First, congrats on your first 100 days, and hopefully many more to come. As someone who is part of an extended family that has had (and maybe still has?) drug and alcohol problems, I am sure they appreciate your efforts.

I don't drink and can tell you that socializing in general is difficult. One thing I'll throw out there which you might like are small hiking trips. Some of the state parks allow alcohol in designated areas, but many also prohibit it. I've met a few nice people in my travels who share a similar interest in the wilderness and the call of the loons. Not only is it relaxing, generally alcohol-free, but a good source of exercise as well.

I appreciate what you do here, and all meterologists in general.

Unfortunately, it's easy for people to be critical of the work because they don't fully understand the complexity of it. They may see a forecast that doesn't quite match what they experience, or they may be frustrated by sudden changes in the weather. But what they don't see is the immense amount of data you have to analyze with the sophisticated computer models you use to make predictions.

It's worth considering that a police officer could be right 999 times out of 1000, but all that good work can be forgotten when a case like this makes the news. Unfortunately, we rely on the statistical median IQ of the population to be correct 100% of the time, which puts a lot of pressure on them, much like the pressure put on teachers.

It's unclear whether the police officer failed in their duty in this case or if some policy prevented them from "protecting and serving." Having oversight in such situations could significantly reduce the failure rate. If a police officer is likely to make an error in judgment 5% of the time, having someone review the case could reduce the failure rate to 0.25%. Something to consider. But you know. Defund the police?

I'm one of the rare few who are willing to give police officers the benefit of the doubt because they're human, and humans make errors all the time. We put a lot of pressure on certain professions to do things that humans aren't capable of, such as the grocery store worker who directed us to the wrong aisle or the drive-thru worker who messed up our order. Although errors can have significant impacts, they're all made by humans, who are inherently flawed by virtue of being human.

They're just there to protect and serve...

It's not much of a copypasta, but here is how my last conversation with them was initiated:

Hello, my name is ____________. For verification my address is ____________ and account number __________________.

I have a couple of things: First, I think there is an issue with speed in my area. In the past on my plan I was getting 600 Mbps just fine, but I recently heard about a speed upgrade to 800 Mbps in my area, so I tested but now I'm down to 225 Mbps. I tried restarting my cable modem and router, but the speed is consistently lower.

Second, would it be possible to sign another two-year contract on the 800 Mbps tier and get the same promotional pricing as before?

It's not as complicated as people make it out to be. You just need to ask. After a couple more messages they reprovisioned my modem for the correct speed and signed me up for a new contract. The downside is that there's a prorated ETF, but I don't really care since I've had no issues and don't plan on leaving.

The service industry is a difficult job to be in and being nice to these people can go a long way. It takes a special kind of person to work in an environment where you're constantly getting requests from people when they are most unstable (ie: they're upset because they don't understand something or something isn't working).

It's all relative based on where you are, and what field you work in.

Lower-middle class Americans all live like kings if you ask 50% of the rest of the world. Then compare this area to somewhere where $160k base salary + $90k year 1 signing bonus + $80k year 2 signing bonus + $400k worth of RSUs vested over 4 years (5%, 15%, 40%, 40%) is the norm and we are just drops in a bucket. Everything scales. The easiest way to find success post-pandemic is to work for as competitive of a company as you can find while living in the cheapest area they will let you move to.

(btw I meant it kind of half-jokingly but sarcasm doesn't always translate well)

>on't really know the right solution to attract more productive young people. A lot of the issue just has to do with the housing stock being inappropriate for what most young people want and can afford, which is a nationwide problem. In our town, we've had one apartment building conversion go well, but the forces of NIMBY defeated another proposed development on the basis that the town needed

The problem is 100% jobs. The jobs go where the people go, and the people are in cities.

Are you a young college student from MIT looking for an internship? In Boston you're looking at Nvidia, Adobe, Dell, AMD, IBM, and so on. Looking for a tech job in New Hampshire? Good luck. Boston is also packed with hospitals for medical school students. The only noteworthy teaching hospital in New Hampshire is in the middle of nowhere.

Is there a housing problem? Yes, but it's for the people living in New Hampshire and working in New Hampshire. My company can't hire software engineers fast enough, even when starting fresh out of college with 0 experience $90k +$10k singing bonuses. Unfortunately not everyone can can work remotely, but the people that can can outbid 90% in this state—getting those talented young people up here would be no problem if there was work for them.

For scale, I got offered a job for $85k in this state but am making $130k working remotely for a company in Massachusetts (no income tax either btw). I'd probably be around $180k if I wanted to commute but I ain't about that life. So I work for a slave wage because I choose to live and work from up here, but I'm still far better off than most people in NH where I'd be just one of many in Cambridge.

Per the article: I'd like to see a survey from the people choosing to move up here from Massachusetts. Are they remote workers doing what I do? Or are they GOP migrants that are uneducated and couldn't afford to live down there?

You do not need to threaten to cancel. Every 1-2 years, depending on how long the contract goes, I DM their Twitter and ask for their promotional rate. And every time I ask they give it to me. No threats, no nonsense—just a simple inquiry. $59.99/month for the 800 Mbps plan. A lot of people seem to have a lot of bad things to say about Xfinity but I've never had anything but good experiences.

