Changetheview @ Changetheview @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

139

Joined

2 yr. ago

Many people lock in interest rates for the life of the loan. Most often 30 years for mortgage loans. You don’t have to renew a mortgage’s interest rate unless you get an adjustable rate one.

This is the main reason why mortgage applications are down significantly right now. People with super low interest rates don’t want to move because they’d have to get a new loan to do so, and interest rates are much higher now. If they stay and they have a fixed-rate loan, nothing changes.

It’s true insurance companies need to take in adequate premiums in order to have the money the money to pay claims. And when done in balance, insurance is a great thing. Not all insurance in a scam, no doubting that.

But the current state of insurance, especially health insurance in the US, shows that these companies are making massive profits. How does this happen? Literally one way: They take in more premiums than they pay out in coverage. How? By either knowingly overcharging people or skirting out of paying covered claims through other means (such as baseless rejections).

That’s the problem with the entire insurance industry and why it must be properly regulated in any industry: It is a race to the bottom. The worse the insurer treats the people that buy insurance from them, the better the company does financially (charge a lot, pay out a little). Mix in the fact that (1) you cannot shop around at the time you need a claim and (2) the contracts are so intensive only a sophisticated legal team can interpret them, and it’s a recipe for disaster.

So you’re right that all insurance isn’t necessarily a scam. But if you can’t see that the US health insurance industry raking in profits shows serious dysfunction that could be considered a scam, it’s worth taking a second look.

This next election is going to be wild. Stacked full of unpopular candidates.

Biden’s approval rating is abysmal, and his age is actively working against him. Sure, he’s likely to get most D votes, but unlikely he’ll get extra voters to come out from any fringe group or independents.

If Trump is selected as the R candidate, his supporters will come out in droves to vote. But independents aren’t looking like they’ll give him support. Then again, a lot of people said they wouldn’t vote for Trump in 2016, but did anyway.

If Trump isn’t on the R ticket, another person could grab hold of independents and a good chunk of the R party voters. But impassioned Trump supporters are a wild card. Will they just write in Trump? Vote third party out of vengeance? I guess they’ll probably do whatever Trump says, which seems like it has a good chance of splintering the R vote.

Honestly, this is all just wild. And the only certain thing is that there is no certainty.

I really hope young voters show up.

Places like this are frankly disgusting. Just driving past them is sickening, both physically and to the thought that part of the food supply comes from that. The cows that live in these environments, even for short times, simply cannot be healthy. Eating the meat from animals spending time in these conditions cannot healthy be either.

$1k per month is also a downright excessive price for something with zero intrinsic value. I honestly do not believe many wealthy people would pay it (or let their kids waste their money like that - which is usually pretty closely scrutinized).

I have a good amount of experience with the finances of the ultra wealthy and the vast majority do not waste money. In fact, they can be surprisingly frugal. It’s actually a big reason why trickle down economics is total bullshit. The more money you have, the more likely you are to save it or put it toward investments. It does not result in increased “regular” spending.

Sure, they’ll drop big cash on homes, planes, and other valuable assets with resale value. A small handful have obscene restaurant and/or travel expenses. But I don’t think I’ve ever seen something like a cash drain of $1k/month for a silly subscription. That would be a major red flag, and as a financial advisor we’d probably make sure they’re aware of it.

Some historical perspective as it relates to greed:

During some of the United States’ most prosperous times, the marginal income tax rates were higher (topping out around 90%!) and executive compensation was no more than ~20x the average worker pay.

Now, marginal tax rates and capital gains rates are so low, the wealthy often pay the lowest effective rates (sometimes less than 10%). And executive pay is simply off the charts at 300x, 500x, even 700x median pay.

https://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-compensation-2018/

The problem is greed and its manifestation as tax and corporate policy. Basic tax reform and implementing new corporate regulations can and would fix many issues plaguing this country.

Those in poverty would be lifted out by higher wages and adequate social safety nets. The growth of a thriving middle class creates a premier labor force, allows people to innovate and start new businesses, and creates additional private support networks that reduces stress on government programs.

It even helps the elite by letting them live in a prosperous country where they don’t have to step over people dying in the streets to go to their entertainment spots. Theft and crimes of desperation decrease as stability increases. Labor is more educated and healthy. They don’t have to drive on roads with defunct bridges. On and on.

We are all in this together. It’s time to act like it. We’ve done it before and we can do it again.

Haha, very true! Sure would be nice if they had any accountability and did anything to stop their “rotten apples” from ruining the whole bunch.

But even if they weren’t entirely corrupt, it seems like most people fail to realize that preventing harm is plain and simply not their role in society. It’s up to legislatures to determine what’s criminal, then up to cops to bring in those who break those criminal laws.

https://mises.org/power-market/police-have-no-duty-protect-you-federal-court-affirms-yet-again

I like to imagine cops as low-IQ NPCs that just go around with overly inflated egos, dressed in power-inducing military cosplay outfits, holding the legal knowledge of a toddler, with a lasso and a notepad. They tie up anyone who might be criminal and write down what they think they did wrong, without really using any rational thought and no one looking over their actions. Rinse and repeat.

Cops exist for two reasons: (1) to bringing any and every potential criminal in front of a court and (2) protect the property of those with the most influence (elites tied to major commerce/government).

