Conspicuous lack of coverage given it was Yuki’s worst Red Bull race (so far).
If he doesn’t get a Caddy seat next year - he is on their list, apparently - he is out of the sport, UNLESS Max moves to Mercedes (or Aston Martin), and Red Bull is forced to scramble for drivers.
Horner will try to hire his fellow Tory George Russell, who will be in the cold. Russell is rumored to have an opportunity at Aston Martin (don’t know which seat!), as well.
Horner is toast if Max leaves (and the 26 car isn’t a title winner).
One could question Red Bull’s corporate commitment to F1, but then again … the Red Bull Ring just inked a long term deal AND Mark Mateschitz just bought BCE’s tremendous collection of vintage F1 cars.
If Oscar had kept up the pressure and forced Lando into a mistake that would have ended the season. Highly entertaining race. I am almost as ready for a summer break as the teams, I think the long season is showing in mistakes.
Congrats to your family on the wins. There was also an F1 race this past weekend. Norris won. Please debate the reasons why below.
I am not commenting on the Canadian rental situation because if I was honest about my thoughts and feelings, my mother would spontaneously teleport to my place and slap me for using such language.
McLaren's doing something that helps their tires. Rumors of phase change materials, and apparently an interesting suspension setup. Didn't Chapman say "any suspension works, as long as you don't let it"? Not quite that extreme, but... Here's a vid on it: https://youtu.be/3mAeVIA94n0?si=driPt67eAnlb1cYz
In that video linked above the narrator (who I believe knows what he's talking about) says the scrutineers have examined the McLaren and found it "legal, but clever." Something going on with brake cooling...
You are correct about the brake cooling. I was referring to the belief that Newey's piece of the RB19 was the anti-dive suspension that made its ability to develop downforce so much more consistent than the porpoising horde of 2023 F1 cars.
MotoGP ran at Assen in the Netherlands this past weekend
(Sachsenring the weekend after this where Marc Marquez has the moniker King of the Ring).
In a shocking qualification Marc Marquez was down all the way in fourth place behind his brother in third, Bagnaia looking sharp in second, and Quartararo once again with a pole position on the Yamaha.
At the jump Marc makes great progress and slides into second between turns one and two putting Bagnaia and his brother behind him. Alex put further pain on 63 in turn 8 to secure third place in lap one.
In lap 2 93 and 73 both overtook Quartararo.
Bezecci passed Bagnaia for fourth place, and then Quartararo the next lap to seize third. He proved be unable to overtake the Marquez brothers in the sprint but did finish on the podium. Marc first, and Alex second.
Bagnaia was further beaten up and ended down in 5th with no ability to hold off Digiantonnio's late charge. If only Digi had better qualifying!
The race was about equally poor for Quartararo. Marc, again, put on a clinic in getting to the front and holding it for the duration. Alex wrecked out in his second big mistake of the year, but the only one that counts as the first was spared by a red flag restart. Bezzechi looked strong and ran in second but was unable to overtake Marc with a half second gap at the end. Bagnaia faded and rallied to a distant third. Digi failed to duplicate his late charge, tangling with teammate Morbidelli, and finished 6th behind Vinales and Acosta.
The rookies had a fraught weekend with Ogura high siding and his bike burning. Aldeguer also high sided during the race. Chantra finally finished second to DFL behind Aleix Espargo as Honda's wildcard.
MotoAmerica ran at the Ridge on the west coast (best coast) but their premiere class, King of the Baggers, was absent.
Instead it was a Herrin, Beaubier, Gagne 1-2-3 both races in a fairly boring weekend.
Supersport's Scholz finished first and clawed back points against PJ Jacobsen. Blake Davis is developing well as a rider along with Ty Scott
I have friends (a married couple) who lived in Geneva for a few years.
They both had excellent jobs (Pictet; restructuring law) and massive trust funds (both families worth well into 9 figures), but their first remark about Geneva after returning back stateside was … “It was SO expensive.”
And moreover: Draconian speeding laws, US citizens don’t get the tax benefits, etc.
Perhaps Jack should consult with our mutual friend Ted Gushue about the relative merits of living in St. Moritz vs. Gstaad!
Just shows how every brand needs to push down market to grow in the B2C space. Kind of wild to me but it makes sense, now I just need to get used to seeing it everywhere around me in Miami.
I once used the phrase “toxic empathy” in an internet argu-, ahh, discussion, and was basically laughed out of the chat by the simpletons who seek to out-empathy the next guy. But that’s exactly what it is, doing what “feels like” the right thing because you want to be a good person, while having zero understanding of the 2nd, 3rd, nth order effects of doing “the right thing.” Why wouldn’t you give your kid candy and ice cream for every single meal? Doesn’t it make your kid happy? Why wouldn’t you want your kid to be happy you monster? Etc.
Well, the distaff half for sure. The only thing worse for our society than Affluent White Female Liberal - AWFLs, are leftist lawyers and judges who have no regard for the law or justice, only power.
He’s great! Many videos out there of him discussing suicidal empathy. I believe he has a book in the works about this, as a follow up to the Parasitic Mind.
First off, the vast majority of American Jews don't have any deep knowledge about traditional Jewish values and beliefs. A large fraction are not affiliated with any synagogue or Jewish fellowship at all, and those who are affiliated with Reform and, to a lesser extent, Conservative congregations have likely been miseducated by their clergy into thinking that Judaism is a cross between the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man and whatever the Democratic party's platform is this year. Hence the "tikkun olam" dolts. Add the fact that they are likely to have been indoctrinated with leftist stuff on campus.
Also, half of Ashkenazi Jews (there are crazy leftist Mizrachi Jews but with their families having experienced the joys of being a religious minority in the Muslim world, they tend to be a bit more grounded in reality) have IQs under 115. We're not all Einsteins & David Mamets.
There are some cultural factors at play too. Jews have been refugees many, many times, so the culture has sympathy for immigrants, and they've been persecuted, so the culture has sympathy for the downtrodden and persecuted. Also, compassion for the poor and foreigners has been part of the Jewish religion going back to scripture. The Talmud (Yevamot 79a) teaches that Jews should be compassionate, modest, and perform acts of kindness if they want to act as Jews.
