Living cheaply is relative though. I have no idea if this person’s living cheaply is doable on my current savings so it’s meaningless to me until I have some hard numbers.
The trick is living cheaply while earning. Not starting living cheaply only once the money-hose dries up. Obviously, this advice is too late for many people.
Ahmad and Impra are both several cuts above Twinings, not expensive (especially as bulk loose-leaf) and can be found in standard grocery stores, or ordered online.
If you've a specialty tea shop nearby, that's all but certainly better, though it can be pricey.
You'll find there's a whole new world out there, and may regret discovering a taste for real whole-leaf teas.
Greens, whites, blacks, fermented, oolongs, darjeelings, matcha, gunpowder, pu'er, etc.
There are also herbal teas, such as rooibos, not made from sinchilla (tea plant), but also tasty.
Best is to buy a bag of loose tea from a tea shop. The leaves are whole, it's not powder. It's usually not hard to find, but they don't sell it at most supermarkets.
I hate seeing it used that way on HN though because it actively undermines meaty discussion of objective data and promotes the treatment of articles about objective data as click-bait, like it's the "hot sheets" of Men in Black -- like HN is a place to take seriously the wildest conspiracy theories with no real basis.
I thought UAP stands for "unidentified aerial/aerospace phenomenon". Anyway it's better than UFO because it primes you for the fact that many "UFOs" are not flying at all. Many are stars, lights of all kinds, or artifacts of the the recording equipment.
I can think of at least one scenario where you need that call center worker. Let's say internet goes down in your area, but you're not sure where the problem is. Allowing a customer to call for a technician to come check the connection in your house might be a waste if the problem is regional. If too many people do that, the waste of resources compound. And you could argue that AI could diagnose where the problem is and choose what to do, but maybe it can't. You need that human to disambiguate the course of action.
>the alternative is to learn to enjoy bitter beverages.
people seek replacements when things they like become scarce, not alternatives.
asking the public-at-large to wholly change preference (especially when the preference is compounded by biological bias in the way we experience taste..) will never be effective without extenuating circumstance or market control of some sort.
I sympathize with your point -- people should try to enjoy things without a lot of excess sweetness -- but it doesn't align with reality.
> What if a diabetic wants a cookie? Or ice cream?
Diabetics can eat cookies and ice cream, they just need to shoot themselves with insulin afterwards. It's having too much of it the problem.
Besides, if something is bad for you, you avoid it. Period. There are infinite other flavors in life to make it all about that single one. "But I want it" is not a reasonable argument.
