Let’s do all of it, and put in place a solution for all future student loans. They are robbing us blind right now, and costing future generations a chance at a debt free life.
He did do a lot more! I mentioned it in another comment a week ago, but look into what his save plan does. Lowers costs, lowers interest, increases forgiveness, etc. etc.
Save plan lowered my effective interest rate to around 2%. I’ll still have to pay a lot over the next 20 years, and if the tax bomb is not removed it will be another 100,000. However my cash flow is much improved and how much I pay total has decreased drastically.
Still fighting with my student loan servicer to set me up on the plan correctly, but that is a different can of worms. The servicers need to have their contracts nullified for how terrible they have been.
Definitely better than a kick in the teeth, but it’s a shame the Supreme Court nixed the bigger loan forgiveness plan. I’m glad to see Biden is still trying to live up to his promise as much as he can given the obstructionist Congress and Supreme Court.
Here in Australia, our student loans are given and managed by the Australian Tax Office, and while they technically don’t accrue interest they are “indexed” according to inflation (CPI specifically) once per year, every year. Our repayments just come out of or income like regular income taxes - that means that the repayments are tax-deductible too. We usually get indexed around 2-3% per year but last year it was almost 8% which hit really hard. Most degrees also fall under the Higher Education Commonwealth Support (HECS) program which drastically reduces their total cost too.
We keep electing democrats that think fixing something at once would be too disruptive.
So they stretch the smallest amount of progress as long as they can, even if that doesn’t make up for damage Republicans do.
Its been like 80 years since moderate Dems told FDR that it was too soon for universal healthcare and Americans had to wait a few more years to make sure it’s a good idea.
And they’re still fucking saying they need to look into it more. It’ll never be time. Student Debt relief shows every indication that it’s going to be the same thing.
I’m not sure why this comment is so controversial. It’s exactly what’s happening. We’ve been talking about this now for forever and almost nothing is happening. It’s wonderful that 74,000 people get some relief but that’s a drop in the ocean. I want it badly but I’ve almost accepted the fact that it’s probably not going to happen.
Lots of moderates want to keep copying the Republican party, even the part where no one is allowed to question any politician who has the right letter next to their name.
They think it’s better to live with the problems and not talk about them let alone solve them.
I couldn’t find a source for how much total Biden has forgiven, but I’d be shocked if the percentage doesn’t start with a decimal point.
It’s north of $136B in total. If you couldn’t find that, you may not have looked today, as it’s definitely been reported. I’ll let you work out the percentage, but it certainly doesn’t begin with a decimal point.
Medicare covers everyone over 65, not just orphans, widows, and people with disabilities.
The reason we didn’t have universal health care 80 years ago is that it wasn’t popular 80 years ago. Even today, support for single payer is shaky, depending on the details.
People kept voting FDR into office so often we had to put a limit on how many times a person could be president because his main campaign issue was unpopular…
Are you serious? There’s a big difference. Anything related to student loans already has a big hurdle in that it effects a segment of the population and not the entire population. For that reason, its not going to be the #1 issue for many voters. In situations like that, incremental progress is good because its not a prioritized issue simply due to numbers. It sucks but its true. The list of things we need to fix is huge. Things fewer people prioritize need any help they can get. Same reason enshrining abortion rights wasn’t a priority. People thought it was already settled law and were less likely to prioritize it if they weren’t personally effected.
In the case of healthcare it artifically created a similar problem, which was probably the intent. Giving some people healthcare makes them prioritize it less, which is why there hasn’t been much movement (though pretending nothing has changed is disingenuous, even requiring insurance companies to cover pre existing conditions is a big deal). It isn’t even a matter of individual voters being against giving other people healthcare despite having their own, though theres certainly some of that. Its about the fact that a voter is not likely to find a politician they agree with on every position. Let alone several for various offices. The things they are willing to compromise on disagreeing about will be things they prioritize less.
Also, if you couldn’t find a source then you either didn’t actually try to find a source, or you aren’t smart enough to google “how much student loan debt Biden has forgiven.” The answer was in the first result.
The supreme court stopped them forgiving 460 billion a wide acope. Instead, his admin has forgiven 141 billion in a narrower, but still huge, scope. Its far, far more than any other admin has ever forgiven, and still going.
If 30% of “an ocean” is just “a drop,” thats one hell of a drop.
Hell, if he had just promised to forgive the equivalent of 10k like he intended on the campaign trail, his admin would be more than half way there, and climbing.
Including me under the TEPSLF. I was on track to hopefully finish paying off my loans at age 63, but with the TEPSLF it counted the ten years I had already done so they were forgiven after the ten years of public service work I did.
Sure, I agree the extra 3.4 million people have gotten relief or forgiveness is not nothing, but out of the 45.3 million people (quick Google search) with student loan debt that’s only 13%. It’s great, we’re on the path, but 87% of people still haven’t seen any kind of help, and were drug along being promised help for the last 3 years.
“It’s only 13% and not 100%, so it doesn’t count!”
The Supreme Court blocked his attempt last year to forgive debt for another 43 million people, which was set to take effect before repayments started back up. He’s trying to help but is being blocked by conservatives who want him to fail so Trump can be reelected.
3.4 million people total have had their debts forgiven (so far) out of a potential 45.3 million. That’s around 7.5% of all people who held student loans.
NOAA estimates that the oceans hold around 1.335 billion cubic kilometres of water, which is around 1.335 sextillion litres (1.335e18 litres) or 353 quintillion gallons (3.53e17 gallons). Estimates put annual human water usage at around 4 trillion m^2 per year (4 quadrillion litres or 1.057 quadrillion gallons).
If the student loans forgiven were merely ‘a drop in the ocean’, that ‘drop’ would contain 100 quintillion litres or 26.4 quintillion gallons. That ‘drop’ would weigh 100 quadrillion tonnes and would be twenty-five times the amount of water all human being use globally every year. Dumped over the contiguous United States, that would form a layer of water 12.5km (7.8miles) deep.
This may be a shock to you, but there are other branches of government in the US. One of which is not elected and that’s the one that recently struck down Biden’s HEROS plan that would have eliminated $460B in student loan debt.
Good thing we elected a career politician who said his decades of Senate experience meant he could get Republicans in the Senate and house to vote for progressive legislation…
Oh, that’s right…
I forgot Dems had the Senate, House, and presidency for 2 years…
But that highly experienced career politician told us trying to change even a single politicians mind (even if they were in his own party) was an impossible task so he wouldn’t even try.
