This is government at its best - taking a real problem, trying to solve it, and making it worse.
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2016/04/29/3773960/republicans-fiduciary-rule/
Yes, financial advisers have an inherent conflict of interest that tends to cause them to steer clients towards investments that make the adviser money. Worse, most financial advisors get most of their training from the company that employs them, so they don't even KNOW that their advice is tainted. This is the only explanation for why good, honest people can sell whole or universal life policies, which are terrible and you should never buy.
This is a problem requiring a solution. Despite my misgivings, it might even require a government solution. The solution on the table, however, won't solve the problem (unless you think you've solved the problem of there being marginal advice by replacing it with no advice at all). Contrary to what Bernie might say, even financial advisors have to make money. They make money off commissions, and that leads to the conflict of interest. Requiring a fiduciary standard, which HuffPo conveniently fails to define - here's a decent source, though it fails to highlight the pitfalls.
Simply put, a fiduciary standard makes an advisor VERY responsible for giving good advice, and opens them up to enormous potential liability. No advisor is going to accept that risk without some real money coming in. In fact, HuffPo misses the point that the standard already applies to advisors! It's brokers, people who facilitate more than advise, that don't have to uphold the higher standard.
If this rule passes (which is a misnomer, since it is unelected bureaucrats making the rule) poor and middle class people will find investment advice almost impossible to come by.
Friday, April 29, 2016
Thursday, April 28, 2016
What it's all about...
I argue a lot....A lot.
I'm opinionated, sarcastic and also wicked smart and well read.
That said, like most people, my opinions and tightly held beliefs change over time. I've found that ideas I fervently clung to a decade ago just aren't right. Hell, there are things I thought yesterday that were just stupid. I like to be challenged, but hate being wrong, even though I'm probably wrong more often than I think.
This blog is a way of challenging my beliefs, as well as articulating my beliefs in a way that helps me understand them better.
It's also a place that I can write whatever I want, without messing up the theme behind my food blog and my tax blog. I'm going to write whatever I want, however I want, and without much editing. I'm going to express some frightfully stupid, offensive and also incredibly smart and insightful things. I'm going to argue in favor of things I despise, and against things I love. Then do the opposite.
I'm going to label posts so you can generally tell where I stand at the time of writing, and this is important...if you decide to take something I write, knowing that it might not be what I really believe, and spread that about as though I actually believe it, then you're a dick. That's all. Go ahead and do it if you want, or be a stand up person and argue with me about things here.
I hope to make this a place where people (especially me) can learn about issues, critical thinking, good argument techniques, and what a generally brilliant person I am (modest too).
I might invite people to write here if I respect the way they express their beliefs. I don't actually care what their beliefs are, just that they can articulate them well and make me smarter. But this is my house, and what I say goes. I won't change your comment or post, but I will delete it if I don't like it. The criteria for that are...there are none. My house. If I don't like it, that's enough - though you'll find I'm pretty tolerant. This is one thing I believe, tolerance is about putting up with stuff you don't like. It's easy to be tolerant of things that you agree with, or don't annoy you. True tolerance is accepting (or at least, well, tolerating) things that really bug the living shit out of you, or that you really, REALLY disagree with. Please be tolerant of the insanity to follow....
I'm opinionated, sarcastic and also wicked smart and well read.
That said, like most people, my opinions and tightly held beliefs change over time. I've found that ideas I fervently clung to a decade ago just aren't right. Hell, there are things I thought yesterday that were just stupid. I like to be challenged, but hate being wrong, even though I'm probably wrong more often than I think.
This blog is a way of challenging my beliefs, as well as articulating my beliefs in a way that helps me understand them better.
It's also a place that I can write whatever I want, without messing up the theme behind my food blog and my tax blog. I'm going to write whatever I want, however I want, and without much editing. I'm going to express some frightfully stupid, offensive and also incredibly smart and insightful things. I'm going to argue in favor of things I despise, and against things I love. Then do the opposite.
I'm going to label posts so you can generally tell where I stand at the time of writing, and this is important...if you decide to take something I write, knowing that it might not be what I really believe, and spread that about as though I actually believe it, then you're a dick. That's all. Go ahead and do it if you want, or be a stand up person and argue with me about things here.
I hope to make this a place where people (especially me) can learn about issues, critical thinking, good argument techniques, and what a generally brilliant person I am (modest too).