Of course, if current trends for birthrates, intermarriage, and assimilation, continue, within a generation or two the majority of American Jews will likely be religiously orthodox and politically conservative. My youngest grandson just finished 1st grade. His yeshiva had three 1st grade classes this year. At least half of non-orthodox Jews marry non-Jews and a minority of their children identify as Jewish (putting aside religious standards for who is a Jew). Orthodox Jews have very large families. With four kids, my son and daughter in law are likely to have the smallest family on their block. About 90% of American Jews raised as orthodox stay religious. Do the math.
What is a Christian? A person who accepts Jesus Christ as their savior.
What is a Muslim? A person who worships Allah.
What is a Buddhist? One who follows the teachings of The Buddha.
But what is a Jew? A person who was born into a Jewish family? A person who has chosen to follow the tenets of the Jewish faith? A person of Jewish ethnicity? A person who's only a Jew because of their name, and not their behavior?
Seems the answer is Yes, No and Maybe, but that's speaking as a gentile looking in.
A Jew is someone the Jewish religion defines as a Jew, specifically the child of a woman who is considered by Jewish law to be a Jew, or someone who has converted to Judaism in accordance with Jewish law. By Jewish law, I mean orthodox Judaism in its Ashkenazi, Mizrachi, or Yemenite forms. That means, yes, someone who was born Jewish but has even rejected Judaism could be still considered a Jew in the eyes of Jewish law. They're still bound by the covenant and are obligated to perform commandments. That doesn't mean, however that apostates are counted towards prayer quorums and the like.
0. The 'global south' has shown that it can produce infinity people
1. These places are crowded, usually violent, dirty, literal shitholes because that is what they are capable of creating. Any place they go in numbers will become those things.
2. This is not my fucking problem. I don't care if it makes big line go up or helps boomers get their lawns and roofs done on the cheap.
3. I can figure out how to make my own tacos and curry. (They can keep their mud cakes.)
4. 10 bucks says these chicks fucked dirtier and smellier guys back home for much, much less.
It would be trivial to tax remittances at very high rates. Both parties, including the pathetic cuckservatives in the GOP are against it. The new president of Mexico had a conniption over just the mention of it
i think over here we probably get the watered down versions of some dishes given how spicy some of them can be. i went to a proper indian restaurant (as recommended by a friend of mine) and while the flavor was great it was absurdly hot
went to go try it again years later and it was gone
Indian food served by SF bay area restaurants is typically slop. Home-cooked dishes brought to the company pot luck had little resemblance to restaurant fare and was quite tasty.
America is under no obligation to fix mankind's age-old problems. It's like when cities broke up skid rows as actual physical locations. The bums and junkies just wandered into the places with names that ended in "Gardens" and "Heights" and wrecked those areas. If we take in the whole world, they'll bring their habits with them, trash our "nice neighborhood" of a country and then EVERYBODY loses. You have to protect the healthy sectors of society from the riffraff.
I am not going to watch the sting on the show, but I have questions. Similar to legal brothels in the hinterlands of Nevada, I am not going to participate in the market but I am also bothered by the asymmetry of information regarding pricing.
Are these single occupant units? If not, are all the occupants paying the same "rent"?
Is this a better deal for either party than Seeking Arrangements if that is still a thing?
Is this OK or does it fall afoul of some Canadian version of the fair housing act?
If the quality of services being rendered is poor, does the frequency then have to increase? Is it a free use thing?
I read about someone offering to share (non-sexually) a Queen bed for IIRC 900CAD/month, and the comments were "unlike a King, you can't even put up a divider."
"ahead of two BMWs, and the third-fastest Stock driver overall, behind a C8 and a Camaro SS LT1 but ahead of two C7 Vettes."
In every WAY that can be construed: OUCH
That endurance race sounds like a lot of fun. I don't know why you would say the passing was horrifying (except for having to trust the car next to you in the corner), since each of those passes have to make you feel like one Fernando Alonso each time one comes off. I know that's how I would.
Man, DO you complain.....
"As you can probably guess, the same CBC that embraces OnlyFans sex work is quite outraged at the idea of sex housing." LMAO WTF.....
"if you OF content creators out there think that GPT- 6.0 won’t be able to figure out your social security number and kids’ names in 2028 from an image of your left shoulder taken during your online “bad girl phase” in 2016 then you’re too naive to be using the Internet."
Please let this come true, Jah!
"I’ve come to believe that support for open borders is a flex. It’s the position taken by people who stand to economically benefit from having additional demand for their capital, whether the capital is real estate or investments or, I don’t know, Rolex Submariners. When you publicly state that immigration should be effectively unlimited, you are saying “I’m so rich, so successful, so unique and powerful, that I can only benefit from this.”
It’s like me saying, “Sure, I think women should be able to filter by height on Tinder.” That can’t hurt me, but it’s hell on the five-foot-eight crowd. And I can sound like a real advocate for women’s rights — “Nobody should ever have to take off their heels on a first date!” — while I laugh at what that policy does to other people."
For all of your readers who think I exist only to give you grief, THIS is PERFECTLY TRUE. You have hit the nail on the head.
"One of adulthood’s worst lessons is that things can feel good to us, or be beneficial to us as individuals, yet be inimical to society. Unlimited pornography. Low-cost recreational marijuana. Easy divorce. Lack of zoning laws. And so on. "
The hits keep coming!
"In a perfect world, however, this would get us all thinking about the consequences of feel-good decisions, for ourselves and others."
The lesson my soon to be 5 year old is already learning in her own way.
'That endurance race sounds like a lot of fun. I don't know why you would say the passing was horrifying (except for having to trust the car next to you in the corner), since each of those passes have to make you feel like one Fernando Alonso each time one comes off. I know that's how I would.'
These were novice racers and they weren't predictable. Which is why SCCA has this program: to help them get to where they want to be. I probably made two passes a lap for 110 laps. Some of them were... marginal.
