Insurance companies are legally locked in to having to pay out 85% of what they bring in back out to their customers, and they try to just barely hit that mark every single year. If you’ve ever gotten a little “customer appreciation” check mailed back to you from your insurer that 85% law is the real reason. It means they didn’t pay out quite enough.
So that being said, insurance companies charge higher rates in areas where the most claims happen. They aren’t making more money when they do this. They’re still capped at making their 15%.
So for an insurance company there’s three options.
-Charge everyone everywhere the same, so people in low claim areas are forced to pay higher prices, which means they’ll try getting insurance elsewhere.
Charge more in areas where claims payouts are highest. Which seems like it would be fair.
-Stop offering insurance at all in areas with higher risk. Which means that people living in certain places may end up not being able to find an insurer.
The article is trying to present this as a race issue, and that’s just total bullshit. It’s just based on likelihood of cars to get damaged in the area you live at. No one here who’s been to Detroit will argue that your car is just as safe there as it is everywhere else. The crime, and poor driving habits, and likelihood of a person walking out in front of your vehicle are all higher than elsewhere.
Theres a picture in the article, and it’s terrifying. Maybe stop stringing powerlines along rickety wooden poles? That’s something I’d expect in a random southeast Asian village, not a first world country.
Burying thousands of miles of utility lines is prohibitively expensive. In some places, like parts of Florida, you can’t bury anything because you’ll immediately be underwater.
In some places, like parts of Florida, you can’t bury anything because you’ll immediately be underwater.
Greeting from the Netherlands, currently 5 meters below sealevel and all our powerlines except for (some of) the main network ones are underground, many of them sitting pretty below groundwater level. That’s actually a bonus, because it helps keep them cool. If they’re above groundwater level, you need to make sure they can lose their heat by using specially graded sand.
It might be expensive, but this method demonstrably gets people killed. If Europe can manage to bury powerlines for small villages, why can’t the largest cities in the US?
if that’s what a southeast Asian village looks like in your mind
You managed to pick a site that has the worst poles in the largest city. Many streets look like this: maps.app.goo.gl/7oUxKAx5hqX3kwNF7
isn’t even trying to keep an innocent behind bars already a type of kidnapping attempt and every second of delay that it caused an actual act of kidnapping?
During a court hearing Friday, Judge Ryan Horsman said that if Hemme wasn’t released within hours, Bailey himself would have to appear in court Tuesday morning. He threatened to hold the attorney general’s office in contempt.
Props to the judge tho, 'cause threatening Bailey with contempt charges could have landed him in jail (for a bit anyways).
“See my big gavel here? If you don’t release her immediately this gavel will crash into your thick, stupid skull … with force.”
Honestly, there should still be an inquest or something where the guy is brought in and must explain wtf he was thinking or trying to accomplish by fighting her release. And if he doesn’t have a satisfying answer, remove him from the position.
And no, I wouldn’t consider “trying to save the state taxpayers from a lawsuit for the false imprisonment” a satisfying answer.
In fact, if he can’t defend a position such that it’s reasonable to believe she was actually guilty, there should be criminal charges against him and anyone who worked with him to stop or stall the release. And I’d say this should be the case for any prosecution where it becomes just about winning a case rather than demonstrating the truth in court.
Peter Thiel, one of the top GOP funders (and likely reason for JD Vance pick) is openly gay. Of course for him the reasoning is simple: he has a lot of money and wants policies that favor people with a lot of money. I’ve known a number of rich people in my life, and many (not all) have bought into a sort of wealthy identity, thinking of wealthy people as superior to non-wealthy people, and that the ideal social structure is a rigid hierarchy where the “deserving” are rewarded with luxuries and the “inferior” working class deserves a life of cheap labor. Psychological incentives strongly encourage this, because otherwise these people would have to believe they are getting more than they deserve, and that they themselves are too weakened by a life of luxury to be as supportive of the as fortunate than they should be. Accordingly, this identity can be more powerful than something like gay identity.
I am not advocating for assassination here but … just as a shot it was pretty good. I mean a 20 yr old, with no military training, shooting from 400 ft away, and the only reason he missed was because Trump turned his head at the last second.
How about parents actually monitor their kids web activity instead getting the government involved? I fucking hate Facebook and most forms of social media and they do skirt responsibility for a lot of the problems they cause but making internet forums liable for things like bullying, scammers, or anything “damaging to children” is basically impossible.
Protecting kids user data? All for it. But from what I read this just seems like another step in over policing the internet
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.