your questions, tell me what you want to know more about, or weigh in on the latest Moneyist columns.

The Moneyist regrets he cannot reply to questions individually.

More from Quentin Fottrell:

My mother excluded me from her will — before she died, my sibling cashed out her annuity policy, on which I was a beneficiary. Should I sue my family?

‘I’m clean and sober’: My late father left me 25% of his estate, and my wealthy brother 75%. My brother died 10 months later. Should I ask his son for his share?

‘It’s still painful’: My wife of just one year left me, took all her belongings and won’t answer her phone. How do I protect my finances?



Source link

#stepmother #ethical #suspect #stepmom #removed #beneficiary #late #fathers #lifeinsurance #policy

‘I am angry’: I’m an unmarried stay-at-home mother in a 20-year relationship, but my boyfriend won’t put my name on the deed of our house. Am I unreasonable?

I have been in my relationship for almost 20 years. For personal reasons, we are not married but we have a 10-year-old child.

When our child was born, we decided that I would be a stay-at-home parent because my low-paying job didn’t cover the costs of child care, and at the time, we were stretched. I have been an at-home caregiver and homemaker for a decade.

About two years ago, we finally saved enough to buy our first home. It’s a condo, but it’s ours. Since it was my first house purchase, I didn’t fully understand the process, so by the time my partner closed on the condo, I realized I was not on the deed.

When I asked why I was left out, my partner made some noises about loan applications, the cost, etc. My credit score is higher than his, so if I were part of the loan process for the mortgage, wouldn’t it have been beneficial to us?

In the two years since we’ve bought and moved into our place, we’ve had several tense “discussions” about adding me to the deed. For me, even though I’m not an earner, I am still a working member of this household, so having my name on the deed is about equality in the relationship and family.

When our child was born, we decided that I would be a stay-at-home parent because my low-paying job didn’t cover the costs of child care.

Through my labor as a homemaker, which includes meal preparation, cleaning, laundry and home maintenance — not to mention 24/7 childcare — I feel my role as a “stakeholder” in this family should include legally owning my home. Am I wrong?

Through the various discussions we’ve had, it seems my partner is unwilling to add me to the deed. First, he got angry whenever I tried to discuss it, and tried to make it sound as if I was being completely unreasonable. But now he says it’s because it’ll cost several thousand dollars, and that in the end, it “really shouldn’t matter.”

But it does matter. To me, not being on the deed is a direct correlation to how I am devalued for my time and labor. I feel like I am considered “less than” simply because I am a woman, an at-home parent, and a homemaker. I am angry about my situation.

Adding to the complication, we JUST purchased an upstairs neighbor’s condo with the intention of renting it out. After all the fuss about being excluded, my partner made sure my name is on the deed for this second unit. But because of this, my partner says having my name on the original home is “unnecessary.”

I want to continue to fight for my name to be added — to fully own BOTH properties. But my partner is still making me sound completely unreasonable, to spend thousands of dollars just for a “piece of paper.” I know we can afford the costs, and I feel the cost is worth it so I can be on equal footing in this family. And legally, it is not just a piece of paper to me.

Am I really being unreasonable? Will the costs really outweigh the benefits? What can I do?

We live in New Jersey.

Thank you.

Not on the Deed

Dear Not on the Deed,

Common-law marriage is not recognized in New Jersey, so it’s up to unmarried couples to manage their joint assets the old-fashioned way. The father of your child has certainly done his best to do that, and has tipped the scales in his favor.

You are either a committed couple in a long-term relationship with a view to sharing your lives, or you’re not. Not putting you on the mortgage — assuming he did so given your good credit — or the deed of your home is sharp practice. At this point, you would likely need to finance to put you on the mortgage, and may need to inform the lender to do the latter.

Put bluntly, you’re not being unreasonable. There is a huge amount of physical, mental and emotional labor involved in being a stay-at-home parent and homemaker, and an equal amount of time devoted to raising your son and taking care of your home while your partner attends to his 9-to-5 job.

Being in a long-term unmarried relationship can affect everything from taxes to real estate. “Unmarried couples do not have the same rights as married couples when it comes to estate planning,” according to the New Jersey-based Bronzino Law Firm.

“They aren’t eligible to inherit a portion of their partner’s estate, for example; and they don’t receive tax breaks on property that they plan to leave their long-term partner after their death, the way that married couples do,” the law firm writes.

