EPTFrankly I think homeowners insurance is probably one of those things better off socialized (up to a certain point). It's easy to think of it as something you can opt out of if money is short (I assume a pretty damn small percentage of houses are ruined on a yearly basis, although I have not seen statistics), but having a home is completely essential and damages will normally be so expensive that a rainy day fund can't be expected to cover it.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4697
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28665 Posts
Frankly I think homeowners insurance is probably one of those things better off socialized (up to a certain point). It's easy to think of it as something you can opt out of if money is short (I assume a pretty damn small percentage of houses are ruined on a yearly basis, although I have not seen statistics), but having a home is completely essential and damages will normally be so expensive that a rainy day fund can't be expected to cover it. | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
On August 11 2016 01:58 KwarK wrote: The darn liberals in Washington set it up so even the poorest workers could have a share of the pie to mitigate exactly this kind of situation in which the wealth was largely returned to the capitalist class and not the labouring class. Sure, real terms earnings have stagnated and that sucks and I think the minimum wage should be higher. But at the same time we shouldn't present this as a narrative of growth only benefiting the few people at the top, not when the system is built to give direct cash incentives to people at the bottom who want to play. When it's a solid 90% of new income going to the top 1% it's disingenuous at best to imply that there isn't a very deep systemic problem. That level of inequality is unsustainable and is something that the capitalist classes should be deeply worried about, rather than rejoicing. | ||
|
Evotroid
Hungary176 Posts
On August 11 2016 01:51 KwarK wrote: Giving them huge incentives (often double/triple matches on their money) to open investment accounts which entitle them to a share of the overall growth of the economy is how you help the bottom layers lift themselves up. Refusing to use them or using them badly is how they fuck themselves over. (...) But the argument isn't neccesarily that is there a system to help the poor. Rather that is it working? Now I don't live there so I have no idea, but sound like it does not. At this point isn't it pretty useless to say that the system is in place, the general populace is just too stupid to use it? I mean, we can't just make the general population smarter, maybe only in very long timeframes, so it is the system that is "at fault" and should be improved. | ||
KwarK
United States42673 Posts
On August 11 2016 02:01 Velr wrote: That you shouldn't need to play if you have a 100% job never came to your mind? You plan to keep working until you drop dead on the factory floor? Because that's what 100% means. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10702 Posts
On August 11 2016 02:05 KwarK wrote: You plan to keep working until you drop dead on the factory floor? Because that's what 100% means. nah, in my countries system i have 2 mandatory "pillars" that will pay rent for me and one optional (basically private savings but with some special options if you declare it to be for pension). As long as i work I only need to care about the optional 3d pillar, I can about the second pillar (if i have excess money and want to save taxes) and I couldn't do shit about the first one even if i wanted. Its basically "mandatory savings --> should take care of your very basic needs, professional savings --> should allow you to keep your living standard, private savings --> everything extra. Now thanks to people that like to "play" its not exactly working like this anymore because, well, need more moneyz and hate to pay taxes, but thats how it was designed to be. And honestly, in a system halfway decent, a working person shouldn't need to care for his retirement if he's ok with a pension of about 70-80% of his former earnings. | ||
|
KwarK
United States42673 Posts
On August 11 2016 02:04 Liquid`Drone wrote: I guess this is one of those problems having a sovereign wealth fund makes me unable to relate to. :D But I kinda disagree. If I'm 40 years old, I have two kids, 7 and 9, I'm living in Minnesota and october just arrived, stuff is cold, tree falls on my rooftop and somehow I don't have homeowners insurance but I do have a 401 with just enough money to pay for fixing it, I'm fixing it. I'll tell myself that 'I'm just gonna put aside an extra $500 per month for the next 5 years and I should have it largely covered', and then I'm gonna kinda fail to do that because I probably didn't have $500 to cut without severely impacting the life quality of myself or my children and I'm one of those people who suffer from 'wanting immediate gratification', and then in retirement I end up being poor. Frankly I think homeowners insurance is probably one of those things better off socialized (up to a certain point). It's easy to think of it as something you can opt out of if money is short (I assume a pretty damn small percentage of houses are ruined on a yearly basis, although I have not seen statistics), but having a home is completely essential and damages will normally be so expensive