I mean like anywhere, depends on where you apply. Many people won’t care, some will. I’d say that people will care less here other than San Francisco, LA, and New York, so long as you’re qualified. Losing the blue hair may increase your chances of finding a job, but I’d guess that employers who aren’t chill with colorful hair will be less chill overall. Find someone who is chill with your hair, they’ll be chill overall, if you get your work done. Not everyone will be, but plenty will.

Boston Globe, around 2005 to 2010.

It was newsworthy, because Fidelity was buying out shareholders to get below 100 shareholders, and the state contemplated changing tax laws on big sub-S corporation taxation.
At some point the max number of shareholders went to 100, which made it possible for Fidelity to contemplate the change.

> I’ve never heard of a hair color like that

I have seen a few people who had that hair color, but it is not often.

I would change to a natural color for the interviews then play it by ear once you're in.

I’ve never heard of a hair color like that

Our veterinarian has her hair dyed blue. We love it. She’s the best veterinarian I’ve ever had.

It might depend on your field, however. There will always be small minded people who can’t see past their own fears.

Never understanding probability is a key feature of you people, it seems.

[deleted]

Thanks for this! Adding some places to our list.

I would also recommend heading to Harvard Square - lots of options and window shopping.

Lol I think the history of these terms is funny. Frank Lutz, famous conservative political communications consultant preferred the term climate change over global warming because you could more easily weasel your way out of it by just saying "so what, the climate changes all the time!" Or some variation. I had a friend whose mom was a climatologist and her preferred term has always been "global storming", referencing the unpredictability of the situation.

Creative accounting?

I work in a public middle school, it's not common though not unheard of. In my experience, in this profession, nobody cares: parents, teachers, administration, nor students.

[removed]

I work at Harvard and my boss had blue hair lol you’ll be fine.

You’ll be fine. I’m a teacher in a public school system near Boston and no one would say boo about it in any of my schools.

Follow the Science until the science doesn’t agree with the politics. Both parties are guilty of it.

Lifelong New Englander. I only learned what a King cake was when I watched the creepy show on Apple TV called "Servant" where Leanne makes one. I had never heard of it before then. That said, I think I saw one in Market Basket in Cheslea on Saturday. No idea if it contains the baby.

At this point we are getting candidates wearing jogging pants and reeking of weed for a professional position. We would take blue hair no problem.

Art director. You'll be fine.

My wife is 40 with pink hair. Has had it since 14. Never been a problem. Tats n piercings were at a few places, but not in years. You be yourself & you'll be fine.

I never BLAMED tech people. You r clearly looking for a reason to b offended.

and as far as ur stats go - I never said anything about the state im talking about Worcester. we r being inundated but im sure ur stats prove otherwise... what r your sources? what sources are tracking people renting in worcester? would love to know.....

I dyed my hair bright blue early in the pandemic, so had the blue-black dye at the ready to be workplace appropriate. It was something I dreamed of doing but never was the right time because I had to look professional. I kinda hid from video calls for a bit, but my manager saw my hair she mentioned that our employee dresscode does not include anything on hair color. If I was interviewing, I'd likely go with that blue-black like your candidate did, but I have two decades of conditioning that unnatural hair colors aren't professional.

As others have explained it's based on the original price degraded by age.

But the age table stops at 10% for five years and older.

Both of your vehicles are are over 5 years old, so you're really just seeing the difference in their original list prices

Perhaps that things level off after 5 years seems unfair. On the other hand, we could ask what the value of the vehicle should have to do with the tax amount at all. It might make more sense to base the taxes on the impact of the vehicle, at which point older is perhaps actually have more impact than newer.

It may be simplest to look at the value is being used as a proxy for ability to pay and the reduction is capped so that everyone ends up paying something.

Like most tax policies, it's imperfect in many ways - but good luck getting agreement to move to a different imperfection.

I actually noticed that it’s finally a marked graveyard! I took my dog for a walk in there once and found a bunch of half burned books from the 1800’s. Last time I went for a walk through there.

Hey now! I said the worst department of our state government - that doesn't mean other states are better! We all know Massachusetts is the best state in the union.

Chapelle’ Show “why, why treat our customers this way? Because, fuck them, that’s why”