There is a huge amount of physical, mental and emotional labor involved in being a stay-at-home parent and homemaker, and an equal amount of time devoted to raising your son.

Your partner would have to file a grant or warranty deed with the county clerk. This could come with ramifications for insurance and should be done in consultation with a lawyer. It should, in theory, only cost a few hundred dollars.

I say “in theory” as that does not account for the closing costs and, of course, if there is a significantly higher interest rate now than when the loan was first signed.

“Deeds are characterized by ‘guarantees’ the grantor makes about their interest in the property, and ‘promises” of future action the grantor will take if their representations are challenged,” according to the law firm of Earl White.

“Covenants are the defining feature of each type of deed,” he writes. “Sellers often guarantee a property is sold free and clear of mortgages and liens, and that the seller has authority to make the sale.”

Some broader context: A few years ago, Oxfam released a study that estimated women contributed $10.8 trillion to the world’s economy every year in unpaid labor. That’s three times the size of the world’s technology industry.

The cost of you pursuing this does not outweigh the benefits. Your time is valuable. Your contribution to your partnership is valuable. Your sense of worth is valuable. And your role as a homemaker and a mother is also valuable.

Yocan email The Moneyist with any financial and ethical questions related to coronavirus at [email protected], and follow Quentin Fottrell on Twitter.

Check out the Moneyist private Facebook group, where we look for answers to life’s thorniest money issues. Readers write in to me with all sorts of dilemmas. Post your questions, tell me what you want to know more about, or weigh in on the latest Moneyist columns.

The Moneyist regrets he cannot reply to questions individually.

More from Quentin Fottrell:

• ‘I’ve felt like an outsider my whole life’: My father died without a will, leaving behind my stepmother and her 4 children. Do I have any rights to his estate?
• ‘He was infatuated with her’: My brother had a drinking problem and took his own life. He left $6 million to his former girlfriend who used to buy him alcohol
• She had a will, but it was null and void’: My friend and her sister are fighting over their mother’s life-insurance policy and bank account. Who should win out?



Source link

#angry #unmarried #stayathome #mother #20year #relationship #boyfriend #wont #put #deed #house #unreasonable

‘Gaslighters have two signature moves’: Are you being gaslighted at work? Here’s how to recognize the signs.

Are you less happy at work since you befriended that new recruit? Have they told you stories about how colleagues have constantly undermined them? Maybe you have a boss who excludes you from key meetings and then asks why you did not attend a meeting even though you are pretty sure you were not invited to begin with. If any of this rings true, you may be working with a gaslighter.

Gaslighters, as the name suggests, cast themselves in a positive light — friend or confidante who is here to help — but actually are manipulating or undermining others, usually from the shadows, which adds to their potential power.

Merriam-Webster named “gaslighting” the word of the year. Searches for the word on Merriam-Webster.com surged 1,740% in 2022 over the prior year, despite there not being an event that the publisher — known for its dictionaries — could point to as a cause of the spike.

It defines gaslighting as “psychological manipulation of a person usually over an extended period of time that causes the victim to question the validity of their own thoughts, perception of reality, or memories and typically leads to confusion, loss of confidence and self-esteem, uncertainty of one’s emotional or mental stability, and a dependency on the perpetrator.”

The term was coined in a 1938 play, “Gas Light,” a psychological thriller set in Victorian London and written by Patrick Hamilton.

George Cukor’s 1944 film, “Gaslight,” based on the play, further popularized the term. In that film, Gregory (Charles Boyer) tries to convince his wife Paula (Ingrid Bergman) that she has lost her reason. When he turns on the lights in the attic in his search for a treasure trove of hidden jewels, the gaslight flickers in the rest of the house. He tells Paula that she is merely imagining the dimming of the lights.

‘Jerks at work’ or actual gaslighters?

The workplace is fertile ground for such behavior, given what’s at stake: money, power, status, promotion, rivalry and the intrigue that often comes with office politics.

I’m in the business of helping people work out their conflicts at work. In fact, I dedicated a whole chapter in my book, “Jerks at Work,” to gaslighters.

‘For gaslighters, slow and steady wins the race, and the best ones make friends with their victims first.’

What has surprised me is how wide-ranging the definition of “gaslighting” has become. Everything from “not respecting personal boundaries” to “talking so much shit about me I couldn’t get hired for two years” seems to fall under the “gaslighting” umbrella.