"he was observing a refueling mission over the Atlantic"
how does anyone even get chosen to do that in the first place
"third-fastest Stock driver overall, behind a C8 and a Camaro SS LT1 but ahead of two C7 Vettes"
nvm this is more impressive. how much do you have to suck to get passed by a child in an accord when driving a c7? otoh maybe this is the best evidence of you capability to instruct (and how competent your kid is)
"international students, are being targeted by ads offering rent-free housing in exchange for sexual availability"
they also openly discriminate against whites or non indians when posting places for rent or jobs for hire (because those are literally the only people ive seen do this) and despite being blatantly illegal nothing is done about it. locations near colleges and universites are getting crushed under the weight of these people and destroying the neighboring areas and stories of people living 12 to a basement arent unheard of.
the immigration numbers are likely far higher than whats posted due to the actual influx of people coming in under mulitple pathways like tfws or international students or on visas or those bringing their families in. its literally insane. its not slowing down or stopping. in ten years we could very well have 50million people here and a huge chunk will be indian immigrants.
there is no current solution being proposed by anyone near any power
It just occurred to me to ask if the refueling mission showed only the KC-135 or KC-46 on radar, and such mission supporting the return from a certain act of..uhh..DIPLOMACY in the Middle East! 💣
I'm genuinely interested in understanding how he was selected, as in what agency even does this sort of thing. I'm probably asking a dumb or obvious question.
If you're 'in the system' so to say, it isn't that hard. I got to watch B-52's getting refueled over the midwest back when I was in ROTC. For guys like him who are in CAP, they get offered that stuff all the time, especially if they're already pilots. We used to see CAP folks often enough when I was in the service.
Youth and lack of fear play a little part here, though clearly not all of it. I remember getting the point by in a Sumitumo shod v6 s197 by a couple caged foxbodies on Hoosiers at Nelson. I was 23. Not everyone is going to be pushing like that and I’m fairly certain I might not do the same thing today.
It’s more or less EXACLTY why the Commander will make such a great pilot at his age. Consequences are never much thought of. Not meant to downplay any of it; just sort of the reality of life.
Canada (surprisingly the name hasn't been changed to some unpronounceable native/African/Indian word), is perhaps five years behind the UK. England itself being maybe five years from violent ethnic balkanization.
I have a front row seat to the destructive diversity as I ride the subway to work in Toronto. The commute of the damned.
Two requests, first that the US liberate us. Regime change or simply add a few new states, I'm easy. Don't worry, Canadians won't fight back. Heck, the British had to tell people of Upper Canada to stop helping the Americans during the War of 1812.
Second request, as the subway is becoming intolerable (will leave its depravations to your imagination for now) what car should I make a daily as an alternative. My current fleet spans the years 1959-1999, none are really suitable.
I think it will be far cheaper and easier for us to liberate Canada than to have to fortify the border.
And I don’t mean fortify with Border Patrol, I mean fortify with the US Army.
Having lived in and exited bad parts of Chicago, bad parts of Chicago suburbs, and the bad US state of Illinois, there’s no reward for living somewhere ruled and populated by people who hate you and your way of life and everything you stand for. It’s best to leave as soon as you can to live and thrive in freedom. For much of my life I had to be on guard and always be looking over my shoulder. Now that I live someplace free I no longer have to do that and it’s liberating. I wish it for everyone.
Sure, and as I've said before, you're free to change the number to even a negative value if you do so feel.
I am a guest, and act appropriately.
In the case above, imagine what ataraxis's position would be if the residents of the state he moved to went out of their way to make him feel unwelcome.
I'm surprised people burning the US flag while flying one from any other country by an alien is tolerated. I put it down to the retardedness of Joe sixpack.
Well having lived in both Michigan and Illinois people from Illinois are special and think they're special too, so it follows that they get special treatment.
RECOMMENDED: The newest, cleanest Ford {Focus, Fusion, Taurus} or Chevy {Malibu, Impala} within your budget: "cattle not pets."
ALTERNATIVES: Mopar {300, Charger, Challenger}, Saab {9000, 9-5}, AMC Eagle. If you need lots of headroom due to a long torso, skip the 9000 (if you're leggy, it's OK!).
The Dodges are RWD with traction control. The difference between the "recommended" and "alternatives" is that you have to think about whether you want:
a) a disposable commuting tool that preserves time, energy*, and money for your existing classic cars
or
b) Yet another classic car that will be another labour of love and soak up the time, energy*, and money that you want to spend on your existing classics.
I never liked AMC Eagle, but it's old and, in some ways, the progenitor of 99% of modern commuter CUVs.
April as you know, gas mileage was not even thought of as a consideration in the 71-73 GM FWD cars, the chain driver transmission and big block on top of it required front suspension components that ended up being utilized in 22 and 26 foot motor homes. I once took my Eldorado in to have a new set of 235/75-R15 installed and the young man could not believe the size of the front end components.
Great combination, first and last year, just wish they had upgraded the dash in the 71-73 as a lot of people comment on the down market look of that dash with its light colored plastic wood and black plastic switches for the rear defogger and convertible top. But the great advantage is no quarter and fender extensions to crack and fall off. Best and happy motoring
The new Camry was mighty impressive to me on a business trip to Buffalo a few months back. Quick enough and will have resale value when it’s time to sell it to a newcomer
I guess they decided that some ex vice governor of British Columbia wasn't sufficiently woke in his dealings with the Siberian-Canadians so Vancouver renamed Trutch Street to šxʷməθkʷəy̓əmasəm Street (I dare you to try and pronounce it), which translates to Musqueamview in English, after the name the local tribe gives itself. Signposts bear the English name below the official Musqueam name, because not even the Musqueams can pronounce the phonemes created by academics to represent their language, which had no written alphabet. My favorite part is that they included the English translation on the signs. I bet locals still call it Trutch Street.
I was once talking to an Indian (dot, not feather) chap at the NAIAS and he said that periodically in Bharat (he called it India, btw) anti-colonial activists will rename something with a Hindi or Sanskrit name, but locals will still call it something like "Victoria Station". It doesn't matter what bank owns the naming rights but Cobo Hall will always be called Cobo Hall.
From Grok:
"The Musqueam First Nation, whose traditional language is hən̓q̓əmin̓əm̓ (a dialect of Halkomelem, a Coast Salish language), historically did not have a written alphabet, as their language was primarily oral. Like many Indigenous languages in North America, hən̓q̓əmin̓əm̓ was transmitted through spoken communication, storytelling, and cultural practices for thousands of years. Written systems were not part of their tradition until contact with European settlers and the influence of colonial systems.
