Affiliate Marketing Secrets

I aspire to be a surgeon. Im a senior in high school and i am going to attend my local community college for two years to get rid of some med school pre reqs and to become a certified surgical tech ( i understand that a surgical tech does not lead to being a surgeon i just need a way to pay my way through school and to live and this is a good way to be affiliated with healthcare prior to med school) they make about $40,000-$50,000 i will also recieve approximately $15,000 from an unnamed source. After i get certified i really want to transfer to a university in New york (NYU) and live there for two years while i get my bachelors. i currently live with my family in southern illinois and i really need a change of scenery so the city sounds great. I know that if i moved to new york i wont be able to afford a decent apartment (studio or 1 bdr) in manhattan but i might be able to in queens. what i really like about the city is the ease of transportation via subway, walking, and bus. thats why i dislike Chicago compared to nyc. In chicago there is less mass transit and more citizens driving. I dislike every aspect of chicago compared to nyc except for the cost of living and the closeness to my family.
In your opinion how does chicago compare to nyc in these categories?
Transportation
housing
housing cost
utilities
things to do
night life
schools (universities and medical schools)
The only reason i ask this is that my family feels nyc is too far away and that the cost of living is ridicoulous.

Along the way with this scam, Lord James also pointed out that $100’s of billions in profits were generated, with none of those profits ever being recorded let alone reported (and taxed). In short, this is every bit as illegal as the $100’s of billions in heroin-trade profits laundered by Wall Street each year – from the poppy-fields of Afghanistan. For those pointing out that the fraudulent U.S. Treasuries market hasn’t (yet) required $15 trillion in funny-money to extend this Ponzi-scheme, obviously the banksters can come up with plenty of other uses for their counterfeited/laundered money.
Where do people think that the Plunge Protection Team comes up with its own capital for its daily manipulations of U.S. markets?
Ultra-leveraged Wall Street balance sheets (greater than 30:1) only required a drop in U.S. housing prices of 3% to take their entire paper empires to zero. U.S. housing prices have fallen more than ten times that far. We can only guess at how $trillions (in secret hand-outs) it has taken to delay the implosion of those fraud-factories even this long.
This also explains the fanatical desperation which the Federal Reserve has shown in fighting even the tiniest request for disclosure about its “lending operations”. When you’re secretly counterfeiting $trillions every year, the last thing you want to hear is anything that even faintly resembles the word “audit”.
The U.S. Treasuries market is nothing but a gigantic (and clumsy) fraud. Along with the motive which I have previously supplied for this fraud, Lord James of Blackheath has added “means” and “opportunity” through his own diligent investigations. If the Rule of Law was not already dead in the United States, there is more than enough evidence here to justify a formal (and public) inquiry. Don’t hold your breath!
Banks are now being Robbed from the inside?
Time these Criminals were brought to Justice!
As Max Keiser of Max Keiser Report states Hang a Bankster a Day till they get the message?

I currently attend San Diego State University. There is nothing wrong with the campus, housing, food, faculty, nor resources in this school. However, I don’t feel as if I blend in well with the student body on campus. As a generalization, everyone here seems to be a frat boy meathead or sorority girl just looking to have a great time. Now, there’s nothing wrong with having a great time, but it doesn’t seem that they take their education seriously. It’s something you would see from the Jersey Shore or the Hills on MTV. Some people have recommended me to give it some more time to settle down. But, I am afraid to take the risk as I may not even find my niche or crowd settled here. In all seriousness, I believe the people around you make the joyful experience, but I can’t seem to blend in with anyone here at all. I’m just not part of the “cool” crowd.
As of today, I still have an opportunity to transfer schools to another Cal State, but it’s more of a commuter school. I feel so lost and I don’t want to regret my decision by staying or leaving. What do you think?