that a rainy day fund can't be expected to cover it. Fuckin' Norway man. Alaska had a similar idea, although theirs also includes Guaranteed Basic Income which is really cool too. I really like it when states notice that things like natural resource wealth really belong to all of the people and then steward them responsibly. Socialized insurance, or at the very least mandatory insurance as we have with cars, is a net public good for the reasons you described. Cashing out a 401k is a good alternative to literally freezing to death but not much else. People are not good economic actors and tend to underestimate their risks and plan for them poorly. That said I recently saw a facebook friend demanding that there be an NHS for cats because the vet wanted £2000 to give their elderly another year of life so you'll always get a few idiots wanting their own shitty personal costs socialized. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On August 11 2016 01:47 KwarK wrote: The good thing about predicting the next big crash is that if you wait long enough you'll always be right. People have been saying the market is overvalued since 2011 and they may even be right but the market doesn't act in predictable and logical ways. A crash will happen at some point, crashes are part of the natural economic cycle. It seems to me that it is incredibly unlikely that one won't happen in the next 8 years, especially given the tendency of investors to forget that crashes happen and act more and more stupidly the longer it's been since one. So on the one hand it makes little sense to thank a sitting president for a good economy and condemn them for a bad one given how little direct control they have. Especially given that factors that cause problems or fix them often take longer than one presidency to take effect. That said Obama handled the financial crisis competently for the most part and while there are systemic issues we're back to a stable sort of all kinds of fucked up. Some sort of recovery was inevitable and most likely would have also happened under McCain but America is hugely richer today than it was when he took office and people should be aware that it's been a great 8 years. That doesn't mean he necessarily caused it but it does mean you can't attack his record on it. Funnily enough sam!zdat posted that on facebook and it is very relevant to your point (and it's cyclically adjusted) : http://www.multpl.com/shiller-pe/ "natural economic cycle" yeah Kwark, really ? You believe in the fable of Juan Fernandez Island depicted by Townsend or what ? | ||
|
KwarK
United States42673 Posts
On August 11 2016 02:05 Evotroid wrote: But the argument isn't neccesarily that is there a system to help the poor. Rather that is it working? Now I don't live there so I have no idea, but sound like it does not. At this point isn't it pretty useless to say that the system is in place, the general populace is just too stupid to use it? I mean, we can't just make the general population smarter, maybe only in very long timeframes, so it is the system that is "at fault" and should be improved. The system should be improved, it's just nobody can agree how to improve it and everyone is in the pay of some lobbyist. The left want to take away the ability of people to control it themselves because they think people are dumb (ie social security). The right want to make it all within the control of people because they know people are dumb and they think they can make a profit off of that (ie privatizing social security). Every now and then they manage to work together briefly on things which are a badly working compromise like 401ks which help the poor get enough money to be exploited properly. But Obama has actually done some good work on improving these plans like including rules that say "the guy managing your pension cannot literally be trying to screw you because he's accepting money from another guy who will make a profit if your pension is wiped out" and other similar rules which you'd think wouldn't need to be explicitly stated but apparently do. It doesn't function as the right claim it will because as always they operate in a world of rational informed actors and economic theory. On the other hand I just don't like the left's ideas because it replaces a system that could be made to function with one that doesn't even aspire to function well. Both sides need to stop taking lobbyist money though and with a little compromise could unfuck the system. For example Americans have to calculate their own taxes because of an industry that charges the public for tax filing help and lobbies the government to not implement automated tax deductions. On a fun note congressional Republicans actually tried to block Obama's "there should be some kind of law against bribing a pension fund manager to bankrupt the pension he manages" rule but he vetoed it. Shit like that is why I'm a Democrat and couldn't justify voting Republican. But if they stopped pulling that kind of shit I might one day change my mind. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
 http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/09/us/baltimore-justice-department-report/index.html hopefully that will result in some improvements. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On August 11 2016 02:54 zlefin wrote: Hmm, so baltimore pd is bad, there's a shocker http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/09/us/baltimore-justice-department-report/index.html hopefully that will result in some improvements. Its been decades of them being shit. This only confirms it again. | ||