In the 20th century, efforts to document and revitalize the hən̓q̓əmin̓əm̓ language led to the development of a writing system. In 1997, the Musqueam First Nation formally adopted the North American Phonetic Alphabet (NAPA) as their orthography to represent the sounds of hən̓q̓əmin̓əm̓. This decision was made because the Latin alphabet used for English could not accurately capture the language’s unique sounds, including its 36 consonants (22 of which are not found in English) and distinct vowel sounds. NAPA was chosen for its specialized symbols, which are designed to document and teach Indigenous languages accurately."
the govt is way too absorbed with kowtowing to everyone but actual canadians to get anything accomplished and is especially overly concerned with its first nations people
Given the ages of your existing fleet, I assumed that you were looking for more modern (and probably more reliable and less of a project). My personal fleet policy is that redundancy (in the engineering sense) is good, but superfluity is bad.
Once, I had an old Saab (they're all old now), and, in a David-looking-out-the-window-when-he-should-have-been-at-war moment, found a GREAT DEAL on another Saab of the same year. He (the car: Saabs have personalities) provided excellent and economical service with outstanding performance, but, through no fault of his own, drove me crazy! I would have had much better mental health with almost anything else, because the roles and purposes would have been more clearly defined and the vehicles would have had more complimentary strengths and weaknesses. Like even a Geo Metro would be clearly "an ultra-economical penalty blob whose purpose is a backup car if the Saab needs service during the work week."
Larger would be Fusion (a good friend has one and it's been good) or Malibu (I rented one and it was nice).
If you are willing to try RWD with traction control, then you can let Brampton solve Brampton and consider Challenger, Charger, or 300. The latter seem very much to your taste as I understand it.
I'd try to find a Grand Prix GTP or one of its platform buddies with the supercharged 3.8. Literally good at everything if you can find a well cared for example. Perfect age, too. Even the most recent ones would only be a couple years newer than your '99.
That'd do it! A little more power than the GTP if memory serves, but, to counter Wyatt, I think the softer edges make the Grand Prix the better looking of the two. Can't go wrong either way. Park Ave and Regal had it, too, or if you have a stash of "3" stickers, the Monte Carlo fits the bill.
My gedankenexperiment was mostly focused on something, ideally domestic, that would be highly economical for cheap commuting, DIY repair, and entry-level motorsports (AutoX / RallyX). I wanted to avoid the Honda/Toyota tax. Although Honda is often more domestic than the Big 2.x these days, I have considerable history (generally positive) with Honda products, but always in a non-DIY context (and on one of them, even the dealer techs struggle to properly stow the dipstick, which indicates to me that the rest of the car may also be unusually difficult to work on).
I agree with "not much new that I find exciting," but also "not much new that seems like a long-term economical option." I did a deep dive and plotted out all the economy FF platforms (Civic was not the first) by year of introduction, and realized that if the 1970s were a transition from Système Panhard (FR) to FF, the 2020's are possibly the transition away from manual transmissions, ICE only powertrains, and non-crossover bodies. Another issue is that platforms seem to be turning over much more quickly: VW Type 1 and Mini were produced FOREVER, Falcon was ~1960-1980, Fox lasted for decades, Volvo 200 1974-1993, Saab 99/900 1969-1993, Range Rover 1970-1996, etc. That seems to be much less common these days, which has implications for parts availability and also the longevity of knowledge.
"REMITTANCE TAX" "enacted" but completely neutered.
Search for "SEC. 70604"
The rate is only 1% (not the proposed 5% or 3.5%), AND it only applies if paid with cash or check, NOT credit card, debit card, or bank transfer. Why even bother?
Never automatically trust anyone in a position of power—whether that is government, corporate, private, ngo, social club, track club, religious, or otherwise. Trust has to be continually earned.
Corollary is that you need people to seek positions of power bc those create and keep order. Otherwise the hierarchy of organized criminal violence will win everytime.
Let’s add more than $3 trillion to the national debt, cut medical care for the poorest Americans, hugely pump up funding for Trump’s masked private police force, funnel tax breaks to the very richest, expand the gravy train for munitions manufacturers, and all because you lot simmer in your crab bucket hatred for immigrants and women with blue hair. While we’re at it, cut clean energy, subsidize the oil companies, support fascist governments, scrub any mentioning of global warming or other environmental pressures that are the *cause* of people wanting to leave their own shitholes and come to ours. Job done.
'Let’s add more than $3 trillion to the national debt,'
Nobody cares. They didn't care when Biden added $7.5 trillion. Fiscal responsibility is a lost cause. I'm not saying this to excuse Trump, or to perform whataboutism. Just stating the fact.
'hugely pump up funding for Trump’s masked private police force'
Come back to me when they burn down a building full of kids, or shoot a pregnant woman in the head while she's holding her baby. Scratch that. Come back to me when they do what the "antifa" heroes MacArthur and Patton did to American citizens during the Bonus Army march. Some people are so eager to get a taste of stolen victim valor they can't be bothered to crack a history book.
'all because you lot simmer in your crab bucket hatred for immigrants and women with blue hair.'
Who is "you lot" here, exactly? I personally housed South American immigrants for nearly a DECADE while they worked through the process. At my own expense.
'cut clean energy'
Clean energy is a sinkhole of wasted money, and part of the reason we spend trillions. Worse yet, the trillions get spent on Solyndra style graft rather than on a genuine Manhattan Project of clean energy. Which we already did, by the way; it was called the Manhattan Project. Any plan that omits nuclear for solar and wind is pure fantasy.
'scrub any mentioning of global warming or other environmental pressures that are the *cause* of people wanting to leave their own shitholes and come to ours.'
In the words of Joe Rob -- Come on, man! Do you really think that people want to leave Venezuela and Somalia and India and Pakistan because of GLOBAL WARMING? Do ya see anyone leaving Texas or Florida over it?
Let's be thoughtful and logical in these discussions. Otherwise it's just emotions competing for vicarious satisfaction.
I find David Bahnsen's Capital Record podcast and blog informative about US debt. We won't see a hyperinflation spiral like Argentina or Zimbabwe. We WILL see anemic growth and relative economic decline like Japan.
THAT said, the US looks good compared to lazy EuroLand. Or corrupt China. Yes, the US has corruption too - like the '09 bailouts and public sector union grifts. But we are pebbles compared to the mountain of "Installed Base" Chinese Communist Party corruption.
There are solid reasons for wealthy Chinese to invest wealth US and Canadian condos. They want a trusted out.
By the way, very "nice" Switzerland gives local governments a veto vote over each new immigrant. For some reason, that's not much reported.