If you’re not in the elite group (2), then your only interaction with cops is them seeing if there is ANY chance you fit into the criminal group (1).

“Climate activism should not be considered an altruistic endeavor. Instead, climate action should be viewed as an act of survival, a necessity.”

This right here. We criminalize and punish people for harming others and even property. It’s time to use this view against climate change by updating and enforcing criminal liability against major actors.

The actions harm other people and the actors do not care because the damage is mostly external. This is exactly what criminal justice systems are there to fix.

My thoughts are more centered on true purity and safety, but it’s usually a good sign if it at least tastes better! As we learn more about water contamination, it seems like a well-designed and well-maintained RO system is a good idea for people who want to help protect their health.

Single-use plastic water bottles are basically a crime against humanity, especially when used frivolously (drinking bottles filled with tap water of the same quality that comes out of the faucet). But the reusable 5-gallon jugs are a different category, in my opinion. In many places, these large plastic containers are by far the most popular lifeline to safe drinking water. Of course I’d prefer metal or glass, but the logistical challenges and availability make them a problem.

I agree. ”It depends” seems like the right answer to me.

Having access to clean, tested spring water seems ideal. You’re a lucky one!

But for areas dealing with contaminated water (whether it’s PFAS, lead pipes like Flint Michigan, or literal shit and commercial chemical dumping from areas with lackluster water treatment, mostly outside the US) then “it depends” seems the right answer.

What’s the RO membrane rating? Does the system have UV? Charcoal? Remineralization? And do they perform the necessary maintenance? Seems like these are the critical factors about the system and might be found in someone’s home, might be at the stores, but it depends!

Exactly. One thing I’ve learned from areas with unsafe drinking water is the beauty of stores dedicated to providing purified water (delivery an added bonus). Going back to the US and drinking “safe” tap water has always been pretty gross after that, even in houses with some filtration systems.

A home-based RO system would be nice, but I’ve always wondered if the ones people usually get (<$500) can compete with the quality of the commercial suppliers/stores that you typically see in other countries. Likewise for the small fill stations common on the outside of US grocery stores. Are all these systems truly of similar quality? I have a hard time trusting those tiny little under-sink setups and the unattended outdoor water fills.

Very interested to see how the “small government” crowd deals with this.

And one of the main people who put an end to it was then-Attorney General William Barr. He basically said “Mueller says Trump didn’t obstruct” when Mueller’s actual report basically said he can’t say for certain either way (obstruct or not) and provided a mountain of evidence that could be seen as obstruction. Most legal professionals see Mueller’s report as “we can’t say he’s guilty without charging and convicting, so we’re just going to say the door’s open and hand over the evidence.” Barr’s interpretation was complete bullshit.

The other giant elephant in the room is charging a sitting president with a crime. It’s never been tested in the US whether it can actually happen or not, but there are a lot of strong arguments against. The damage that can do to a country is extreme… I see it as a matter of absolute last resort. One that’s more likely to come after impeachment and removal unless absolutely necessary. And that’s one ugly situation that’s basically showing complete dysfunction to the world.

https://www.npr.org/2022/08/20/1118625157/doj-barr-trump-russia-investigation-memo

So frustrating that this industry isn’t properly regulated. It’s massively profitable and has had a profound impact US energy structure.

Yet basic regulations can’t be implemented because they’re “too challenging” for the industry. Even as continued evidence of its harm pops up.

It’s insane. And shameful. I have some shockingly wealthy acquaintances connected to the industry, and without fail, they’ll all spread the pro-industry propaganda before any votes related to the most basic regulations. It’s pathetic. Absolutely blinded by greed.

Both major reservoirs at nearly 30% with a warmer, drier outlook long term. The southwestern US and affected parts of Mexico are in for a serious renegotiation of water use, with agriculture at the top of the list.

“Farmers use between 70% and 80% of all water in the Colorado River system...”

Act like a mobster. Get charged like a mobster. If the shoe fits…

Money is the key and I agree it will take some massive disruption to overcome the current state… But just because someone holds the cash now, doesn’t mean they always will. History teaches that lesson over and over again, especially with new technology.

Uber vs taxi monopolies. Netflix vs Blockbuster. Apple vs BlackBerry.

I can see where you’re coming from, but we can’t stop fighting for fear of court rulings.

Courts are only there to interpret laws. A determined legislature should be able to overcome poor court interpretations through enacting laws.

For example, Dobbs v. Jackson (stripping abortion protections) only nullified Roe v. Wade. Congress could still protect/prohibit abortion rights with the stroke of a pen. Of course, the legislature’s obvious dysfunction is a problem that must be factored in. But I’d also factor in growing resentment in the Supreme Court with each asinine ruling akin to Dobbs they have to make. Make no mistake about it, that enraged and fueled a lot of opposition. Enough of that could lead to stacking the court.

In this particular case, it seems to be a state issue, so it’s pretty unlikely to make it to the fed Supreme Court anyway. And at least it means that people who likely would be using legal resources for other nefarious means are tied up trying to overturn this one.

The technical challenges are real and there’s definitely some time before it goes mainstream, but it seems almost inevitable for this to be the future of gaming.

Streaming movies was once thought unrealistic. Subscription music used to be a fringe product. Even online gaming through consoles/PCs has gone through tremendous change.

Like all the other streaming products, the creators are the ones positioned to get the short end of the stick. Hopefully that can be avoided.