Welp, at least we’re not running him again since the whole reason he said he was the man for the job turned out to be something he was lying about…
Oh, but what more could you ask of him? He tried once and the Supreme Court said no, and that’s all he can do. Sure, when Trump wanted to ban Muslims from the country and the Supreme Court told him no he just changed one or two small details and issued the same order again and again and again until the Court gave up, but Biden couldn’t possibly do something like that here because it wouldn’t be very polite. You don’t want a rude president, do you?
That’s quite literally what Biden is doing now [except for how he isn’t doing it at all and is instead occasionally dropping much smaller scale things that are mostly just implementing things that got passed years ago and hoping everyone forgets that he promised to help everyone]
Tell me you're a petulant child that never passed a single Civics class without telling me you're a petulant child that has never passed a single Civics class.
I’m not a fan of him either. Though he hasn’t done much of what I’ve wanted, he’s been more progressive than I expected. Tbh it sounds like he would have been better off politically if he hadn’t touched student loans. Im finding other progressives aren’t realistic on this issue and do not seem to want to encourage behavior they want from politicians. Way to encourage other politicians not to make attempts like this. Biden would be getting raked over the coals less if he had done nothing. That doesn’t mean dont be critical when its warranted, but don’t expect anybody to take you seriously when you claim he didn’t try. Were you a fly on the wall listening in? You not being there doesn’t mean conversations didnt happen. Its an unfounded claim that doesn’t acknowledge the good changes he HAS accomplished. You just don’t care about those because you weren’t personally impacted. No different than every other selfish voter who gave us Trump.
You are foolish if you think individual politicians can make more progressive shit happen on their own. So many “progressives” only care about the end results and how they are personally helped. That makes you no different than any other voter and its also why we will never make progress until people like you cut the crap and grow up. Incremental progress is still progress. The only time it is not is when its something like setting up a healthcare program and underfunding it so bad it makes the masses hate it. In cases where shit is already fucked, making it slightly less fucked is a good thing.
Personally I actually want politicians to move left. So I celebrate when they make steps in that direction. You are playing into exactly what the Supreme Court was trying to accomplish with its bs decision. The point was to hurt him politically. If you do not reward politicians for moving left and are extra critical of any who make attempts to do what you want, you are only telling them not to bother.
He wasn’t my choice but he’s what we have. We may as well try to use him instead of throwing a tantrum about what could have been. Most neolibs wouldn’t have done anything and he surprised me when he did. The primaries are the place for idealism. The general is the place for realism.
During those 2 years Manchin and Sinema weren’t actually Dems and voted against most major progressive legislation, only voting for minor stuff if progressive.
Sure, some of them were evil, but I bet most were just stupid and tribal. I’m sure plenty were helpful neighbors, good friends, average parents, a part of some community that now misses them. Many were good people whipped up into stupidity by a team that doesn’t care about them, we should remember their humanity.
The same is true of Nazis as well, but I have a hard time having ethical consideration for those who wish to cause pain and suffering. I find it ironic and poetic when they cause it to themselves.
To be fair, the 17000 were not even all Americans. 16,990 patients in the US, France, Belgium, Italy, Spain and Turkey. I too dislike Trump but the world is larger than the US
Overall, using median estimates of HCQ use in each country, we estimated that 16,990 HCQ-related in-hospital deaths (range 6267–19256) occurred in the countries with available data. The median number of HCQ-related deaths in Belgium, Turkey, France, Italy, Spain, and the USA was 240 (range not estimable), 95 (range 92–128), 199 (range not estimable), 1822 (range 1170–2063), 1895 (range 1475–2094) and 12739 (3244− 15570), respectively.
50% of people are below average intelligence. This is by the definition of averages. Republicans don’t have a monopoly on stupid. They do seem to have a vocal majority of them though.
The waste from this, the people who died needlessly from not getting vaccinated, from drinking bleach, it’s sickening. That sentiment would likely not be shared should the situation be reversed.
That’s 17,000 people who will not be voting in 2024.
Unfortunately, a lot of patients didn’t actually have many options and were prescribed it without asking. In the early days of the pandemic, doctors were basically just throwing everything they could at it, to see what worked. If you got a conservative doctor, there was a good chance that you’d be prescribed it without ever asking for it.
Because all the doctors were flying blind, but hey the news says this drug works so we might as well try it. They’re probably going to die without treatment anyways, so worst case scenario the result is the same as if they weren’t taking it. Nowhere to go but up, right? A lot of patients basically didn’t have a say, because they were hospitalized.
No doctor will just randomly prescribe medications to a patient with a relatively unknown disease just “to see what sticks” because that’s not how that works, that’s now anything works.
Medicine have side effects, especially on people that are already sick. Also, a lot of medicine knowingly won’t do shit because they do things not related to visursses. Viruses specifically are VERY hard to treat. Bacteria have antibiotics, because of how bacteria work. Visursses in general basically only have vaccination, basics they only have “prevent it” and “your own body will kill it” hydrochoroquine (or however you spell it) was kever going to cute anyone from covid, it has severe side effects, but trump needed some miracle to cure this to become the president that fixed covid, so he just threw this in, the retard.
Trump should be jailed for mass murder, at this point, for his actions
The same justification as when you place a bet on black in vegas, it comes up red, and the house takes all the chips you bet.
You can call greed “rational self-interest” and gambling “speculative investment” all you like, but trying to change the language doesn’t change the reality.
When you’re gambling, you might lose, and society shouldn’t subsidize the days you gamble and lose. Only income derived through labor should be truly safe, as labor is useful to civilization, unlike gambling, often with winnings from previous gambling gained using loaded market influence dice and marked insider information cards.
The closest we come to “society” “subsidizing” stock losses is via capital loss deductions. Assuming you aren’t doing particularly crazy tax shenanigans, you are looking at up to 3000 dollars deducted from your taxes per year. For reference, the standard deduction is 13850 for an individual as of 2023.
But the thing about capital gains and losses are that they are only actually a thing when you cash out of the stock market. This means you are actually encouraged to “sell” your shares in a failing company and use it to invest in a company “on the rise”. Which is actually good.
What you are proposing would, ironically, mean only the super rich would be able to trade stocks to begin with. And they would only invest in the “guaranteed” companies like MS and the like which would hurt a lot of medium sized companies and workers.