David Bahnsen likes to mention the USA'S TINA attributes.
Not sure if this is a trick question, but the simple answer is the party that starts with a “D”.
The longer answer is that the bill known as Obamacare is basically a poison pill for the budget of the US Government. A key feature of Obamacare is that when states expand Medicaid, US Government share of that new Medicaid benefit increases, so Obamacare was and is a way to blow-up the healthcare system, financially speaking, by further distressing the US Government’s financial state, and then “forcing” the US Government to move to single payer healthcare “to save costs”. There was a lot of discussion on the right about this back when Obamacare was being pushed through the house and senate, and the people talking about it were called kooks and conspiracy theorists. Now we can literally see how Obamacare is bankrupting and exploding the US debt in real time. So when the left says “this cuts Medicaid” they are lying because they are still hiding the fact that Obamacare was designed to do this (incentivize states to take lots of free money in the form of Medicaid reimbursement and move us all along the way to single payer). The left didn’t consider that someone like Trump would come after Obama, and that he would actually build the Republican Party to a level where they would have the power to, not undo Obamacare, but reverse some of the evil inside of it.
It was meant as a rhetorical question to the original poster who brought it up… either they say explicitly that’s what they want or understand what the reality is below the surface by applying the ‘above average’ IQ that everyone here has except me.
"hugely pump up funding for Trump’s masked private police force"
based. yeet the illegals over the wall and put that shit on payperview
"you lot simmer in your crab bucket hatred for immigrants and women with blue hair"
yeah because neither of those groups did anything to degrade the standard of living or freedoms in the west in any way shape or form right
"global warming or other environmental pressures that are the *cause* of people wanting to leave their own shitholes and come to ours"
yeah the us is the sole reason some third world wasteland became too hot and inhospitable therefore they should show up and be granted access to the greatest country in the world
No. Deer and related species (elk, moose, antelope) are kosher because they have split hooves and are ruminants, but they still have to be slaughtered and inspected per kosher rules. Also, hunting for sport is prohibited by Jewish law and considered cruel. It's permitted to hunt and trap for skins (Jews have been in the fur business for a while, the first Jew in Michigan was a fur trader). Selling the meat might run into issues because technically you can't operate a business that from the outset is based on selling non-kosher food but you can derive incidental benefit, for example if a beef carcass is found upon inspection to not be kosher it can be sold as non-kosher meat.
I've had kosher venison but I think I prefer lamb and beef.
My late mother worked as an office manager for the local fundraising office of Bar Ilan University and my ex and I got comped to one of their big dinners. I particularly wanted to go because the caterer was the best kosher chef in Detroit and with a lot of potential bar mitzvah and wedding reservations in the audience, I knew they'd put on a good spread.
I was waiting to get some venison at the hors d'oeuvres table and a nicely dressed older woman wearing some pricey jewelry said to me, "How could you eat such a beautiful animal?" I replied, "Have you ever seen a polled hereford?" "No," she said. "Magnificent animals, and they taste really good!"
My grandmother, O'B'M', would say, "A shailah is treif," i.e. a question isn't kosher, which can mean, if there is any question, it's probably not kosher, but the way she used it was, if you don't ask the rabbi, he can't say it isn't kosher. She was a very practical woman.
It happened at 2am, I was coming home from the airport, and I never saw the deer until after I hit him. For one terrifying moment I thought it was an Amish kid.
Note to self: become a Canadian landlord (just kidding!)
Kinda sorta OT question about: debt. We don't have much, just a 30 yr fixed mortgage @ >3% and a single credit card that has a balance that ranges from $1-3k on average. Own all the cars, etc. no other loans or BS owed. Single breadwinner (me) until my wife decides to either go back to work or not (say in the next ~2 years).
We're not in dire straits panic mode, but '24 and this year has been a little expensive (some extra capital gains taxes, more CA home insurance horseshit, fixing deferred issues on the home etc.). Bills always creep up and unfortunately my employer has not delivered on a COLA (yet). We would be fine keeping things as is - paying the monthly mortgage + interest and keeping the CC balance from getting kooky - but would we benefit from some kind of David Ramsey type plan to get the house paid off, etc. in X amount of time?
My financial outcomes are bad so ignore me, but paying off a 3% mortgage (with tax deductible interest) when the prime rate is 7.5% would be a huge mistake.
Consumer debt is bad, but DR goes way too far in the opposite extreme. You would basically need a top 1% income while simultaneously denying your children proper food, housing, and education to live according to his rules.
If I may suggest— no matter what your income level is, have a healthy cash reserve. 6 months? 9 months? Let it earn 4% easy for the moment and it’s there if you need it, and you don’t have to worry about “what if something bad happens” for a while. Instead of paying off low interest rate debt accumulate cash.
Credit lines can, and often are, reduced in tough times, so credit is not a substitute for an emergency fund.
I actually think Dave Ramsey is not conservative ENOUGH when he magically says "6 months should be enough to get back on your feet." Maybe in past decades for semi-skilled work, but for specialized stuff it can take a long time (even in the 1980s/1990s I think I heard adults saying "1 month for every $10k in salary," but even that is an estimate, not a guarantee).
A friend got an adjustable-rate mortgage a couple of years before COVID and then spent the next few years working 80 hours/week and paying it off. Now he has a car loan and a second mortgage to build a garage.
I disagree with this philosophy, though I've heard it many times.
All the rich folks I even knew told me that it's all about the cash flow, and anything you can do to increase it, you do.
Yeah, I've got 2 years left on mine if I only pay the minimum, but if I'm out of it sooner, that increases my cash flow. And I can see the advantages of that.
Also, the government holds all of the notes in the USA (well, maybe only 90 percent) and well, I don't exactly trust them. I remember when JC allowed a law to go through that let credit card companies change their rates on outstanding debt. So what about that contract...
How much more cash flow would you have not paying that monthly payment?
I dislike having any personal debt. Look at what the Covid scam did to your income stream. It sure messed mine up a great deal, but at least I was prepared for it. What happens when they do it again? (And they will - because now they know they can).
If you had to pay your house off in 60 days could you? Especially if your investments are suddenly only worth 50 cents on the dollar (or less?)
Personally, the only debt I'm okay with is debt that other people are paying off for me and even then I'm cautious to make sure none of it will splash back on me if the government (who hates us) decides they want to fuck everybody over (again).
