Shouldn’t background checks for Top Secret clearances that involve employees in closer contact with important government officials screen out those with links to radical ideologies?
Even National Guard members deployed to serve as an extra layer of security at the inauguration were vetted by the FBI to ensure no infiltration by potential insider threats; 12 National Guard members were removed due to security concerns. One Army reservist with a current security clearance and access to a naval munitions depot in New Jersey was also arrested in connection with the assault on the Capitol.
Not if the goal was equilibrium/homeostasis rather than unsustainable growth/metastasis on a finite world of finite resources as it is today.
That will never be permitted though. Humanity will destroy itself not out of hatred as once believed, but in the name of cold, insatiable, sociopathic greed.
Yah we won’t stop using resources and fucking the air until we all die off. There’s no other way cause humans, specifically the humans in power with the ability to make change. Won’t. Cause cold hard cash.
Yup. Workers in America desperately need more rights. But so long as there are unpleasant jobs thst have to be done, total financial freedom isn’t really possible. Even under a socialist/communist model.
I guess Drew Findling was the person who made Trump cancel an event where he wanted to spout out more lies about the Georgia election and then told Trump “we can not put these lies onto a 100 page long paper and read in court either” even when you promise we will and so he had to go.
This is very good, because it means Findling was an actual lawyer who could have successfully defended Trump (or at least kept him of digging himself deeper and deeper) and now Trump is forced to go with someone who either doesen’t care on being a reasonable lawyer or isn’t one.
Just a reminder how everything the GOP tried against the election outcome in Georgia went so far:
“Rather than presenting their evidence and witnesses to a court and to cross-examination under oath, the Trump campaign wisely decided the smartest course was to dismiss their frivolous cases,” Raffensperger said.
Trumps problem is, all the people who “wisely” made the decision to not go forward in this direction and to hold him back are now gone.
no lawyer can defend him as there is to much actual evidence which is why trump wants to bring in bs for the court of public opinion and by that the opinion of his rabid base. He needs an attorney ready to turn the case into a circus and willing to get debared to do so.
Personally, to be "financially free" I would need enough investment income to cover all my expenses without making any sales/withdraws. Ideally this would include owning my home outright. So probably in the neighborhood of one million. I doubt I will ever get there.
Unless you pay cash upfront for a house, it serves no benefit to pay it off early due to inflation. As inflation goes up your debt says flat but your home value increases as well as equity. With a interest rate lower than the inflation rate your making money on the loan, not losing it. A mortgage is an investment, let it roll for as long as you can. Also it’s convenient that taxes are collected within the mortgage rate, once that is gone it becomes a pain.
A mortgage is an investment, let it roll for as long as you can.
The fact that you're not wrong about this is part of the reason housing keeps getting more expensive. So many individuals have their nest eggs tied up in their houses that building more would hurt a lot of ordinary folks.
No benefit? I agree that inflation can make paying a house off early less financially advantageous, but it’s silly to say there’s no benefit.
with an interest rate lower than inflation
First to your point, with interest rates as they’ve been the last year or so, it isn’t safe to assume your interest will be lower than inflation. (Mine isn’t, and I bought my house last June.)
Also, removing a huge monthly bill grants freedom in the short-term. Making a mortgage payment every month may mean things like not leaving a bad job or not starting your own business due to fear of losing your house. With that expense out of the way, you can make riskier choices with potential for greater pay off.
And lastly, there’s the mental burden of debt. It’s easier to be happy when you don’t have any debt, so getting rid of it can be a huge boon personally.
So yeah, I might lose a net benefit of a few thousand dollars spread out over the next 15 years if I don’t pay my house off early. But I might miss out on even greater benefits because I’m saddled with ~33% of my take home going into my mortgage every month. I’ll take the minor hit to be debt-free ASAP.
Currently I wouldn’t suggest buying a house because the interest rates are high. We refinanced at 2.2% so I don’t plan on ever moving. Bought my home at $225K and it’s value is $525K now, over a 50% increase since I bought. I’ll never see that happen in my lifetime again so I’m sticking here for life.
Yes a mortgage is an investment (which can make a profit or loss just like other investments) but it is also an obligation. With a mortgage losing your job could potentially leave you homeless. That is not what I consider "financially free". If you have a lot of cash up front you could potentially put it into higher yielding investments and make a profit on the difference between yield and mortgage rate at the end of 30 years but that takes some amount of luck and skill with investing. Especially now that mortgage rate are 7%. If you don't have all the cash up front then taking out a 30yr 7% loan for 300k will mean you're paying over 700k for the house with interest included.
Saving up an emergency fund to pay the mortgage if you become jobless should be a top priority for any homeowner. Priority meaning you cut back everywhere you can to generate those savings, until you have enough saved to be comfortable. Once I saved up a 6-mo emergency fund I felt much closer to financial freedom. I can have 6+ months to look for a new job if I lose mine.
It feels like one of the flaws in the system is that, while we’d want the agents who surround the president to be vetted more than almost anyone else, it’s the executive branch that’s responsible and apparently the president can give the okay for someone who doesn’t otherwise pass, as we saw happen for his kids. What’s to stop a corrupt president from having corrupt USSS agents?
news
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.