I might invite people to write here if I respect the way they express their beliefs. I don't actually care what their beliefs are, just that they can articulate them well and make me smarter. But this is my house, and what I say goes. I won't change your comment or post, but I will delete it if I don't like it. The criteria for that are...there are none. My house. If I don't like it, that's enough - though you'll find I'm pretty tolerant. This is one thing I believe, tolerance is about putting up with stuff you don't like. It's easy to be tolerant of things that you agree with, or don't annoy you. True tolerance is accepting (or at least, well, tolerating) things that really bug the living shit out of you, or that you really, REALLY disagree with. Please be tolerant of the insanity to follow....
Thoughts on Bathrooms
Use the bathroom you're most comfortable with.
There, problem solved.
If a business won't let you use the bathroom you want, leave, and don't come back - that's what I do when I have issues with a bathroom.
Getting the government involved in bathroom rules is stupid, and a recipe for disaster.
There are a people I'm a lot more creeped out in a bathroom than I am about the trans gendered...
Like that guy who wants a buck for handing me a towel, and thinks I might like a mint that's spent any amount of time in a bathroom.
Like the guy who doesn't use proper urinal selection etiquette - there's a rule book, with charts, and scenarios, and a test - it's actually stupid - like fag seats between two guys at a theater (sorry for the ugly term, but that's what they were called, and that's how fucking stupid they were. Only the use of the term can convey how homophobic you have to be to need a seat between you and a guy so people won't think you're gay.) Back to creepy people in bathrooms (wow we got off topic quick)...
Like anyone buying a condom or cologne out of a bathroom vending machine.
Anyone who thinks that when politicians, pundits and activists (most of them) get involved that it's about rights, protections and freedom is deluded. This is an issue right now so that Conservatives can get votes from neanderthals, and liberals can get votes from people who think there's a giant mass of people who give a shit what bathroom you use. Spoiler alert, there isn't, and the ones who do exist, nobody gives a fuck what they think, except conservatives trying to get their vote.
This isn't about religious freedom, and it isn't about trans rights. It's about power. The power of the government to tell you what to do, and both sides are wrong. Under no circumstance should the government be telling people what bathrooms they have to use, or telling a business what their bathroom policy should be, beyond having one, and I'm pretty sure the marketplace will fix that one too. I know I'm not going to a bar without a bathroom, and there better not be a line.
I have no problem with the people boycotting Target over their bathroom decision (well, I do, but that's a personal belief based on their opinion - but boycotting - knock yourself the fuck out.) I also will have no issue with the other side boycotting Target when they inevitably bow to public pressure. I do have a problem with people wanting the government involved. That's how you get police beating and tasing people for using the wrong bathroom. I think we can work this out without anyone being beaten, arrested, tased or humiliated - at least until someone decides to get violent, then 911 it is.
Now on to the craptastic NC law that's got everyone worked up. That law is only "needed" because of other craptasticer (def: more craptastic) laws passed by other monkey fucking morons who just can't help themselves but try to tell people what to do. On top of that, the law is both so narrowly designed as to be discriminatory (against all non christian beliefs that might also need "protecting") and also widely subject to interpretations and unintended consequences that will boggle the mind when some 14 year old ends up on the sex offender registry. Very similar to Mississippi's religious freedom law with regards to gays. I'll let Popehat Lawsplain it for you. In short, some stupid fucking busybodies that can't leave well enough alone and want to tell people what they can and can't do have caused other head-up-assers who can't imagine not protecting their ever-so-perfect religion (and no others) to create this Giant Steaming Bucket of Fuck out of NOTHING!
Fuck them all. Use the bathroom you want, and if someone has an issue with it, kick 'em in the nuts (originally provided, or added later.)
Nothing discussed here should be interpreted as me not being empathetic to the very real struggles the LGBT community face every day. I just think things will get a hell of a lot better, a hell of a lot faster, if we can keep the government's dicks out of the whole thing.
Bonus Popehat thoughts on bathrooms
There, problem solved.
If a business won't let you use the bathroom you want, leave, and don't come back - that's what I do when I have issues with a bathroom.
Getting the government involved in bathroom rules is stupid, and a recipe for disaster.
There are a people I'm a lot more creeped out in a bathroom than I am about the trans gendered...
Like that guy who wants a buck for handing me a towel, and thinks I might like a mint that's spent any amount of time in a bathroom.
Like the guy who doesn't use proper urinal selection etiquette - there's a rule book, with charts, and scenarios, and a test - it's actually stupid - like fag seats between two guys at a theater (sorry for the ugly term, but that's what they were called, and that's how fucking stupid they were. Only the use of the term can convey how homophobic you have to be to need a seat between you and a guy so people won't think you're gay.) Back to creepy people in bathrooms (wow we got off topic quick)...
Like anyone buying a condom or cologne out of a bathroom vending machine.