Yes, a lot of financial people say to use your house as an investment. I notice all of those people grew up very rich. I also suspect they've got a fully paid off house someplace. All of the truly rich people I've known always owned their own house. Because fortunes can change in the blink of an eye and they're always a lot easier to weather and recover from if you're not living on the streets.
If you live in a high COL city, throw in 4 or even 5 figure property taxes. Those almost never go down, even in housing crashes.
Debt, even housing debt, is like a suitcase to drag around. Even if it's empty and light because of the strategies mentioned above, you have to lug it around.
Ramsey also had an extremely stupid article where he advised buying a $1000 car from a dealer, saving $100/month for a year and upgrading to a $2200 car at a dealer, then $3400, etc.
a) This neglects employment difficulties inherent gn a $1000 car*
b) A $1000 car is probably going to cost more than $1200/year in repair/maintenance*
c) This neglects the "spread." Dealers would give you $500 trade-in for Car #1, then turn around and price that very car for $2500 or $3500.
It's hard to take him seriously after that.
* MOST $1k cars for MOST people, who are not skilled mechanics
Dave Ramsey? That man's as out-of-touch with reality as a traffic cop writing a speeding ticket.
Have six months of income in the bank. Don't pay $500 a month for a new car, buy a used one outright for $15,000 cash. Make becoming debt-free your only financial goal. Cut up your credit cards. Live on ramen noodles and rainwater till you pay off your mortgage.
Yeah, I will add that profligate spending may be unwise or even immoral, I've seen some of his followers become extremely nasty, money-obsessed people.
I also think his "blame the individual" advice serves to squelch necessary political action about changes to the economy. To be fair, SOME people do have spending problems ("MC Hammer"), but in many other cases, decades of anti-American-worker policies have turned many careers into below-subsistence traps. And while I do agree that an individual can't wait for political deliverance, it doesn't benefit society for people to tell themselves "my problem is not that the factory I worked at moved to China, the problem is that I spend too much." (But it has possibly kept some pressure off of the billionaires and Mitch McConnell types.)
Yeah I’ve owned I think five different cars that cost $2k or less, including an ancient Ranger I once bought for $600. Put new brakes on it and ran that for a year.
Today, $5ish thousand sounds about right for something I would expect to last at least a little while. There are still a handful of relative bargains out there — think any base model W body from the mid 2000s — but since C4C the absolute bottom end of the used market has never really returned. Add to that inflation and just how much it costs to repair a car made this century and it’s all just a bit miserable to buy cheap.
Watch this, ditch Dave Ramsey, follow The Money Guy channel and their Financial Order of Operations. You are in minor setback territory, not "My dad cosigned my HD3500 so I could tow my 84-month financed fifth wheel to the KOA, 'cause that's all we can afford" territory.
My non-professional advice: The only debt you currently have that you need to erase is the balance you are carrying on your credit card. That interest is most likely in the mid-teens if not higher which is easy to let get out of hand if you're not careful.
My outlook on paying down mortgages is as follows:
0. How much is your home worth? If it is worth more than the total value of your loan at maturity (principle plus all interest) then I think you'd be foolish to push money at paying down your mortgage.
1. Is your mortgage payment equal to or less than what it would cost you to rent the space you NEED (not necessarily what you have, but what you would need to live)? If it is then I wouldn't pay up on it.
2. You always need housing, and in my opinion it is the only true fixed expense we have, again when you look at the cost of what you need.
4. Only consider putting more money against your house, after you're tax advantaged accounts are fully funded, and you have a sufficient safety fund stashed away for incidentals.
Another thing that has helped me with budgeting for home repairs is to build out an amortization schedule for major appliances and wear items, i.e. roof, windows, water heater etc. This gives me a rough idea how much I need to have stashed away per year to cover those costs as they come due for replacement. I do the same thing with car payments, after the note is paid off, I keep making the payment into my brokerage account so I have a large amount available for a down payment when it comes time to replace the vehicle. Your mileage may vary, but these things have helped me keep it all manageable in my overly analytical mind.
And 1 more thing, Dave Ramsay can get fucked. The smartest thing I did when I lived on a fixed income, was buy a cheap new car with a warranty. I went through a few sub3k shit boxes and they were the fast track to pissing off my boss, and figuring out how to absorb 500-1500 dollar unplanned expenses versus the reliable always known $297/ month for 5 years new car that didn't break down. There is such a thing as good debt, if it ensures gainful employment, or grants you access to opportunities you wouldn't otherwise have you should utilize it to the fullest, responsibly.
You and your wife sound financially responsible, so I would ride that beautiful mortgage rate to Year 30. I personally prefer liquidity than to have my $$$ stuck in bricks and mortar where it’s harder to utilize. Plus you will be paying off that mortgage with inflated dollars for the full term.
I’m retired and my 30 year mortgage ends up when I’m 90, God willing. I did this purposely as the returns in my portfolio far exceed any returns the house investment will accrue.
Think of your monthly mortgage payment as cheap rent. That’s how I look at it. Could you realistically rent another house as nice as your house for what your mortgage payment is? I know I couldn’t.
For additional perspective, go on to the online Inflation Calculator and enter the starting year of your mortgage and your current monthly payment to see what your payment is in today’s inflated dollars. It will probably be eye opening. Oh, and congrats on the low rate!
I'm aggressively paying off debt... at this point, all I have left is real estate to pay off, which some will argue is "good debt"... I'm trying to erase my "good debt" as soon as possible.
Ramsey is salesman, he's got a brand, but essentially he's right.. there's just no such thing as "good debt". For all the strategies of cash liquidity, inflation vs interest rate, etc... think of it like this: you will only live a certain number of years, you will only earn x amount in those years... you can spend a larger number to service debt, or a smaller number to service debt... spend the smaller number.
I think the "good debt" / "bad debt" thing is mostly stupid. Student loans on a worthless degree are not "good debt," a mortgage on a much more expensive house than you need is not "good debt," and a young person MIGHT require a loan to obtain a reliable vehicle.
Putting that aside, congrats on getting rid of most debt, but aren't there any investments that return about the same as the tax-effective rate on your mortgage?
(If you have AMPLE liquid assets, paying off a mortgage COULD be wise.)