|
Deathstar
9150 Posts
Putting money away now that you won't see for another 30-40+ years is truly a sad thing to see. What a waste. Live your life and use your money while you have the vitality to enjoy it. You don't want to be that old guy that goes golfing every single day because he has nothing to do with his life and is just thinking of how to use the money he saved up before dying. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18826 Posts
 | ||
|
brian
United States9619 Posts
On August 11 2016 03:04 Deathstar wrote: There's nothing wrong with working until you die. Working energizes people and makes them sharper and healthier. It gives you purpose. It gives you an opportunity to interact with people you normally wouldn't. Retirement is an idealized and unsustainable model from a booming time period and it shows because most boomers have an expectation of at least part time work. Putting money away now that you won't see for another 30-40+ years is truly a sad thing to see. What a waste. Live your life and use your money while you have the vitality to enjoy it. You don't want to be that old guy that goes golfing every single day because he has nothing to do with his life and is just thinking of how to use the money he saved up before dying. or you can have a reasonable compromise, enjoying what you have now as much as you can while reasonably saving so that when you call me from your cubicle at 90 while I'm hitting the back nine I can sip my next beer and sucker-candy at my leisure. because not everything is black and white eh | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Deathstar
9150 Posts
| ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On August 11 2016 03:04 Deathstar wrote: There's nothing wrong with working until you die. Working energizes people and makes them sharper and healthier. It gives you purpose. It gives you an opportunity to interact with people you normally wouldn't. Retirement is an idealized and unsustainable model from a booming time period and it shows because most boomers have an expectation of at least part time work. Putting money away now that you won't see for another 30-40+ years is truly a sad thing to see. What a waste. Live your life and use your money while you have the vitality to enjoy it. You don't want to be that old guy that goes golfing every single day because he has nothing to do with his life and is just thinking of how to use the money he saved up before dying. Depend heavily on the type of work. Blue collar labor break your body. I'm a teacher and work 18 hours a week, I can work up to the end without a worry. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On August 11 2016 01:22 KwarK wrote: Thanks, I will. A 401k isn't a secret cash reserve, it's something you bought because you need it and you still need it. That need has not gone. Using it isn't putting out a fire, it's setting fire to something bigger and leaving tomorrow Plansix to worry about that. Go without the well pump until you have the $10k, a gym membership gets you free and regular access to showers, tap water is available pretty much everywhere, laundromats exist etc. $10k taken from a 401k at age 30 is $107,000 from your retirement. Medical expenses, well, if it was going to literally stop you making it to retirement, arguable I guess. Otherwise work out what payment options they have for you, you won't be the first person who can't afford to pay $30k of medical bills in cash. Car? The entire industry pretty much exists just to let you get any car in existence with no money down. You can get a beater easily enough for the short term. You're not above making mistakes and you're certainly not above being judged for them. People who cash out their 401ks with plans to pay it back when things are better typically never pay it back and even if they do, they can't get back that lost time, especially if they cashed it out in 2008 etc. This is how otherwise smart people fuck themselves over. So drop this "only God can judge me" shit, I'm not divine but I can certainly call you an idiot if you do something idiotic. I know you're smart, you know you're smart, but that doesn't mean that anything you do must be smart simply by virtue of you doing it. You're not above fucking yourself over. Are you fucking kidding me dude? Live without water in your home until you save $10k? If you are at median income do you know how long that takes? You are so disconnected. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15688 Posts
On August 11 2016 03:36 IgnE wrote: Are you fucking kidding me dude? Live without water in your home until you save $10k? If you are at median income do you know how long that takes? You are so disconnected. I get the distinct feeling Kwark has never been truly financially vulnerable. His analysis seems entirely reliant on actually having the ability to do this stuff. This is just straight up impossible for families living paycheck to paycheck. If no one can bail you out, you're just fucked. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
To act like private saving solves pension problems of the poor is like trying to advocate golf as a sport for poor obese people. | ||
| ||