Anyone who thinks that when politicians, pundits and activists (most of them) get involved that it's about rights, protections and freedom is deluded. This is an issue right now so that Conservatives can get votes from neanderthals, and liberals can get votes from people who think there's a giant mass of people who give a shit what bathroom you use. Spoiler alert, there isn't, and the ones who do exist, nobody gives a fuck what they think, except conservatives trying to get their vote.
This isn't about religious freedom, and it isn't about trans rights. It's about power. The power of the government to tell you what to do, and both sides are wrong. Under no circumstance should the government be telling people what bathrooms they have to use, or telling a business what their bathroom policy should be, beyond having one, and I'm pretty sure the marketplace will fix that one too. I know I'm not going to a bar without a bathroom, and there better not be a line.
I have no problem with the people boycotting Target over their bathroom decision (well, I do, but that's a personal belief based on their opinion - but boycotting - knock yourself the fuck out.) I also will have no issue with the other side boycotting Target when they inevitably bow to public pressure. I do have a problem with people wanting the government involved. That's how you get police beating and tasing people for using the wrong bathroom. I think we can work this out without anyone being beaten, arrested, tased or humiliated - at least until someone decides to get violent, then 911 it is.
Now on to the craptastic NC law that's got everyone worked up. That law is only "needed" because of other craptasticer (def: more craptastic) laws passed by other monkey fucking morons who just can't help themselves but try to tell people what to do. On top of that, the law is both so narrowly designed as to be discriminatory (against all non christian beliefs that might also need "protecting") and also widely subject to interpretations and unintended consequences that will boggle the mind when some 14 year old ends up on the sex offender registry. Very similar to Mississippi's religious freedom law with regards to gays. I'll let Popehat Lawsplain it for you. In short, some stupid fucking busybodies that can't leave well enough alone and want to tell people what they can and can't do have caused other head-up-assers who can't imagine not protecting their ever-so-perfect religion (and no others) to create this Giant Steaming Bucket of Fuck out of NOTHING!
Fuck them all. Use the bathroom you want, and if someone has an issue with it, kick 'em in the nuts (originally provided, or added later.)
Nothing discussed here should be interpreted as me not being empathetic to the very real struggles the LGBT community face every day. I just think things will get a hell of a lot better, a hell of a lot faster, if we can keep the government's dicks out of the whole thing.
Bonus Popehat thoughts on bathrooms
20160428 Things I'm Digesting...
Popehat on Rape
Deidre on improving the lot of the poor.
Are we fighting an unauthorized war? (Oops, a headline as a question!)
Simple Justice AND Popehat will try to make you smarter
Math Shit I wish I understood better - but there's a movie coming out about him.
Deidre on improving the lot of the poor.
Are we fighting an unauthorized war? (Oops, a headline as a question!)
Simple Justice AND Popehat will try to make you smarter
Math Shit I wish I understood better - but there's a movie coming out about him.
Wednesday, April 27, 2016
Global Warming
I haven't decided if I'm going to keep updating posts on a subject, or make new posts whenever I'm thinking about things. I have some time, since I haven't posted much yet. It's amazing how when you start a blog where you can explore politics, everyone on all social media platforms stop posting thought provoking or irritating things - go figure.
This post would be a good example of a "don't quote me post". I'm going to go everywhere, and a lot of what I'm going to write doesn't necessarily comport with any solid conclusions on my part. I'm not an expert on climate, but I'm really good at politics and political motives, as well as sciencey shit in general, but I'm the wrong guy to form your opinions based on my thoughts. Bottom line, don't assume you know my true thoughts based on what you read here. A lot of this is going to be me digging holes and following random thought chains. Everything that follows is unreliable as to my true views - which are fungible anyway.
That said, you could call me a climate change skeptic, but that just means I'm skeptical of everything, especially if it involves government action. I am pretty sure climate change is occurring and I'm pretty sure man is a big part. But I'm very skeptical of calls to action. By their very own "science" climate change advocates have pretty much proven that carbon control is too little too late - so why wreck the world economy trying to clean everything up. I'm all for slow and steady progress in the direction of clean air, but the plans of some of these people would send us back to the stone age. If you ask me, we should focus on effect mitigation, not go balls to the wall on prevention, especially if prevention won't work. One big thing I could get behind is to stop subsidizing insurance for oceanfront homes - that seems the opposite of what we should be doing if sea level's going to rise.
I'm especially skeptical of motives. Not the motives of the average joe, or the celebrity true believer. I'm skeptical of the politicians, the businessmen, the lobbyists, the world government and NGO's. I just don't believe it's all about climate change. I think this is just the latest "crisis" that's being used to shove a bunch of policies down our throats, get more power, and get more money. These were the same people screaming "global cooling" and "new ice age" a couple decades ago.