Obviously everyone's situation is different... in my case, I'm at peak earnings, career relatively secure, with real estate my only remaining debt... I'm relatively diversified between retirement strategies, I have about 3-4 months of immediate savings (I know that's a bit short... like I said, everyone's situation is different and I'm keeping the liquidity short to pay off debt as I'm confident my career is secure to do that)...
This is why I'm not throwing extra income at investments... I'm attacking debt. Paying off the mortgage - if you can - is ALWAYS wise. ("if you can" here means not taking obvious risks) Again, look at it over a lifetime: if you had a choice, do you want to pay $800k for your house, or do you want to pay $400k for your house?
Sure, everything is a calculated risk, because we can't predict the future... my point is to get to where I wouldn't have to fire-sale anything. There's much less urgency in a situation of unexpected job loss when you have no debt...
Property tax, car insurance, health insurance, health deductibles, groceries, utilities (gas, electric, Internet, phone, ...), fuel, vehicle maintenance & repair, and registration all consume thousands of dollars of liquidity each month, and nobody is going to give them to you for free just because you've paid off your mortgage.
And looking for work requires a phone, computer, etc., and often a relocation which you may have to pay up front.
My friend lucked out and was able to get a car loan and a second mortgage (at much higher rates) shortly after he paid off his mortgage. Lucky for him, at least he kept his job.
I think this is something that you are clearly very passionate about.
The only debt we have is a mortgage, at 2.75%. I'm making 4% in a money market account and have been getting 20% -ish in the stock market the last few years. I'd be a retard to take stock or money market to pay down the mortgage.
That's great. My point is, what are you doing with your returns? Likely reinvesting, correct? To make more returns... and so on...
At some point, does it make sense to be sitting on a pile of returns....... while sitting on sizeable debt?
That's why I framed the idea in the context of lifetime income and X amount over a lifetime servicing debt... the caveat here is not everyone has the income to make that decision... but if you do have income - whether you're earning a lot at work or investing - it doesn't make sense to pay more to service debt when you don't have to...
We're reinvesting, and will continue to (God willing) build wealth. Think of it as opportunity cost - by paying off the low interest loan you lose the opportunity to make considerably more by investing.
I understand (and have) the desire to be entirely debt-free, but the numbers don't lie.
I get that... my point is, at what point do you not just go ahead and take your capital and attack the debt?
Think of it this way (using the same example as I replied above).. does it make sense to pay $800k for your house over 30 years just to look at a large investment account that... does what exactly?
Everyone's "attack point" will be different... but over a lifetime, it's the same decision... pay more to service debt, or pay less to service debt
Eliminating debt (just a mortgage at a sub 3% rate in my case) would increase my immediate cash flow, but at a cost. I would have to reduce my cash flow in the short term to put more money against the loan. For me I would have to stop or reduce the amount I am investing in my brokerage account to do so. Which would reduce my future state cash flow because I would not be taking advantage of compound interest on the brokerage account, which is currently showing 11% annual returns over it's lifetime (>4x what I am paying to carry my mortgage).
A simple example, say we have a 30 year mortgage on $200,000 at 3%apr = $843.21 payment. If I were to double the payment to $1686.42 per month, I would have the house paid off in 141 payments, which would eliminate 219 payments and save $66,034.00 in interest. By doing so I would decrease my monthly cash flow by $843.21 for 11 years and 9 months. Assume that after the loan is paid off, I take that $1686.42 and invest it into my brokerage account for the remaining 219 months to get us to 30 years. I would have approximately $1,113,350.05
Instead of paying extra every month, I open a brokerage account and invest the additional $843.21 each month into my brokerage account. After 30 years I would have $2,131,872.72 or an extra $1,018,522.67 after 30 years.
Obviously this requires someone to be disciplined enough to actually invest that money, have trust in the market, and be patient for this to work out for them, but it clearly shows that this is the way to spend the smaller number when you are able to net sum your entire portfolio.
I get those numbers, but a couple of things here... like I said, everyone's situation is different (although I will generally maintain that the "wealth" people seek - financial freedom - is more likely debt freedom)...
1) a sub 3% mortgage hasn't been realistic lately, and is probably not realistic going forward... now obviously in your case, it changes the calculation (I'll still suggest as I have in other comments that if you earn a compounded return, would you then pay off debts?)... so let's use my specific situation: a $225k mortgage at 7.75% (if you're interested, it's a $300k closing price on a second property). On scheduled payments, monthly interest alone was $1600/mo... the $225 borrowed would be well over $450k paid over the full term of the loan... in less than 2 years I'm now around $90k to go, dropping fast, and interest is about $600/payment now... at this rate, I will have erased over $200k in obligation...
Now, I'm not sacrificing lifestyle, reasonable savings, or retirement planning to aggressively attack debt... so again that's just my situation. But I look at it fairly simply... I would rather pay around $320-330k (down payment, loan and interest) for my property vs $525k (full-term repayment plus down payment)...
...WITH the added benefit of getting "wealthy" (obligation-free) much earlier... yes, my principal payments directed towards aggressive investing may yield compounded returns... or, maybe they don't. But dragging out my mortgage will absolutely yield a penalty.. guess which strategy I've decided to go with...
As a final note, I think $225k is much lower than the average mortgage, so the numbers only get bigger with most people. Depending on their situation, they potential reduced hundreds of thousands in debt obligation in just a few years... yes, they should also be investing. But I think for most people, the financial freedom they seek - "being wealthy - is living debt-free.
"I will generally maintain that the "wealth" people seek - financial freedom - is more likely debt freedom"
My definition of financial freedom is being in a position to not need fulltime employment, to live the lifestyle you are accustomed to. If one spends all their money to pay off debt they would still need an income stream to pay for their operating costs, food, taxes, consumables etc.
"I'll still suggest as I have in other comments that if you earn a compounded return, would you then pay off debts?"
I could, or I could buy a Porsche, or fake tits for my wife, and any host of other things. The whole purpose of the exercise I did was to show that on a certain path a person is "wealthier" by not paying their mortgage off early and investing the money instead. Anyone can manipulate the specifics of my calculations for their situation to see if the math works out for them. Even at your 7.75% rate, you have opportunity to increase your cash flow month to month by taking that extra money you spent and investing it. The margin is much smaller but it is still there.
"On scheduled payments, monthly interest alone was $1600/mo..."
