Like Edwards and her husband, a vast majority of adults over age 50 prefer the idea of remaining in their own residences as long a possible, according to an Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll. But staying put is becoming less of a choice. Some baby boomers and older members of Generation X are locked into low mortgage rates too good to give up. Skyrocketing housing prices fueled by lean supply further complicate the calculations of moving house.
Selling a bubble and buying another one is a wash. You get an outsized price but you pay an outsized price. That's a net zero.
If you have a mortgage and are nearing or beyond retirement you're an idiot. Oh, I get it, "**** happens" but most of the time the "****" is your "need" to have fancy cars, a boat or just a few vacations, so you engaged in serial refinance.
Which, I might remind you, means that you built basically zero equity because on a 30 year loan if you only hang onto the property for 7 years you have only paid about 10% of the principal!
All the rest of the money went to the bank and they kept it, which is why doing a 30 year if you are going to be "average" and move after 7, which is incidentally the average tenor of said loans, is stupid.
Advising you to do that violates every standard of fiduciary responsibility and is an intentional act but, of course, we don't hold mortgage lenders and bankers to said fiduciary standard nor is it applied to Realtors either -- otherwise we'd have to throw them all in prison. Thus you ought to consider what the appropriate punishment is for the repeated assrape perpetrated upon you and exact said penalty yourself.
But, you say, "oh that's terrible!" and "someone has to fix it for me!"
Well, stupid has a price. The simple fact of the matter is that you should structure your finances during your earning and child-raising years (when it does make a lot of sense to have continuity) around having said residence paid off by the time the kids are grown. Now if the market is a bubble you still eat the commission and other selling/buying expenses, which are not trivial, but you don't give a crap about rates and you're immune to being locked in one way or another.
Likewise if the market crashes while your house value goes down so does the one you would trade into, so it matters not once again. You are, once again, immune from said effects.
Attempting to argue that "well prices always go up so I'm going to do this because I want the appreciation" is ****ing stupid beyond words and you deserve to get a 2' long horsecock up your ass, because as noted in said bubble where appreciation is occurring it is happening across the board and thus you actually make nothing from said appreciation since you must overpay for the new place as well. Never mind that if you're "fortunate" enough to exceed the tax-free limit in said "appreciation" you will get it in the ass from Uncle Sam on the transaction as well and you really don't want that to happen.
The only way to "win" in a housing bubble is to die and then your heirs get the windfall but in that case you're dead, *******, so it matters not to you. You too can be the subject of the large auctioneer's Estate Sale (yes, including the house and car) sale currently down the road from me to the benefit of your kin.
There is a "severe gap" in the number of available vaccine doses compared to the level of current need, said UNICEF on its website.
"Between 2021 and 2023, more doses were requested for outbreak response than the entire previous decade," UNICEF noted.
Outbreak response?
You don't vaccinate into an outbreak of anything. Of course we knew this decades ago and then immediate forgot it when Covid showed up.
Also note they try to blame "climate change" (bull****); cholera is a bacterial disease that occurs as a result of eating ****. Literally eating ****, typically through water source contamination.
The answer to the problem is not "vaccination" it is clean water sources and sewage or septic disposal of human feces.
That's why we don't typically have a problem with it in the United States today; there is no routine shot given for it in the US because there is no value to it. Don't eat **** and you won't get it. In fact this is why polio is basically gone too; it, like cholera, is transmitted through consumption of feces.
Was IPV (Salk's vaccine) even relevant in the evolution of that disease in the United States and worldwide? Not really, because it is not sterilizing. That is you could get it and transmit it to others but just as with cholera how you got it is the same -- to get it you have to eat ****.
Interrupting the transmission is thus a function of first-world water and waste handling. Succeed at that and there is no cholera -- or polio for that matter. Fail at it and you have a problem.
Further, since cholera is caused by a bacterium for those places that still use communal wells as a water source personal or household, at-point-of-use water filtration is both sufficient and effective. This is typically not true for viruses (e.g. polio) but a decent filter is good enough to prevent bacterial contamination. Filters of sufficient quality for consumption are inexpensive.