Also, this all forgets that the vast majority of retirement schemes (even pensions when you look at where the money comes from) are based on investing in stocks. In large part because the idea is to benefit from an overall better economy.
So yeah… your statement about “betting on black” makes no sense and your proposed solution only hurts all but the super-rich.
But the thing about capital gains and losses are that they are only actually a thing when you cash out of the stock market.
Oh hey guys we can’t tax the wealth of the rich because their wealth isn’t in the form of sequential 2 dollar bills and simon didn’t say so it doesn’t count as wealth!
Of course it helps when Wall Street sends lobbyists to make the tax code work to their advantage.
We should have a wealth tax on net worth, if they don’t like cashing out stock to pay it, tough. It is completely workable, but since the oligarch class owns our government, don’t worry, it’ll never happen.
Also this story directly addresses where most of the benefits of this rigged con-game of an economy goes, and most Americans haven’t had significant pensions for a long time.
Following this line of thought - sacrificed alot and you now own a house (shocking in this market I know). Its value goes up 100k in a year due to forces out of your control. You now owe 30k in additional tax.
Should you now be forced to sell your home if you can’t pay this tax?
Following it further- you have a bank account. You save 20k. You now have an asset that is increasing in value - do you now owe tax on this?
There is a bloody good reason taxes are paid when gains are realised, or more accurately when money changes hands.
Easily addressable by making an annual wealth tax have a threshold so it largely effects the economy’s “winners.”
That’s the point of progressive taxation. The tax code should force the people that benefit the most from society pay the most back into it, as generating great wealth means you utilized a publically educated, pre literate workforce, tore up our roads and infrastructure more, utilized our commons more, etc.
Hey, here’s a great idea, multiply the median American annual income by the current average lifespan in years, tie the lowest net worth wealth tax bracket to that number, and go up from there. I’ll bet the .1 percent would be really eager to start raising wages then.
At least the ones that don’t flee because they were never on their nation’s side to begin with.
maybe you should not take such risks in the market if you cant afford the consequences.
the point here is the entire stock market is not based in reality. its a game that is managed by the very wealthy. we need to remove/reduce the profit motive.
between the hidden markets, self-governance and millisecond level trading, the entire thing is a casino and peoples lives should not be beholden to it. unfortunately those in charge are forcing everyone to get involved.
So you’re saying don’t take the risk and buy your own property to live on… just permanently pay rent to someone else?
And you are right, the stock market can come down to milliseconds trading… but over the long term gains average. You won’t become a millionaire overnight but nothing stopping you from buying and holding.
Depends on your definition of tax, and your country.
Interest income yes, taxed at the time the gain is realized.
We pay rates, which is a tax on the house value to the council for infrastructure (not technically a tax), and many places have capital gains tax where you pay at the time you sell (i.e when the gain is realised).
Primary residences are always protected from tax agents.
Primary residences are absolutely not protected from tax agents. They can and are sold to cover unpaid taxes. While it is true they don’t do it often and will sieze every other asset you own first, that commonly leads to loosing your home as well. Good luck paying your mortgage when you don’t have a car to drive to work anymore and all the funds in your bank account are frozen.
"if you have unpaid taxes, the IRS has the right to seize your home through a tax levy. If the IRS seizes your home for unpaid taxes, it uses the money from the sale to cover the cost of seizing and selling the property. Then, it applies the remainder to your tax bill. You can apply for a refund if there’s any money left. " taxcure.com/tax-problems/tax-levy/home-seizure
Huh TIL, however it must be a large enough tax bill, several thousand dollars, and a court has to agree they’ve exhausted every other avenue. Combined with their settlement offers it’s got be rare event that happens to the person who just will not work with them. Same with the car you drive to work. So your “nightmare” scenario is still a distant worry, at best, for anyone who isn’t a militant libertarian. Personally I’d be more worried about the going to prison part of not cooperating with the IRS.
Well, I guess you ARE attempting to solve the problem of corrupt lobbyists. Why pay an org to bribe a politician when you can instead just listen to people arguing for why only the ultra-wealthy who can afford the cost of trading should be able to benefit. What next, punish the tobacco industry by giving every school child a piece of nicorette at lunch?
That said, I do actually very much agree with a wealth tax, with caveats. First home (which you are already paying property tax on) is exempt. Same with very specific retirement funds. Probably one car per person because that would also predominantly hurt the lower class, although I would probably make it a fuel tax since that would impact climate change AND de-value the resell value of a car collection.
Because there are solutions and many economists have proposed and studied them. But “We should make stock trading more expensive so only the ultra rich can do it” is not at all a solution.
Because people actually live in those. And, because of the never ending housing crisis, the “value” of houses goes up pretty rapidly. Which already sucks when you are paying property tax and needing to send the “Hey, my house isn’t ACTUALLY worth that much” letter to the county every few years. But add on an overall tax for… not paying rent? And you are going to have a LOT of people priced out of owning their own homes. Which, like most of the previous poster’s suggestions, just serve to consolidate “wealth” with the ultra-rich.
Multiple homes? Fuck ‘em. Yes, there is the occasional case of someone buying their parents’ home or whatever. But mostly you are looking at landlords in that situation.
Maybe. In that case, I think the “first home” should be exempt only if its your only home. If you have more than one, then I see no reason not to tax them. I’m sure it would create a lot of loopholes that would also need to be plugged up.
Only income derived through labor should be truly safe, as labor is useful to civilization, unlike gambling, often with winnings from previous gambling gained using loaded market influence dice and marked insider information cards.
AI and Automation is going to destroy these human labor=value claims of classical Marxism even further. The point is you can’t choose not to live in a capitalist society as if you’re an ostrich burying your head in the sand. I invest my retirement and portion of my savings in market index funds because keeping it in a bank will lose value over time due to inflation. Keeping the money I have earned through my labor as cash or in a savings account is pretty much guaranteed to lose value as inflation occurs. There is risk in the market, but I’d hardly call that type of investment gambling.
There is a reality we live in, and regardless of political beliefs or opinions on labor and capital, you are in capitalism, your participate in capitalism whether you like it or not, so might as well protect yourself and future by playing the game of capitalism to some degree.
Marx enjoyed the fruits of bourgeois society and participating in fox hunts arranged by Engels. I don’t think it’s a problem to have some irony in fighting the good fight, while investing in a 401k.
