Changetheview
They’ll also use the customer donations in their own marketing materials with carefully chosen wording.
“We put $X in the hands of X charity!” Sounds cute, until you realize why they don’t say they “donated $X” instead. It’s because it’s often not their money or donation.
I’d love to know how much they paid for it. Even part of the “message from warren” page too. Must have been a pretty penny. I bet a lot of pages would love to do static links in exchange for upfront fees similar to it.
The southwestern US is seeing a level of water scarcity that hasn’t existed alongside the current commercial and residential operations we have. These legal cases and rulings are going to have major impacts on both, and with so many rulings in favor of big business over the last four to five decades, it’s a scary thought for those living in these areas. And like this article mentions, it’s made exponentially worse by the vast legal costs involved. The small businesses and low-income rural communities are really going to need some help, no matter which way this turns.
It’s time for many to reevaluate their relationship with nature. This article mentions one farmer growing squash alongside of corn. Throw beans in there and you jump back to the idea of milpa, sometimes known as three sisters. These three crops grown in unison are a known indigenous technique that worked well. We need more thoughts, actions, and approaches like that.
Our days of taking scorched earth, pumping in all the water, fertilizer, pesticides, and other modifications are numbered, whether we like it or not. Earth is an amazing system that we have been going steadily against. It’s long overdue for us to change to get back in line with harmony.
It’s not easy. Neither was getting to where we are now. Something will be sacrificed. I hope it’s not people’s homes for the sake of multi-national corporations to produce in areas they shouldn’t be growing. But only time will tell.
The party has known it lost control since Trump started to gain support as a candidate. You could say the Tea Party movement was another major turning point, but it wasn’t such a stark identification with a single person.
Now they know they can’t win without the help of Trump supporters. Many of them are ones the GOP had successfully conned for decades. But those people have only been dealt pain, so they’ve been desperate for something else. And a new snake oil salesman is in town and he’s doing a better job at convincing some people to follow him.
It’s basically what goes around, comes around. Greed and short-term thinking coming back to bite them in the ass.
Won’t somebody think of the poor casino owners?!
Why not judge them based on their work and performance? The employer is entirely free to hire or fire someone for how they perform on the job, especially in at will states.
If someone has a drug problem that impacts their performance, get rid of them.
If someone has a drug addiction that doesn’t impact their work, is it really something their employer needs to police?
Thanks for sharing this advice. Sunlight is great stuff, but also insanely harmful.
And I’m just going to also leave this here: A simple Google search of “does direct sunlight damage camera lenses?” shows countless expert opinions in support of “yes, it does.” Of course cameras and phones are made to handle sunlight, but there’s plenty of evidence that prolonged direct exposure can and does damage many different cameras, which almost definitely includes those on cell phones.
Especially if you don’t give a flying fuck about using an established process or doing so legally
I’m sure you’re right about some people. They’re feeling abandoned and disgusted by what’s supposed to have their support and ideologies in mind, therefore not as active. That makes sense.
I know there are a lot of good/reasonable people who just want the government to play a smaller role in society and I think that’s a necessary part of any well-functioning system. And I agree with the sentiment in specific applications. Hopefully there is a way forward for those types to force a change for the better from the current GOP. Because it’s gone off the rails.
I think we’re saying the same thing, but it’s definitely not like giving it to charity that year. They are irrevocable trusts so you can’t take the money back from it, but the majority money doesn’t immediately have to go anywhere.
And even when money does flow out (beyond admin/establishment costs), there are TONS of creative ways to use it for personal benefit.
See Rolex and Hershey for two of the biggest examples. Or giant charity galas.
Many ways to use the funds for “non-profit” entertainment. Plenty of ways to get kickbacks from “charitable” donations. Non-profit status is not that high of a hurdle.
Wayyyy too long of an answer. But I have some experience and might as well not let it go to waste. Definitely doesn’t hurt to talk with a financial advisor about it.
Always a good idea to check out market rates but your employer provided one likely has better premium rates as part of the group and with part of the payment possibly covered by your employer.
Deciding how much life insurance you should get is dependent on your personal situation, your desired coverage, and your risk tolerance.
But it’s likely that both of you having spousal coverage is a little toward overkill. I’d be more concerned about your disability coverage or the coverage of the highest-earning partner, especially if there’s a large disparity in earnings.
The main reason many people get life insurance is to make sure a non-working surviving spouse has the resources they need to get by with the same lifestyle and hopefully in the same house. So when you or your partner is not working, it’s usually the working partner that you want to have the most coverage (perhaps aligned with what would be needed to comfortably “retire” which really means just live the same lifestyle but only off investment income).
The second reason people get life insurance is to help with the short term consequences and expenses. Funerals are expensive. Debt can pile up with end of life care. Taking time off work can cause income drops. Daycare costs might need to be incurred. This is usually where the spousal coverage comes into play. Typically much lower coverage to give the working, surviving spouse a temporary boost due to death-related expensive, but not retire. Child policies are similar.
The more savings or investments you have, the lower your true need for this insurance is. If you can already comfortably retire, then it’s not a huge deal if either one passes (financially). And you have the cash to pay for short term death-related expenses.
Disability is a bigger deal to many people with substantial savings. It can mean a serious increase in expenses (to handle the disability) with a simultaneous decrease in earnings.
But some people also treat life insurance as an investment or a way to hedge specific risks. If you don’t want to work again if your spouse/partner passes, you can get increased coverage. Or if you simply like the security of getting a lump sum if one of your passes early, the premium cost might be worth it. Those are a personal decision and risk/reward calculation only you can make.
On the open market, you’ll find term and whole life. Term insurance is much lower cost because it only lasts a certain period (term). Whole life can be paid as a continuous premium until you file a claim (someone passes). People who are serious about life insurance get whole life policies and treat them as a wealth building investment. Many have cash values, where part of your premium goes into a savings-like account that builds at a certain interest rate. If you’re thinking of this, talk with a qualified advisor. And get at least 2 quotes from highly-rated and stable insurance companies.