I like clean power. I love nuclear power. I like solar and wind. Everyone loves solar and wind, just ask Vermont, vehemently protesting wind turbines, shutting down nuc plants, protesting natural gas pipelines, and then wondering why their energy bills are skyrocketing. I fully expect the giant fields of solar panels will feel their wrath soon enough.
I'm also an optimist. I expect, if the dire predictions are true, that we'll get through it. We'll find ways to slow it, mitigate it, or even reverse it. It's what we do. I'm also a big fan of local action. It seems strange to me that there's not more solar in Charleston. We have these giant neighborhoods, with tons of light exposure, and powerful HOA's. Why aren't they negotiating a big bulk price for panel installation and getting whole neighborhoods done. Especially with the subsidies available (which I hate in principle but will accept at the drop of a hat if it works for me.) It makes me wonder.
Huge left turn aside - tax subsidies. This is pure advice from a tax guy. When you get a loan from a solar company, with a 30% balloon due April 15th the year after installation, be prepared to be screwed. The idea is that the 30% tax credit will pay the balloon. The problem is that if your taxes hit 0, you have to wait until next year, or the year after that to get the rest of the subsidy, but the balloon payment is still due. Make sure to check your taxes to see if you can get the whole credit before signing.
Aside done. Where the fuck was I?
Questions...
Should New York City be building a big sea wall instead of pushing carbon controls?
Should New Orleans be upgrading their flood control systems?
Should we be looking for a technology solution to excess heat retention?
Heat is good. Lots of energy. Can we harness this excess in a good way?
If our planet is so fragile, why aren't we putting more effort into establishing a foothold somewhere else?
Why do environmentalists hate Nuclear? It is literally as clean as it gets.
Do I care what sea level will be in 50 years?
I still have this nagging feeling that this might all be bullshit, but I wouldn't care if we weren't suggesting solutions that are enormous in scope and cost. The problem with science is that we just don't know shit. Eggs are bad, eggs are good, eggs are bad again, or are they good - fuck - who can keep track. The climate is HUGE! Sure, something's going on, but do we really know where it's going and what's going to happen?
I also think this carbon thing has sucked the life out of other important environmental issues like water pollution, over fishing, fertilizer runoff. It's all carbon all the time.
Well shit. I seem to have come across as the anti science nut job. Oh well. Just seeing where the thinking leads me. There are plenty of people writing about why we should all be scared shitless. Might as well write something different.
Remember - not necessarily my true beliefs. Quote them as if they are mine, and you're a dick.
This post would be a good example of a "don't quote me post". I'm going to go everywhere, and a lot of what I'm going to write doesn't necessarily comport with any solid conclusions on my part. I'm not an expert on climate, but I'm really good at politics and political motives, as well as sciencey shit in general, but I'm the wrong guy to form your opinions based on my thoughts. Bottom line, don't assume you know my true thoughts based on what you read here. A lot of this is going to be me digging holes and following random thought chains. Everything that follows is unreliable as to my true views - which are fungible anyway.
That said, you could call me a climate change skeptic, but that just means I'm skeptical of everything, especially if it involves government action. I am pretty sure climate change is occurring and I'm pretty sure man is a big part. But I'm very skeptical of calls to action. By their very own "science" climate change advocates have pretty much proven that carbon control is too little too late - so why wreck the world economy trying to clean everything up. I'm all for slow and steady progress in the direction of clean air, but the plans of some of these people would send us back to the stone age. If you ask me, we should focus on effect mitigation, not go balls to the wall on prevention, especially if prevention won't work. One big thing I could get behind is to stop subsidizing insurance for oceanfront homes - that seems the opposite of what we should be doing if sea level's going to rise.
I'm especially skeptical of motives. Not the motives of the average joe, or the celebrity true believer. I'm skeptical of the politicians, the businessmen, the lobbyists, the world government and NGO's. I just don't believe it's all about climate change. I think this is just the latest "crisis" that's being used to shove a bunch of policies down our throats, get more power, and get more money. These were the same people screaming "global cooling" and "new ice age" a couple decades ago.
I like clean power. I love nuclear power. I like solar and wind. Everyone loves solar and wind, just ask Vermont, vehemently protesting wind turbines, shutting down nuc plants, protesting natural gas pipelines, and then wondering why their energy bills are skyrocketing. I fully expect the giant fields of solar panels will feel their wrath soon enough.