It incentives long term holding which is better for the company anyways and stabilizes prices.
And pretty much elimate all the day trading bullshit that makes companies focus on constantly improving profit margins no matter what the long term repercussions are.
Companies would want to show sustained long term growth to intice investors who could potentially keep the stock for years.
Hard agree. Make it impossible to dodge with loopholes for the wealthy. Eliminate capital gains and losses Taxing every trade is the only fair way to do it. And people don’t need shares of stock to live, so it’s not a burden on the poor.
Don’t worry, they’ll raise a panic alarm about how everyone and their brothers retirement pensions are invested in the market, and so “you’ll hurt the poor” will resound, ignoring that a lot of those poor never had a choice to not have their pensions gambled on the fucking market.
It still boggles my mind that almost all retirement accounts just blindy add money to the market once or twice every month and it doesn’t even move the needle! If we all knew which days our investments and matches (if you’re lucky) went in, the non-rich could also print their own money! BRB, going to talk with benefits managers that also skim everything.
If you mean a small tax per share when purchased then that would be a great idea. Make high frequency trading, that contributes zero to society, unprofitable. It wouldn’t hurt household investors as the tax would be small but it would hurt the assholes who manipulate prices through trading back and forth.
High frequency trading is fully automated insider trading done in broad daylight, but nothing gets done about it because most people don’t understand what it is. It shouldn’t be taxed; it should be illegal.
It’s a long and convoluted route from that to their 401ks not bring as plump as they could be. Indirect robbery of thousands is more palatable than being mugged for a few dollars.
We’re not asking for 5 minute intervals. Just 1-2 second intervals would stop that automated stuff, or at least diminish it significantly. How about setting it to how long it takes light to go around the world twice +1 second?
I wish I remembered the name of it but there was a really interesting documentary/video about how crazy the rapid trading got, to the point that companies were trying to install systems as close as physically possible to the physical location of the NASDAQ so their requests would have less “travel” time and show up before anyone else.
Abolishing the stock market in general would be nice, or at least moving towards that direction gradually. The wealthy don’t typically get their money from great trading, but parking their money and letting it grow.
The stock market itself isn’t the problem either though, it’s that the wealthy have money and the poor do not. If you want to buy a house and you don’t have the cash for it, you need to borrow from someone…and that means someone who has a lot of money. And you’ll pay interest for the privilege because there is a time value of money. That doesn’t go away without a stock market.
The real solution is to tax the wealth itself, either directly or through taxing the step-up in value after the owner of a stock dies, or a massively increased estate tax.
The stock market shouldn’t be abolished without also abolishing other aspects of Capitalism, yes. Workers must currently take advantage of everything they can within the current system. However, people should be striving towards worker ownership of the Means of Production, and keeping the stock market would allow Capitalism to resurface.
The vast majority of churches are positive influences on their community and don’t deserve to be incinerated. I’m saying this as an atheist.
Edit: I guess I should specify my experience is with Canadian churches. I’ve been to several near me over the years, I can remember a few that even had pride flags in the windows.
I understand why you say that, and I’d like to believe it too. I still wish there were stats on that…
Especially considering they don’t pay taxes. If the value of their social efforts don’t reach the amount of money they’d be paying in taxes, then they’re actually a net negative.
The programs these churches run are typically filling in gaps in social programs that the government doesn’t have the political mandate to enact.
If these churches were taxed you’d see their charities diminished while the funding went to some pork belly spending project, or at the very least not related to what services the church is suddenly not providing.
Hmm are you thinking of libraries? Because libraries and books should definitely not be burned and are a monumentally positive influence on their communities. I would highly recommend checking one out near you and researching the historical relationship between the indigenous people and “the church” so you better understand the context here.
I didn’t realize that modern churches had time machines that allowed their congregations to go back in time and inflict horrors upon indigenous peoples
If your modern congregation starts in about how residential schools were a not so bad actually when another bunch of childrens graves is discovered there is admittedly a temptation to burn everything to the ground because God isn’t getting around to it fast enough.
Make no mistake, religion has no place in our society. I don’t give a shit how they appear on the outside, they are hateful places that harbor hateful people. They can all get fucked.
Yeeeeaaaahhh no. The reason the churches are burning is because Canada is in the midst of coming to terms with a massive genocide that didn’t end until the 1990’s that was spearheaded by a joint effort of the Catholic Church and the Canadian government to rip Indigenous children from their families, remove them from their cultures and languages, forcefully indoctrinate them with the idea they were dirty barbaric and sinful while abusing them and then covering up the deaths of thousands of children many of whom were buried in unmarked graves and downplaying the intergenerational trauma caused to individuals and families.
For more than a few years there have been a lot of memorials with very small shoes and a lot of people who are depressed when another grave site near a church run residential school is discovered with another couple hundred little bodies. It’s kind of a reap what you sow situation for Canadian churches at present. Some are completely unapologetic for the role they played and when there’s this much resentment and anger about how we were all made complict via our ignorance some are likely to feel that matches are more effective than arguements.
The cultural genocide aspect of residential schools ended well before the 1990s, every uneducated virtue signaller like yourself should do some deeper reading into what the last school was actually like in its final years
It isn’t about the last, it’s about the whole cultural impact since the beginning. The last gasp is just the final shameful icing on the cake. The effect of the schools is still very real and present in our modern day society and the rolling damages did not end with the closures.
But then I don’t expect callous intolerance signallers who read history only to find ways to excuse themselves from personal responsibility in making anything better to care. You are too busy drowning in doxastic anxiety and attempting to self-soothe by lying to yourself that nobody is actually deeply perturbed by this, they just are pretending to care for appearance sake.
Being precise about the dates when cultural genocide ended vs when the last residential school shut down does not imply that I think it was a non issue or that I think I shouldn’t care about what happened.
You should calm down and reflect on why you decided to automatically ascribe such extreme and awful viewpoints to a stranger in the internet who never mentioned them.
Gee, think maybe it was the immediate jumping to call me uneducated and claiming that I only care because I am somehow performing for attention that got my back up?
I have family members currently working on the GIS investigatory teams and I know how emotionally difficult the work has been for them given what they find. Your "It wasn’t actually that bad " rhetoric isn’t welcome.