I am just curious about this. How does someone go from being bankrupt to living in an exclusive multimillion dollar home(in a period of a year or two)? This person also has absolutely no higher education or trades,skills(that I know of). His father gave him a job running his business when he retired, and last I heard, he doesn’t do it any longer(I assume because of the economy and such) I also heard that he moved to Mexico(where his wive is from) and started a “dress shop”, because he was having a hard time here. Then I check on internet, and find that he is living in an exclusive part of Malibu in a multimillion dollar home(not sure whether he owns or rents, but still..) So, back to my main question. How is this possible? Is there some sort of trick or secret to the housing market or get rich quick schemes that I am not aware of? I am beginning to think he has trees in his back yard with money growing on them(perhaps an entire orchard,lol). Anyone who is knowledgeable on the housing market or business market might be able to explain this. Thanks!

Before you begin, I want to let you know this is a serious topic. This is for some trivia for economic majors. Please keep in mind you should have some economic background before you read this. If you want to give it a try then read everything slowly and thoroughly. PLEASE don’t leave any response as “too long I didn’t read everything blablabla”, sorry about my grammar.
I know the saying that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, and it caught my attention that I know how the rich can’t spend all their savings amassed from corporation business, even if they are taxed certain percentage of their earnings to help poor people get by.
I know simple economic models help demonstrate the problem. Let me know if I am wrong. For simplicity we will start without a government.
Example 1.
Let’s say in the economy there is only 2 dollars, and there are 2 people and each have 1 dollar.
Person A has the secret trade to grow apples but needs land. Person B has the land and housing acquired through inherency. Thus person A pays 1 dollar for the use of his land to grow unlimited apple as well sleep in it shared by person B. Person B in return pays 1 dollar to eat his apple. Thus the money velocity is 1. No one is in debt. No wealth is gained.
Example 2.
Let’s say there are 3 people now. And there is 3 dollar in the economy and each have 1 dollar. Person C is a low IQ laborer, and because he has 1 dollar to spend he will always be broke (in debt) after spending that 1 dollar on either housing or food. Either way Person C is screwed.
Example 3.
Let’s say there are 4 people now, and each have 25 dollar. So there is (25×4) 100 dollar in the economy. Person A still pays 1 dollar for land and sells apple at 1 dollar each, and Person B still charges 1 dollar per person for housing. However Person C and D are willing to work to provide for food and housing, and also demands higher wages. Even If Person C and D work for labor at 1 dollar, they can only pay for either food or shelter. Because of Market theory that as there is more demand, price will rise, therefore there’s an incentive for “A” to sell apple at a higher price let’s say 2 dollar. Because of our desire to survive, C and D will demand higher wages, and then “A” demands even higher prices to compensate for the labor. Person B is fine as long as he can feed himself. This vicious cycle continues. Therefore Person A and B will always amass wealth while Person C and D therefore be spending from their savings until they are broke, meaning they will always be poor.
Example 4.
Let’s say there are 5 people now. Each have 20 dollar. So there is (20×5) 100 dollar in the economy. Because Person C and D are broke. There is an incentive for them to steal. ONLY when the stealing starts, Person A hires person E to work as a police man to safeguard the asset paying him 2 dollar, minimum sustainment. Thus Person A and B will always accumulate wealth, Person C and D will suffer the same faith of poverty. Person E will neither go up or down the wealth ladder.
Example 5.
Let’s say there are is still 6 primary people and 100 other people who are Low IQ laborer, who will still suffer the same faith of Person C and D, just in the matter of moment. The money supply is a lot more now, almost uncountable Person F sees that the world is unjustified and therefore revolt and later a government is form. Person F is a government official and requires the merchant to pay taxes to compensate for the housing, therefore Laborers are only working for food 1 dollar labor for 1 dollar apple, while Person B is also taxed from housing to supply better jobs at better wage to build railroad, sewers, buildings, schools. Keep in mind that not government cannot compensate everyone, therefore some will always be unemployment and broke. While some Low IQ laborers are lucky to acquire free education to get the better paying jobs. Person F is in the safe zone of being a government official.
For now keep in mind there is no bank for money multiplier, bank ratio, money printing, etc. Even if there is, it does not affect the poor people, even if they have savings, the interest is miniscule. Person A will still have more interest base on his large Capital acquired from all the people who used up their savings. There is no longer equality.