Insurance companies are in the business of making money—not the business of giving out free money to poorly maintained complexes.

Most people will get less out of the deal than what they paid in. The idea is that you'll play smaller sums over time, but they'll take care of you if the big one hits. For home owners the option is to either pay $1000/yr for every year you own the home, or pay ~$250k to rebuild your home should it burn to the ground. Insurance companies make enough off of the majority to pay for the minority of cases which do happen.

tl;dr: Always have insurance if you can't afford to pay for something out of pocket.

Zillow isn't the end-all-be-all pricing index for the market. Take a look at Redfin who estimates you at $484,737:

https://www.redfin.com/NH/Walpole/56-Laclair-Rd-03608/home/88030354

Next, read up on just how bad Zillow's data scientists failed Zilllow when it came to pricing the market:

https://towardsdatascience.com/invaluable-data-science-lessons-to-learn-from-the-failure-of-zillows-flipping-business-25fdc218a62

Feel better yet?

My hot take is that prices should go down for everyone as rates go up. What you, and everyone, can afford is a combination of principle and interest. Therefore, as rates go up, what you can afford in principle is less, because you are paying more in interest. Combine all of this will a staggering economy due to high(er) interest rates and you have fewer people that can afford homes.

As far as what you should tell the realtor? Nothing. Like all of us, you likely got your house because you were the high bidder. No one was willing to pay more than you at the time it was listed. That being said, love your house. It's beautiful on a nice piece of land. Take care of it and maintain it well. No one is getting a good deal buying anything that is a 1:1 with many people looking to buy it.

Having a remote job makes NH a good place to be. I’m in a similar situation and think it’s best to stay in commuting distance to Boston. I understand that you like nature so north of Concord probably has a lot of appeal, but remember that layoffs happen and living close to Boston gives you a lot more flexibility. We haven’t been hit yet, but the company I work for is consolidating BUs so it’s definitely coming.

$194 for my last visit.

Delta Dental of Massachusetts covered $182. WIth my previous employer I had Northeast Delta Dental and they only covered $90.40 for the same treatment at the same dentist.

My personal take on this is that I'd keep paying the $50. Are there cheaper options? Sure, but is it worth the stress of taking away something from someone who is now in their twilight years? That depends on your/their financial situation.

Google Voice is free, and if you're a younger person on a tight budget I could see you going this way. But an elderly person? No shot. The furthest I'd reach would be to go to a mobile phone on a Mint Mobile plan. Mint Mobile will run you $15/month, but you'll end up paying full price for a phone.

First mohawk I've seen in a while.

This is pretty spot on.

Also, the reason everything is cheap in northern NH is because there is no money. No one is going to go up north to build houses cheap so everyone else can be rich. OP says he'd have to make his own money up there, and he's not wrong. He'd also be making a lot less to be competitive.

No matter where you live, it is likely your income will scale with the cost of living in that area. The exception are some of the higher CoL areas where people will pay to live in paradise (ie: Hawaii and some parts of California). The only people getting ahead are the people living in LCoL areas but work remotely for HCoL or VHCoL area businesses.

This should be throw in the "don't hate the player, hate the game" category.

This really depends on where you live and what you spend. All things considered, you’re better off financially in MA than in NH when you consider the cost of living and incomes. To really get ahead you work in MA but live in NH. This is where things like gentrification come into play, but with how red the state-level politicians are, they don’t really worry about things like that.

Have you considered perhaps aiming higher?

Logic might tell you that if you aren’t getting interviews you’re not qualified, but you might just be over qualified. Try to structure your resume highlighting your accomplishments and use a lot of numbers—business people love numbers.

For 15 years experience at a new role I would suggest looking for $120k with a $10k signing bonus in this market. If you can get a spot in a good company where you can learn cool things I would take less but plan on bailing in a couple of years for a 20% raise somewhere else.

As someone who works in tech and lives in New Hampshire, I can tell you that it's not worth it to work in tech and live in New Hampshire. My reasoning is because there aren't a lot of roles out there, and a lot of people want to do it. This being said, it's an employer's market up here so the salaries are low. If you choose to go this route I would suggest looking into Fidelity and BAE Systems—two of the larger companies that can justify having full time helpdesk roles. Other options might include hospitals (DH & Concord), and schools are always understaffed, although you'd only be making around $40k.

I work for a fortune 100 company as a hybrid role out of Massachusetts. I'm not help desk, and I'm in a principal-level position, so I think I'm awarded a little more flexibility than a lot of people would be given when it comes to working from home and thus avoiding the Massachusetts income tax. This being said, all studies I've seen on this show that you'll get further ahead by living in a HCoL or VHCoL area and making their respective salaries rather than living and getting a wage in a lower cost of living. So don't think they're going to get ahead unless you're in a fortune position of being able to work from home.

Good luck.

No, not if you are 100% remote.

Some people in this thread are saying that you only need to pay for the days you are physically on-site in Mass, but I was told that I didn't even need to keep track unless I was in Mass >50% of the time. I think I was on-site three times this year and pay no income tax.