Right back at you friend, if you think burning churches is a justified response to the terrible actions of the past, you’re a violent piece of shit who I’m ashamed to share this country with
If you don’t like churches burning, then you should target the leadership of the church which is being less than 1,000 million percent cooperative with any investigation into anybody in their institutions history that ever enabled or covered up for this shit. Either we hang some church officials for their inhumanity or the churches need to be burned to the ground to make sure nobody has to look at that shit anymore and be reminded of what they got away with.
Somehow when you kidnap children, murder them in the backyard, bury them without funerals, And then hide all this information from the police, people seem to think that if you get away with it long enough the police shouldn’t investigate you and punish you the way that we would any other child murdering psychopaths. It’s probably best that Canada doesn’t have a death penalty, but then why not punish these people by locking them up?
I won’t argue with any of the points you’ve tried to make. I’ll simply pointy out that you’re all over this thread, apologizing for churches. All fucking over.
The FAA reqs are the relic. You don’t just get to go nuts and add whatever you want to a product - especially on airplanes. They were given the requirements and met them.
Yeah, that’s my point. The minimum is 2 hours. We deal with a lot of minimums and the culture doesn’t really involve going past requirements. This is something you probably buy, rather than make in house (though I may be mistaken), so you’re just going to find the one that meets minimum specs.
Huh. What do I think? Let me tell you what I think, Stan. If you want Boeing to have 25 hours of audio like your pretty boy EASA over there, then why don’t you just make the minimum 25 hours of audio?
I agree. In fact it should probably be 240 hours of audio. I was simply refuting the slander on random engineers, as though they’re the ones who made the choice of only two hours.
It makes a little sense but personally I believe EVERYTHING that happens in the cockpit could be very important details, if the pilots want privacy there are other places in the plane. Autopilot does most ofnthe job letting them take brakes etc… Of course I am no pilot and haven’t even been on a plane so my point is not very valuable.
I’m not sure I want the pilots to leave the cockpit so they can have a conversation they don’t want to have recorded… “If you’re here, who’s flying the plane?”
To be entirely fair your cheap voice recorder is not expected to also survive a plane crash. That being said European planes have more without issue so yeah.
2-3 large NVMe drives, mirrored to each other and properly encased, would provide years worth of recordings and survive a crash. They save so little because they want to.
We just have another person sit in the cockpit and write down everything that happens around them. Don’t need to worry about pulling the breaker that way.
Modern DVDR (digital voice data recorder) use nvme storage now. Tape is still in use on old planes, but I would suspect this brand new max has the newer versions.
They probably did. There’s a reason that businesses set retention policies on emails stating that everything gets deleted after a certain amount of time, regardless of space. They don’t want the record to exist to be found during the discovery phase of a lawsuit.
That and, more practically, after a certain amount of time you just don’t need the papers. The world generates so much data and most of it anymore is unnecessary, redundant, or obsolete within a few months of generation. It absolutely makes sense to retain data for five or ten years, but after that… At what point is it just hoarding stuff no one will ever look at?
Even my cheap voice recorder can go for hundreds of hours
Only marginally related, but I run into this a lot with “Why can’t I have more space in my homedir? I can go buy a disk from BestBuy and it’s only $50.” The two products - a TEAM disk from BB and the media approved for enterprise (let alone emergency/recovery) work are from two different worlds.
This isn’t entirely an excuse, but a CVR has some pretty serious durability requirements. They’re required to withstand physical forces, sustained exposure to direct flame, lengthy submersion in sea water…it’s not a trivial device.
On top of all that, you have to factor in the development and testing costs for the CVR or FDR too. These are usually off the shelf, previously developed components. A seemingly trivial change like bigger storage suddenly costs several hundred thousand dollars to retest and time to recertify by dozens with agencies around the world. If the regulations have not changed, then there is no reason for to go through that whole R&D process again when the same bought and paid for system works.
You have to recertify the component on each aircraft you install it on. If the manufacturer doesn’t have a reason to update a component they won’t recertify it.
Flight recorders have a very long history with modern ones being engineered in the 1960s. They used film and magnetic tape loops, having very limited capacity. That’s where we get 2 hours from. Early ones only ran for 30 minutes, so 2 hours is pretty good in comparison.
It’s time to upgrade the regulations to match our current technology instead of 1990s limitations.
Modern ones are solid state and the owner can choose how long they want to record for. Most ETOPS aircraft will record for much longer than 2 hours. I believe my airline records for 25 hours, even though our aircraft are not based in Europe.
Absolutely. My comment is about why a regulation would be 2 hours when today we can get more capable, air rated parts. US regulation is lagging behind, but it was based on what was within reach 20+ years ago. Heck, I bet most craft would eventually become 25 hours voice recording as older standard recorders become no longer available.
Farming subsidies are insane in Iowa but because so much of the farming is owned by giant corporations instead of families, it’s just another way we move money from taxpayers to the wealthy.
It pisses me off to no end that rural Iowans go hard Republican. They listen to the pandering to “Iowa Farmers” from the right, despite only larping as farmers since they all sold their farms in the 70s and 80s.
Sorry, Tom the “farmer”, but living in a ranch house on .25 acres in a town of 200 people and wearing coveralls from 35 years ago, does not make you the beneficiary of Iowa farm money.
Who would have guessed, a generation that is constantly struggling on money can’t buy expensive meat at the same rate the generation that got everything handed to them has been. Who could have known that there were unforseen consequences to economic strategies that have produced one of the greatest period of economic disparity of all time!
It’s almost as though massive wealth consolidation and the maintenance of an economic underclass as we prioritise unproductive shareholders over productive workers is bad for the economy.
“If they’re able to successfully remove Donald Trump from the ballot, for example, or they’re successfully able to keep engaging in some of the blatant election-fraud type behavior that they’ve done, then, pretty soon you’re not going to be able to resolve your differences through the ballot box,” said Colorado GOP Chair Dave Williams
These mother fuckers. We decided this at the ballot box through a free and fair election, then they stormed the capitol and tried to throw out the results. Then they have the balls to claim that they’re the ones on the side of fair elections?! Get the fuck outta here.
The hospital here does have a separate surgery center, but it is only for simple procedures. Apparently mine requires more than what the surgery center can do, so I have to be in the main hospital.
It's insane to me that hospitals and doctors' officers don't require masking of all parties while indoors. They spread disease almost as much as children do (not really, but they tend to spread worse diseases than children do), and they get lots of immunocompromised people in there.