Bacterial contamination is serious business for people like me who enjoy back-country hiking. Getting the craps is bad if you're at home and have an effectively-unlimited water supply to make up the fluid loss, and ready access to salt (electrolytes.) In the back-country that same case of the trots can kill you if you're effectively immobilized by it and get severely dehydrated.
Cholera is on the smaller side of bacteria but a 0.2-.0.5 micron filter is effective. I also carry Chlorine Dioxide as a secondary treatment and use it because viruses can also be present and while they're not much of a "in the wild" problem they are when people are around, and, well, people are around these days in the so-called "back-country" and some of them are disgusting and do not keep their bodily waste away from water sources adequately -- or at all.
Nonetheless the issue here is not (as Faux Snooz's headline claims) a function of immunization.
The problem is clean drinking water sources and insuring human waste does not get into the water system.
We didn't end cholera in the US and the rest of the western world with "vaccination" and those who claim this is the proper approach or try to use this as an example of "medicine good, go get more stabs" are lying and said lies get people killed. The answer to these problems is, as we know in the western world, to stop ****ting in the road and resolve clean and sanitary water access issues. That in turn means stop living like ****ing apes and that means society has to produce more than it consumes so the surplus can go to basic infrastructure -- like flush toilets and segregated water and waste systems.
Again you can't vaccinate out of an outbreak. We've known this for over 100 years and the people peddling this crap are badly in need of being skull****ed.
Its here, but I bet you miss it and of course CNN doesn't make mention of it.
It’s important to note that no one, including AAA, recommends not getting these features because of repair costs. Systems like automatic emergency braking, blind spot monitoring, and rear cross-traffic alerts can reduce your chances of getting in a crash in the first place. That’s one reason automatic emergency braking is now nearly universal on new cars and, in a few years, will be required in the United States.
Besides avoiding the need for repairs by reducing crashes, they also help prevent injury to vehicle occupants and pedestrians which is, after all, far more important than a dented fender.
Some of these systems can cut crash rates in half, said Greg Brannon, director of automotive engineering at AAA.
That last line is obviously a lie.
Were it not a lie then collision insurance, which pays when you are in a wreck to fix your car, would be going down in price, specifically for those vehicles with such features since it would reduce the crash rate "by half."
Instead the price of car insurance is skyrocketing.
These "features" are in fact worthless.
But the facts of insurance are simple. Insurance companies are state-regulated and can only make a 10% profit. If they make more the state will force them to reduce premiums. Therefore there are only two ways for an insurance company to grow its profit in dollar terms across a given customer base: Either have more claims or more expensive claims.
Its not rocket science folks. Tarted up vehicles full of these sensors, never mind $2,000 headlight assemblies instead of $200 ones that takes ordinary bulbs wildly increase collision repair costs. If they actually reduced claims by the claimed dramatic amount then the total cost would go down to the insurance company and your premiums would go down too because state law forces that to happen when claim costs decrease.
These people are lying and of course CNN laps it up and feeds you to it on a spoon.
Oh, and incidentally, the same thing applies to health "insurance" as well. Health insurance companies, for example, have been caught issuing bribes to pediatricians for children that are "vaccinated according to schedule", for example, and this extended to the Covid shots as well during the pandemic. That is, rather than offer professional advice based upon what a physician believes is best for a given person instead they're bribed to do what an insurance company wants and, I remind you, the only way for an insurance company to make more money IS TO HAVE EITHER MORE CLAIMS OR MORE EXPENSIVE CLAIMS so spare me any LIES about how this scheme was "best for the person"; it must-certainly WAS AND IS NOT.
Insurance is a necessary evil but it is a felonious business as soon as the "insurance" firm is allowed, in any way, to influence the underlying thing being insured whatever it may be because such a firm always has as the only way to grow its business to either increase the number of claims or the cost of claims.
Always.