What I’ve learned from my doom scrolling on social media is that the word “gaslighter” — probably the worst name to bestow on a colleague or boss — seems to refer to anyone who’s done a whole bunch of bad things to us at work, especially things that involve humiliation.

So what really is a gaslighter, and why is it important to distinguish one from, say, a demeaning boss with a chip on their shoulder and a penchant for public shaming?

If we stick to the clinical definition, gaslighters have two signature moves: They lie with the intent of creating a false reality, and they cut off their victims socially.

They position themselves as both savior and underminer, creating a negative and fearful atmosphere, spreading gossip and taking credit for other people’s work. They are often jealous and resentful, and aim to undercut others in order to further their own position.

In the workplace, you may also be an unwitting pawn in the gaslighting of another colleague.

You may also be an unwitting pawn in the gaslighting of another colleague. The gaslighter might try to convince you that Johnny is trying to steal your leadership role on a project, and encourage you to freeze him out in the cafeteria at lunch time, or simply be extra wary about sharing important information.

For gaslighters, slow and steady wins the race, and the best ones make friends with their victims first. For this reason, it could also be considered a form of workplace harassment.

They often flatter them, make them feel special. Others create a fear of speaking up in their victims by making their position at work seem more precarious than it is. And the lies are complex, coming at you in layers. It takes a long time to realize your status as a victim of gaslighting, and social isolation is a necessary part of this process.

‘It takes a long time to realize your status as a victim of gaslighting, and social isolation is a necessary part of this process.’

Take smart action — no direct confrontration

There’s a difference between an annoying coworker or micromanaging boss, and a gaslighter, who lies and conspires to undermine your position. “The gaslighter doesn’t want you to improve or succeed — they’re out to sabotage you,” according to the careers website Monster.com. “They will accuse you of being confused or mistaken, or that you took something they said the wrong way because you are insecure. They might even manipulate paper trails to “prove” they are right.”

Examples cited by Monster.com: “You know you turned in a project, but the gaslighter insists you never gave it to them. You can tell someone has been in your space, moving things around, or even on your computer, but you don’t have proof. You are the only one not included in a team email or meeting invite, or intentionally kept out of the loop. Then when you don’t respond or show up, you are reprimanded.”

Knowing this, what can you do to prevent yourself from becoming a target? First, recognize that gaslighters don’t wear their strategy on their sleeve. Flattery, making you feel like you’re a part of a special club, or questioning your expertise are not things that raise gaslighting alarm bells.

Rather than looking out for mean behavior by a boss or coworker, look out for signs of social isolation. A boss who wants to cut you off from coworkers and other leaders should raise red flags, even if the reason is that “you’re better than them.”

Second, recognize that lie detection is a precarious — and from a scientific perspective, almost impossible — business. Don’t try to become a lie detector, instead take notes, so you can put your “gaslighter” on notice that you are wise to their tactics. You can also use the notes as evidence if you decide to later raise the situation with your human resources department.

Here are some ways to beat the gaslighter: Send emails with “a summary of today’s meeting” so you can document the origin of ideas and make sure they don’t steal credit from you. Furthermore, document things that happened in person, and share it with your would-be gaslighter. And speak up at meetings. Don’t allow yourself to be browbeaten into submission.

The more you document, the more difficult it will be to be victimized. But a word of warning: Don’t try to confront gaslighters — instead, go to your social network to build your reality back up. Trying to beat these folks at their own game is a losing strategy.

Any of these actions, and especially a combination done early in a professional relationship, can work wonders protecting yourself and your career.

Tessa West is a New York University social psychology professor with a particular interest in workplace behavior, and author of “Jerks at Work: Toxic Coworkers and What to Do About Them.

Related stories:

‘We’re like rats in a cage’: Sick and tired of their jobs, American workers strive to regain their agency, their time — and their sanity

People are seeking a genuine connection with their colleagues’ — one that goes beyond ‘Hollywood Squares’ Zoom meetings. Not all workers are happy with remote work.

The backlash to quiet quitting smacks of another attempt by the ruling class to get workers back under their thumbs:’ Am I wrong?

We want to hear from readers who have stories to share about the effects of increasing costs and a changing economy. If you’d like to share your experience, write to [email protected]. Please include your name and the best way to reach you. A reporter may be in touch.

Source link

#Gaslighters #signature #moves #gaslighted #work #Heres #recognize #signs