I’m hopeful too, thanks. I am trying not to stress, but any surgery is risky, so I’m a little bit on edge, but I’ve been sick for months, so this is my last hope before the Mayo clinic.
Well I’m rooting for you! You’ll be ok. And of course you already know this, but try to focus on the moment now instead of the possibility of unhappiness and pain in the future. Worrying doesn’t help anything. And for all you know your life will be greatly improved!
On X, formerly Twitter, he wrote: “My deepest hope is that Americans of all political persuasions can unite and agree that: 1. Jesus Christ is Lord 2. Satan is evil.”
In a country with religious freedom as a base, not everyone is going to be part of the same religion and not should they be. The first item on his list is just blatantly un-American.
the funniest part is that the Founding Fathers, having just created the Constitution, decided to kick things off with a list of 10 Amendments, they called the Bill of Rights. a list of things that should apply to all citizens. the very first thing they put on their list of important shit, was the First Amendment itself, which states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
so this shitbag doesn't even know the First Amendment, written by the Founding Fathers, to the Constitution he swore to uphold on joining the military service.
Americans of all political persuasions can unite and agree that: 1. Jesus Christ is Lord
no dork, we’re not going to do that.
The next step is to claim that, since you don't believe that JC is Lord, you're not an American. And if you're not an American, they're fine with persecuting you.
Yep. Not even speculation. Look how upset they get when someone is sworn into office on something besides a bible, as if being a Christian is a requirement to hold office. No shame or second thoughts.
There was a court case I read about decades ago in American Atheist, a publication by Madalyn O’Hair, who was a separation of church and state activist. It involved someone (maybe her?) testifying in a court case in Texas, and they didn’t want to swear on a bible. The judge determined that they couldn’t believe any testimony from someone who wouldn’t swear on a bible because they didn’t ‘believe in a future state of reward or punishment’… as in an afterlife in heaven or hell. Just nuts. That’s seriously the only thing keeping Christians moral? The threat of hell or promise of heaven?
He is not, in any christian denomination lol. What a blasphemy!
Satan is evil.
Satan is a questionable topic, if they even exists in original scriptures. Before fic lit like Paradise Lost and the Divine Comedy they didn’t get registered as their own entiity.
He has no power to do anything really. I’m starting to think more socialism makes sense. I kind of want profit limits on certain essential sectors like food, medicine, probably others.
I’m tired of hearing about how company X made 3 billion more this quarter than last year. It’s one thing to be profitable and make something, it’s another to give it all to the execs and make consumers eat more year after year.
Raising prices to raise profits when you’re still profitable is ridiculous and greedy.
I don’t see how Biden could fix the situation on his own. It needs a massive change.
Exactly. Nothing short of some socialism is going to fix this when companies can increase prices as much as they want. Current generation kids will say “well the fair market means someone will lower prices and everyone else will have to follow or lose customers.” Adults know that all that’s happening is everyone is raising prices across the board since they all win.
“Some” socialism means a minimum wage tied to inflation.
“Some” socialism means industries that provide basic necessities are well-regulated.
“Some” socialism means corporations pay taxes on income.
“Some” socialism means anyone paid in stocks (i.e. CEOs) pays taxes on the value of those stocks when they receive them (as income), and then pays capital gains when they sell them.
“Some” socialism means people pay into the social safety net (SSI, Medicaid, etc.) to the fullest extent of their income.
I can’t believe that they treated the first Congolese-American female PHD/Astronaut this way. Did she cure polio for nothing? You can’t do enough for some people.
Brittany said she’s trying to be optimistic. “Yeah, it gets better,” she said. “But when is it going to get better for us, specifically?”
Honestly? When you GTFO of Lynchburg, VA kids. I don’t say that lightly, Lynchburg is about 3 and a half hours away from and about 50 years behind Washington, DC.
Yeah, there are some parts of this country where as a queer person you’d rather be homeless in D.C. than sleep in a comfy bed in. And I don’t say that lightly, I’ve slept in a car in Ohio winters, and D.C. is that but with summers like the Everglades. But if it’s that or being the [slur] of some rural mountain town, you can find places to live and resources in D.C.
Unless you’re the type that wants to change things. If everyone with a heart abandons the countryside and consolidates in cities we give up lots of political power due to how power is allocated in the Senate.
It sounded like the kids had some community support, too. It might just take people taking initiative to run for the school board positions and let the community know to show up and vote.
Ok, I think I’ll have to hand this to you. While I still think real/deep/systemic/lasting type changes ultimately arise from below, at an operational and/or local level, the change can come from above to reduce harm to those vulnerable people in that community. This is particularly true when this argument is restricted to just voting.
This is maybe a bit like slavery ending, the motivation and force coming ultimately from below (i.e. it wasn’t rich slave owners looking to be nice and increase their costs), yet it took Juneteenth where federal forces had to come and force compliance.
That being said, a strong queer kid can change many minds simply be existing and being a decent person and showing people first hand, I changed many in my life. As a trans person with means, I’m currently trying to figure out if I might need to flee the country for my safety, but tbh, I’m a fighter, I’d rather go down fighting than being safe, but I don’t hold others to that.
I make about $75k a year, but to afford a $700k house (which is a “reasonable” price) near my city (Seattle), I’d have to make $150k per year. The only affordable houses are two hours’ drive away, and there are no “starter” homes to buy. I can skrimp and save for the rest of my life (and I am). But unless I get a huge raise (and I’m already above the median national income), buying a house is impossible. Not just hard, economically impossible.
I’m also in Seattle and it’s bad out here. I was looking at townhouses last year before the rates went up but couldn’t get a mortgage because of a limited amount of work experience since getting my second degree during the pandemic. I was actually surprised that I could have afforded a decent townhouse in like Edmonds or Shoreline until the rates shot up - going from 3.5% to 7% adds something like $1000 a month in interest on a $400k mortgage. Then I realized I have never lived alone before and wasn’t sure if buying a place was the best way to try that out lol. Average rent in Seattle right now though is like $2300-$2400 a month which is close to 50% of the take-home income of someone making $100,000 per year. It’s insane.
You are being sarcastic but a lot of people who are convinced they can’t afford it actually could afford to own the place they rent and have just never crunched the numbers.
I live in rural Iowa wtf are you talking about? We rent out here too!
