u/VolkswagenPanda

I'm going to be graduating with a dental degree but don't have any interest in practicing or working with my hands for the rest of my life. Given my extensive scientific background, I was hoping I can enroll back in school and potentially have an advantage finding an analyst role in the pharma industry corridor in New Jersey.

Also I was hoping to maybe work as a dentist for 2 days a week. I'm hoping this job experience will make me significantly more qualified for internships compared to the freshman who's only previous work was as a lifeguard at their local pool.

I know some may recommend an MBA but I won't have any work experience ( and my GPA was kind of mediocre in undergrad and just enough to pass in dental school). I also don't have the finance background needed for masters in finance programs

I'm thinking the base SE provides the same power train and performance but avoids many of the compromises that the sel and r line models bring.

The 18 inch wheels provide thicker sidewalls to handle potholes.

The SE has physical steering wheel buttons and doesn't have travel assist that would require steering wheel replacement.

The lack of a sunroof means you don't have to worry about the sunroof leaking or malfunctioning.

Not having DCC chassis control means cheaper suspension components (and one less part to break)

Not having AWD means you don't have to service a differential and worry about that breaking.

Lack of a digital gauge cluster means you don't ever have to worry about your speedometer, gas gauge, or temperature gauge blacking out.

I was offered $3000 credit by Volkswagen to purchase my current ID.4

However even with that, I can buy an Id.4 pro for the price of the buyout on my standard.

I was wondering if I can negotiate to apply the $3000 credit to the purchase of another CPO or New Volkswagen (eyeing a Golf R or Arteon).

Algeria had a brutal civil war in the 90s, is still fighting a war on the Polisario front in Western Sahara, and greatly suffered from French Colonization. The country is rich in oil, but so are Gabon and Angola but neither of those countries are nearly as developed.

With an HDI of 0.763, Algeria has the highest HDI on the mainland African continent and is even more developed than its less isolated peers like Morocco, Tunisia, and Egypt.

Cities in North America and Europe are known to be more left wing and progressive than rural areas. However it seems like in Latin America, it's the opposite. For example, Fujimori won 63% of the vote in Lima, Milei won in Buenos Aires, Bolsonaro won 55% of the vote in Rio De Janeiro and Sao Paulo, Noboa won in Quito and it was nearly 50/50 in Santiago, Guayaquil, Medellin, and Bogota between the left wing and right wing candidate. Mexico city, despite voting for Sheinbaum, also voted to the right of the country as a whole.

For reference, in cities like New York, Washington DC, Los Angeles, or London, the left wing candidates regularly gets 70%+ of the vote.

The farther back you move the richer you are, but you also must live with older technology and cultural norms.

For example moving back to 1900 you are 40 times richer, but also don't have access to modern medicine and basic plumbing or electricity.

Moving back to 1997, you are only 2 times richer but have most of the comforts of a modern society.

I would choose to move back to 1972. This would multiply my salary by 8 times and things like education, healthcare, and housing were all significantly cheaper even adjusted for inflation. By 1972, most modern medical treatments were already developed, life expectancy was over 70, segregation ended, and things like a/c and colored tv were available.

As an American from Minneapolis, Buenos Aires felt much safer than my city. Granted I only was in CABA, but I felt extremely safe on the buses and the SUBTE, something I cannot say for my city's public transport. Everyone in the city was dressed very well and acted very civilized, there was almost no open drug use, and I encountered few homeless people, beggars, or vagrants.

Why YSK:

Airbags have been required in the US since the 1980s, with side airbags required by the 2000s. However many developing countries don't have these requirements or only recently implemented them.

Cars in developing countries may also have fewer airbags than the cars you're used to. For example, many basic cars may only have one or two airbags instead of the 6 that most modern cars have in the US. Even for the same model, automakers will include fewer safety features. This is in an effort to save cost and due to lower disposable income in developing countries.

Furthermore other features that are standard on cars sold in the US or Europe may not be found on a lot of cars elsewhere like ABS, ESC, a Backup camera, or collision avoidance technology.

In fact, in some countries, cars that were structurally designed in the 1990s are still being made and sold new, the Nissan Tsuru in Mexico for example.

I know this sub may think otherwise but I am horrible at dentistry and likely won't be a successful one. I'll also be 31 when I graduate next year and $800k in debt but I'm still willing to make the switch just cause my hands skills are horrible and I was a horrible dental student (took 6 years to graduate and had to appeal a dismissal to the dean to get reinstated).

I am at this point willing to go back to get my bachelor's in finance and start my undergrad all over back at square 1.

An 800 mm telephoto lens may cost over $2000 but a 40x (20-800mm) bridge camera from 15 years ago can be had for $50.

I know that the sensor size on many bridge cameras are extremely small but I was thinking that for wildlife photography in daylight it will suffice and I wouldnt have a need to spend so much on a telephoto lens for my full frame camera with a focal length I rarely shoot at.

Capital One sent me an offer where you get $10 back every time you spend at least $10 with Paze up to 10 times. Just thought I would share the offer with you

I have about 5 days to spare in Patagonia next month and am deciding which of these two places to go.

I am drawn to Ushuaia for the milder weather and more out of this world scenery (reminds me of Iceland, Alaska, or Norway but for a fraction of the price). The tours/hikes also seem cheaper and easier and the destination seems more under rated. However many other travelers found the area less impressive and touristy.

However, it seems like El Calafate and El Chalten are the stars of Patagonia. The hikes are more impressive (and difficult) and the higher altitude means much colder weather. Also not sure how the winter weather will cooperate and if Fitz Roy could be even visible. As an American living in Colorado, the area also looks similar to what I have back at home whereas Ushuaia seems more exotic.

I've heard prime lenses are sharper but it seems like for the majority of the photography I take, the 24-70 fits my needs. It also seems that the 24-70 mostly underperforms at 24mm and f/2.8 which is a setting I never shoot at.

Was thinking of trading in the 24mm f/2.8D lens since I can get close to what I originally paid for it and using it to upgrade lenses on my backup Sony A6000.