I'm also an optimist. I expect, if the dire predictions are true, that we'll get through it. We'll find ways to slow it, mitigate it, or even reverse it. It's what we do. I'm also a big fan of local action. It seems strange to me that there's not more solar in Charleston. We have these giant neighborhoods, with tons of light exposure, and powerful HOA's. Why aren't they negotiating a big bulk price for panel installation and getting whole neighborhoods done. Especially with the subsidies available (which I hate in principle but will accept at the drop of a hat if it works for me.) It makes me wonder.
Huge left turn aside - tax subsidies. This is pure advice from a tax guy. When you get a loan from a solar company, with a 30% balloon due April 15th the year after installation, be prepared to be screwed. The idea is that the 30% tax credit will pay the balloon. The problem is that if your taxes hit 0, you have to wait until next year, or the year after that to get the rest of the subsidy, but the balloon payment is still due. Make sure to check your taxes to see if you can get the whole credit before signing.
Aside done. Where the fuck was I?
Questions...
Should New York City be building a big sea wall instead of pushing carbon controls?
Should New Orleans be upgrading their flood control systems?
Should we be looking for a technology solution to excess heat retention?
Heat is good. Lots of energy. Can we harness this excess in a good way?
If our planet is so fragile, why aren't we putting more effort into establishing a foothold somewhere else?
Why do environmentalists hate Nuclear? It is literally as clean as it gets.
Do I care what sea level will be in 50 years?
I still have this nagging feeling that this might all be bullshit, but I wouldn't care if we weren't suggesting solutions that are enormous in scope and cost. The problem with science is that we just don't know shit. Eggs are bad, eggs are good, eggs are bad again, or are they good - fuck - who can keep track. The climate is HUGE! Sure, something's going on, but do we really know where it's going and what's going to happen?
I also think this carbon thing has sucked the life out of other important environmental issues like water pollution, over fishing, fertilizer runoff. It's all carbon all the time.
Well shit. I seem to have come across as the anti science nut job. Oh well. Just seeing where the thinking leads me. There are plenty of people writing about why we should all be scared shitless. Might as well write something different.
Remember - not necessarily my true beliefs. Quote them as if they are mine, and you're a dick.
Monday, April 25, 2016
20160424 Things that Interest Me Lately
Popehat on bathroom hysteria
XKCD on the worst President ever
Daily Kos on what you still can't talk about on TV
Nebraska gets on the right side of civil asset forfeiture
When I'm on my phone its a bitch to add a titled link so you get just the link...
http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/04/23/trumpism-cruelty/CSjUXarJiPXNY9B0BO061N/story.html?event=event25
XKCD on the worst President ever
Daily Kos on what you still can't talk about on TV
Nebraska gets on the right side of civil asset forfeiture
When I'm on my phone its a bitch to add a titled link so you get just the link...
http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/04/23/trumpism-cruelty/CSjUXarJiPXNY9B0BO061N/story.html?event=event25
Minimum Income
I'll admit I'm fascinated by the minimum income. The idea that the government provides a living income to everybody of a certain age, regardless of income. Most other welfare programs, including social security would be replaced by this basic income.
The idea is to free people from the income cliffs inherent in other welfare programs that restrict what they can earn. It also will theoretically increase risk taking and entrepreneurship due to having a fallback income. It should drastically reduce administrative costs and it should be easier to minimize fraud.
The downsides are that it's EXPENSIVE, and might create a disincentive for work, though experiments indicate people reduce working time, but don't stop working.
Obviously implementing across the US would be a HUGE risk, but this is why I love the idea of a limited federal government. If our federal leviathan wasn't involved in every single little fucking detail, a state could give this a try, and see what happens.
An economist I respect has some thoughts:
http://cafehayek.com/2016/04/40735.html
An opinion in favor:
https://force4good.me/2015/03/14/ways-to-improve-welfare-guaranteed-income/
Another post:
http://www.marketplace.org/2016/05/06/world/weighing-potential-universal-basic-income
The idea is to free people from the income cliffs inherent in other welfare programs that restrict what they can earn. It also will theoretically increase risk taking and entrepreneurship due to having a fallback income. It should drastically reduce administrative costs and it should be easier to minimize fraud.
The downsides are that it's EXPENSIVE, and might create a disincentive for work, though experiments indicate people reduce working time, but don't stop working.
Obviously implementing across the US would be a HUGE risk, but this is why I love the idea of a limited federal government. If our federal leviathan wasn't involved in every single little fucking detail, a state could give this a try, and see what happens.
An economist I respect has some thoughts:
http://cafehayek.com/2016/04/40735.html
An opinion in favor:
https://force4good.me/2015/03/14/ways-to-improve-welfare-guaranteed-income/
Another post:
http://www.marketplace.org/2016/05/06/world/weighing-potential-universal-basic-income
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)