I actually am paying off my trailer, though, so someday I could maybe put this on a piece of rural property somewhere and do remote work or something? But like, I never chose this shit - I just stayed where I grew up and got a factory job when my neurosis and undiagnosed dysphoria caused me to flunk out of college. I guess I could go squat in the woods though lol
Its pretty insane we don’t invest in our cities anymore when they’re the powerhouse of the economy. Not to mention they’re a way better use of land than suburbs and rural living. You can find affordable places in Tokyo and so many other cities worldwide that dwarf ours in almost every metric. Cities really aren’t the problem, they are actually the potential solution if we change our policies around them and attempt to catch up with countries like Japan.
Right… and no generation since has ever seen the value of owning property, right? Lol.
Mark Twain was right. It’s easier to fool someone than to convince them they’d been fooled.
See how mad people get in this comment section when someone points out they’re being taken for a ride? One person even said they won’t get off the ride if it isn’t “easy.” Lol.
Right… and no generation since has ever seen the value of owning property, right? Lol.
Are you under the impression that modern renters are choosing to rent instead of own?
60% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck making saving for a down payment impossible for over half the country, and with rates being what they are, mortgages are expensive af.
People are renting because it’s the only way to live, not because they think it’s neat. People are getting upset at you not because you’re pointing out that rent is a scam, but because you’re implying it’s the fault of the victims
I wasn’t able to afford to buy a house until I was over 50 years old, it took a global pandemic, a complete shutdown of the economy, and working from home for multiple years to bank the cash to make it happen.
“If you want to move to a shithole, you can get a good deal on a house” is not the persuasive argument you think it is.
EDIT: Just so you know where this person is coming from, they’ve moved on to talk about how fascism isn’t so bad from a “global perspective” and being anti-fascist is just “tribalism.”
@jordanlund already linked saying the average price for a home is 170k in Mississppi, and even that isn’t necessary to find a nice place.
My house was only $60k and it’s 1,200 sqft and 10 minutes from a hospital.
The real issue here is your entitlement. You think you’re ‘too good’ to live in places that many others do because you think you’re better than them.
Well, if you’re so much better than them then pay up, lol. The problem with you people is that you think you’re entitled to live in expensive places, but you’re not actually valuable enough to society to have a salary that can pay for them. Then you want other people to foot the bill so you can continue to have more than those living in what you deem ‘shitholes.’
You’d come across as more genuine if you just admitted it. But you won’t. Nobody wants to acknowledge their entitlement, lol.
“The entire state of Mississippi isn’t good enough for me, but I’m not entitled.”
Yeah… supply and demand applies to you too, buddy. We can’t all live in the Bahamas (which is actually surprisingly cheap), but that doesn’t make ‘regular’ places like Mississippi shitholes. You can live a higher quality of life than the vast majority of people in a $60k* house in Mississippi.
*I haven’t been house searching for 2 years, it’s overwhelmingly likely this number has increased to $70k or even $80k. Still way way cheaper than what you think a house should cost.
Close. Terre Haute, Indiana. And, like the rest of Indiana, it’s a shithole. So I may know a little bit about living in a shithole.
And yeah, you can probably get a house that cheap here- if you want a “unique fixer-upper” in between the meth lab house and the house with squatters in it.
Now it’s your turn to tell me that if I didn’t want to live in the luxurious town of Terre Haute, known throughout the world as The Utopia on the Wabash, I’d know how people really live.
Alright see, there you go saying an entire state is a shithole and (I assume) ‘not good enough for you.’
That’s what I mean by entitlement. It’s insane that you can be living a higher quality of life than the vast majority of people on the planet, yet still think you need more and should get it before they do.
We’re just passing a bunch of money around at the top. And most of us are proud of it.
Lol, that’s funny. When you say ‘shithole’ when buying a house, most people will think you’re talking about the quality of the property because that’s an issue that affects everybody.
If you have something specifically relevant to you that causes you not to like a place, then understand that your judgement is not an absolute truth. Most people will not consider Indian to be a shithole because of its legislation, but you’re an exception.
Instead of saying a place like Indiana is a shithole, you should say it’s just not good enough for you. That takes the faux-objectivity away from your argument and allows us to discuss on relative terms.
See how it all goes back to entitlement? Trying to convince people you ‘need’ something because that way they’re the bad guy if they try to take it away from you. In this case, as with most, it’s money. You need that money, and anyone who gets in the way is a bad person for taking away your needs.
Instead of saying a place like Indiana is a shithole, you should say it’s just not good enough for you.
No. Right-wing dominant places which are enemies to queer people and women are shitholes. In their entirety. Indiana is not good enough for anyone who is non-Christian, queer, a woman or an ally to them.
But sure, you want to be a Trump voter and its paradise. I’d say that makes it a shithole.
Calling a fascist state full of idiot Republican bigots a shithole isn’t entitlement, it’s accuracy.
I’m glad you at least came clean about your sentiments on the matter.
Now we can see you don’t speak for everyone, only people with your specific issue.
When I think ‘shithole’ I imagine places like favelas in Brazil or the black part of Johannesburg. Hopefully you can see how Indiana is significantly different than those places, where unfortunately many people are forced to live while we pass a bunch of money around at the top.
I’m sure you also think Florida is a shithole, and lots of tribalists will agree with you. I, personally, do not. Most places in Florida are great to live. Some places in California are awful to live. I don’t think the politics of any state are horrendous enough to call them ‘shitholes.’ I’m looking at things from a global perspective, though. Because we live in a global society and it’s not fair that people in Indiana get more before those in Somalia.
By “tribalists,” you mean people who are against fascism and bigotry and oppression. Yes. I guess we know where you stand on that with your “global perspective.”
Ah, being anti-fascist is being “Reddit-brained.” Gotcha.
Yes. When it comes to fascism, you are either anti-fascist or you support fascism. There’s no middle ground. And you have made it clear you are not anti-fascist.
Ah, being anti-fascist is being “Reddit-brained.” Gotcha.
No, saying “you really mean this” when saying something that is not what they really mean is being reddit-brained.
Hilarious how you just did it twice in a row, lol. And continued to support my point about tribalists.
Man, I’m glad I’m not with you. There is no independence in your world.
That said, I am anti-fascist. Florida is not a fascist state, though. Tribalists will disagree with me on that, but that’s what makes them tribalists. Just like how they think it’s a ‘shithole.’