Before you begin, I want to let you know this is a serious topic. This is for some trivia for economic majors. Please keep in mind you should have some economic background before you read this. If you want to give it a try then read everything slowly and thoroughly. PLEASE don’t leave any response as “too long I didn’t read everything blablabla”, sorry about my grammar
I know the saying that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, and it caught my attention that I know how the rich can’t spend all their savings amassed from corporation business, even if they are taxed certain percentage of their earnings to help poor people get by.
I know the saying that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, and it caught my attention that I know how the rich can’t spend all their savings amassed from corporation business, even if they are taxed certain percentage of their earnings to help poor people get by.
I know simple economic models help demonstrate the problem. Let me know if I am wrong. For simplicity we will start without a government.
Example 1.
Let’s say in the economy there is only 2 dollars, and there are 2 people and each have 1 dollar.
Person A has the secret trade to grow apples but needs land. Person B has the land and housing acquired through inherency. Thus person A pays 1 dollar for the use of his land to grow unlimited apple as well sleep in it shared by person B. Person B in return pays 1 dollar to eat his apple. Thus the money velocity is 1. No one is in debt. No wealth is gained.
Example 2.
Let’s say there are 3 people now. And there is 3 dollar in the economy and each have 1 dollar. Person C is a low IQ laborer, and because he has 1 dollar to spend he will always be broke (in debt) after spending that 1 dollar on either housing or food. Either way Person C is screwed.
Example 3.
Let’s say there are 4 people now, and each have 25 dollar. So there is (25×4) 100 dollar in the economy. Person A still pays 1 dollar for land and sells apple at 1 dollar each, and Person B still charges 1 dollar per person for housing. However Person C and D are willing to work to provide for food and housing, and also demands higher wages. Even If Person C and D work for labor at 1 dollar, they can only pay for either food or shelter. Because of Market theory that as there is more demand, price will rise, therefore there’s an incentive for “A” to sell apple at a higher price let’s say 2 dollar. Because of our desire to survive, C and D will demand higher wages, and then “A” demands even higher prices to compensate for the labor. Person B is fine as long as he can feed himself. This vicious cycle continues. Therefore Person A and B will always amass wealth while Person C and D therefore be spending from their savings until they are broke, meaning they will always be poor.
Example 4.
Let’s say there are 5 people now. Each have 20 dollar. So there is (20×5) 100 dollar in the economy. Because Person C and D are broke. There is an incentive for them to steal. ONLY when the stealing starts, Person A hires person E to work as a police man to safeguard the asset paying him 2 dollar, minimum sustainment. Thus Person A and B will always accumulate wealth, Person C and D will suffer the same faith of poverty. Person E will neither go up or down the wealth ladder.
Example 5.
Let’s say there are is still 6 primary people and 100 other people who are Low IQ laborer, who will still suffer the same faith of Person C and D, just in the matter of moment. The money supply is a lot more now, almost uncountable Person F sees that the world is unjustified and therefore revolt and later a government is form. Person F is a government official and requires the merchant to pay taxes to compensate for the housing, therefore Laborers are only working for food 1 dollar labor for 1 dollar apple, while Person B is also taxed from housing to supply better jobs at better wage to build railroad, sewers, buildings, schools. Keep in mind that not government cannot compensate everyone, therefore some will always be unemployment and broke. While some Low IQ laborers are lucky to acquire free education to get the better paying jobs. Person F is in the safe zone of being a government official.
For now keep in mind there is no bank for money multiplier, bank ratio, money printing, etc. Even if there is, it does not affect the poor people, even if they have savings, the interest is miniscule. Person A will still have more interest base on his large Capital acquired from all the people who used up their savings. There is no longer equality.