Yeah, just link to an article instead of making your own arguments.
That way you don’t have to stick your neck out and everyone can just assume your positions. If they don’t make up your arguments for you, then they’re the problem.
You clearly agree with all of this since it isn’t fascism. Because you are so “anti-fascist”:
Arresting black men for voting, terrifying them and ruining their lives while making sure they all get paraded in chains before the cameras.
Threatening public school teachers with prison for simply teaching history.
Lying about medical science regarding vaccines to suck up to the Trump base, resulting in fewer Floridians being protected from a disease that is killing literally hundreds of Americans every day.
Using rhetoric that feeds bigotry and hate against gay, lesbian, and trans people.
Intimidating the college board so they strip the Black Lives Matter movement out of their advanced placement African-American Studies curriculum.
Lying to asylum-seekers to get them on a plane to Martha’s Vineyard as a stunt to elevate his own political fortunes.
And, of course, thinking all of that makes Florida a real shithole for anyone who doesn’t support fascism is “tribalism” is also what makes you a fascist.
I know, its “Reddit-brained” to quote an article to tell you why Florida is a fascist state.
Sorry bro, I’m not gonna sit here and debate all of your talking points. You’re delusional enough to believe that Florida is fascist, and that’s all I need to know to see you’re not worth arguing with.
It’s impossible for you to listen to reason because you are too far down your tribalistic rabbit hole. You can’t see how much you’re being manipulated, and there are plenty of other fools following your same path.
Go ahead, believe whatever you want. You were going to anyways, and rational people recognize that your claims are not rooted in reality.
You may have the last reply. I can tell you’re dying for it. Goodbye.
I live in Michigan. Most of the houses below 300k are either so far out in the sticks you can barely even get Internet, or they’re in dangerous and very run down areas.
There are a few nice places listed at 250k, but they sell instantly and for quite a bit above what they’re listed at, so it’s not like you can actually get one of them.
Not if you hide the pending/contingent ones. They’re basically already sold.
Also, the houses that have a garage and aren’t pending are mostly above $250k. They barely count as being “below $300k”.
And like I said, those cheaper houses sell instantly and for a lot above the asking price, unless there’s something wrong with them that will cost a lot to fix. You can’t actually buy a $250k house for $250k.
Even if you filter out pending/contingent sales and houses on the market less than 14 days, there are still >50 houses (not trailers) in that price range. And since they have been on the market for at least two weeks, they aren’t going to sell above asking price.
Yes, houses require maintenance/repairs. Even expensive houses require maintenance, in fact maintenance costs are generally higher in more expensive houses.
That’s just one of the tradeoffs of home ownership. You should be ready to replace pretty much everything in the house over the next ten years. If you don’t like performing maintenance or paying someone else to do it, you should rent.
Finally, $250K absolutely counts as “under $300K”.
40 have been on the site longer than 2 weeks. I can only filter for less than two weeks, not greater than, so I won’t bother with that, but here’s a summary of the first 5 that have a garage, aren’t pending, and are less than $300k:
“This house needs work and is priced accordingly”
“This is a 55 and older only community.”
A trailer with a detached garage for $250k. That’s just insulting.
A nice condo for $299,900, right where I said most houses would be.
A kind of ugly place for $230k. The description says it only needs cosmetic improvements, so this might actually be a good one to buy.
So hey, in the first 5 there’s one house that seems reasonable. Maybe there are a few more if I go through the rest. Still, for a city of 200k people, being able to count the reasonably priced houses on your fingers is not very good.
Keep in mind that this is the worst time of year to put a house on the market.
Realtors advise sellers to list after the Superbowl. People are doing holiday stuff right now, not so much house shopping. And if a house sits on the market too long, buyers will avoid it.
You need to use median household income, not per capita. It’s $49,111 in Mississippi according to your source.
The ratio of home price to household income is typically between 4 and 5 in the US, so the median family should be able to afford the median house in Mississippi.
Household income is absolutely not the right metric to use here, because it’ll always be proportional to the cost of the house out of necessity.
For example, if the cost of a house goes up relative to individual income, then more people in the family need to start working more hours, and more people live with roommates.
Household income stays proportionally the same, always, but individual income shows you how much people are struggling.
No, it’s not the right metric. Which is why people don’t use it.
Imagine you make $160K and buy the nicest house you can afford with that income.
Then you get married, and your spouse makes $100K. Your household income has increased to $260K, which means you can afford an even nicer house.
Your per capita income has decreased to $130K. By your logic, you can’t afford a nicer house. In fact, with a second income you might no longer be able to afford your current house. That’s nonsense.
When multiple people live in a house they all have the opportunity to contribute to paying for it. Some may contribute a lot, some (like children) may contribute nothing. The house you can afford depends on the total amount everyone contributes, aka household income.
if the cost of a house goes up
This doesn’t make sense. The cost of a house is fixed when you buy it. It won’t ever go up while you live there.
When everyone needs a separate individual house that they refuse to share, then per capita income will be relevant.
But in the real world, people buy houses because they want to share them with their family. On average, 2.5 people live in a single house. And the median household income is $63K in Michigan.
So if you really want to look at per capita income, that means there is $87.5K (2.5 x $35K) available to buy a house, which is easily enough to afford a $300K home.
You insist on using per capita income for some reason. That means that even in a single earner family, the income is considered to be divided equally among the family members.
If you are a single earner making $160K in a family with two adults and two kids, then when using per capita income you consider all four family members as making $40K each. That’s the definition of per capita.
And that’s why it’s nonsense to say that per capita income of $40K is not enough to afford a house. A family of five with per capita income of $40K would be in the top 10%.
Household income is total family income, regardless of whether there is one earner or more than one. And it’s not tautological. If your household income is very low, then your family may not be able to afford to buy a house.
A household includes all the people who occupy a housing unit (such as a house or apartment) as their usual place of residence.
A household includes the related family members and all the unrelated people, if any, such as lodgers, foster children, wards, or employees who share the housing unit. A person living alone in a housing unit, or a group of unrelated people sharing a housing unit such as partners or roomers, is also counted as a household.
Do those places have even remotely comparable work, laws, or amenities? Because yeah you can buy a dirt cheap house 5 mountains from the nearest city in rural Tennessee, but it’s a terrible place to live and you won’t be able to find work.
That’s not a crazy price, that’s like outskirts of reasonably sized city price.
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.