I'm struggling with this math, based on the information you provided the payment shouldn't be much more than $1600/mo, are you sure your interest rate isn't higher?
You provide a perfect justification for your actions, by stating that your not sacrificing anything else to pay off this note early. If I were to purchase a second property, I would also be inclined to pay it off quickly, since it is a luxury good, not a necessity.
"As a final note, I think $225k is much lower than the average mortgage, so the numbers only get bigger with most people"
The larger the loan balance the more it makes sense to me to not pay it off early. In that situation it is more likely that the available expendable income is less than it would be with a smaller loan. So, an individuals cash flow would be further constrained with a 500k mortgage at 8% trying to pay more against the loan versus a 200k mortgage at 3%. Remember income is relatively fixed so moving money towards a loan takes it away from somewhere. Cash flow = wealth right? See the first line I quoted from your response for the answer to that question.
In my example you could miss a lot of those $800 payments to your brokerage before you took a major hit on the 1 million dollar upside on the back end.
I will close this out by saying, what I tell a lot of people when talking financial strategy, regardless of your specific plan, the fact that you have a plan makes the odds good that things will work out well for you in the end. It's the people who haven't thought through their financial situation that go on to get fired from their job and fall further into debt when they listen to Ramsay and sell their warrantied new car for a loss and buy a 1k beater that they can't afford to fix.
Re: the math on my numbers... sorry, the $1600 was P&I, which breaks down $150/$1450. So my mistake, but obviously $1450/mo just in interest is still a significant amount...
I can also buy a Porsche or fake tits for the stripper (I'm not married), I'd just rather do it without a big mortgage, too...
Definitely agree about having a plan.. like I said, I'm investing, too. Just much more aggressive towards debt.
"...they listen to Ramsay and sell their warrantied new car for a loss and buy a 1k beater that they can't afford to fix"
I don't mean to sound like a Ramsey cheerleader, I really don't listen to him that much... but let's be honest here, I think 1) overspending on cars you can't afford is probably a pretty big problem, and 2) I'd would say that scenario specifically (getting rid of a new car for a problematic beater) is probably a lot less prevalent than people who find themselves in financial trouble from bad investments...
The only thing I'm not seeing mentioned here is how much extra interest you think is left on the mortgage if you let it ride to the end and how much is your risk tolerance in making extra payments for as long as necessary to get it down.
I personally would also see going debt free as an opportunity to aggressively diversify with future dollars into other investments.
I was pinched for time this afternoon, so I'll leave it to all of you to discuss Austrian GP!
Conspicuous lack of coverage given it was Yuki’s worst Red Bull race (so far).
If he doesn’t get a Caddy seat next year - he is on their list, apparently - he is out of the sport, UNLESS Max moves to Mercedes (or Aston Martin), and Red Bull is forced to scramble for drivers.
This is a Yuki-positive site... and our job is getting harder!
Sounds to my ears like 'HIV positive'.
Crying Isaak should think twice about taking the second seat at RB.
Setting aside the worthless Yuki, if Max DOES move to Mercedes, it'll be interesting to see what Red Bull's approach ends up being.
If it happens it'll be like starting over again and I wouldn't be surprised if they're back to square one, and Horner gets let go too.
Horner will try to hire his fellow Tory George Russell, who will be in the cold. Russell is rumored to have an opportunity at Aston Martin (don’t know which seat!), as well.
Horner is toast if Max leaves (and the 26 car isn’t a title winner).
One could question Red Bull’s corporate commitment to F1, but then again … the Red Bull Ring just inked a long term deal AND Mark Mateschitz just bought BCE’s tremendous collection of vintage F1 cars.
-He fairly evidently had an affair with his PA; boys will be boys, sure. But he definitely displayed poor professional judgment, because…
-…Adrian Newey (who shared the PA) quit the team. As did other personnel.
-The prime mover in all of this Red Bull downfall was Christian’s Horniness.
If Max leaves them, they'll be worse than the 2015 Red Bull team.
If Oscar had kept up the pressure and forced Lando into a mistake that would have ended the season. Highly entertaining race. I am almost as ready for a summer break as the teams, I think the long season is showing in mistakes.
I missed Piastri’s Alpine comment after COL nearly had him off.
"I was pinched ..." Damn Swiss landlords
(long time reader, first time commenter and my first comment is about molestation... I am not proud of myself)
Hey Yuki got justice!
finally finshed above max
very happy for him
Ahead! Please don't dis him. If the others would just kindly get out of his talentness and charm, we could crown a champion.
Congrats to your family on the wins. There was also an F1 race this past weekend. Norris won. Please debate the reasons why below.
I am not commenting on the Canadian rental situation because if I was honest about my thoughts and feelings, my mother would spontaneously teleport to my place and slap me for using such language.
you might as well tell us how you really feel as theres no reason to self censor
a lot will likely agree with you
Did you miss the part about spontaneous maternal teleportation?
i did see that yeah
Mom be one of the only distaff subscribers here
McLaren's doing something that helps their tires. Rumors of phase change materials, and apparently an interesting suspension setup. Didn't Chapman say "any suspension works, as long as you don't let it"? Not quite that extreme, but... Here's a vid on it: https://youtu.be/3mAeVIA94n0?si=driPt67eAnlb1cYz
I could swear that everyone was saying the same thing about the RB19.
In that video linked above the narrator (who I believe knows what he's talking about) says the scrutineers have examined the McLaren and found it "legal, but clever." Something going on with brake cooling...
You are correct about the brake cooling. I was referring to the belief that Newey's piece of the RB19 was the anti-dive suspension that made its ability to develop downforce so much more consistent than the porpoising horde of 2023 F1 cars.
MotoGP ran at Assen in the Netherlands this past weekend
(Sachsenring the weekend after this where Marc Marquez has the moniker King of the Ring).
In a shocking qualification Marc Marquez was down all the way in fourth place behind his brother in third, Bagnaia looking sharp in second, and Quartararo once again with a pole position on the Yamaha.
At the jump Marc makes great progress and slides into second between turns one and two putting Bagnaia and his brother behind him. Alex put further pain on 63 in turn 8 to secure third place in lap one.
In lap 2 93 and 73 both overtook Quartararo.
Bezecci passed Bagnaia for fourth place, and then Quartararo the next lap to seize third. He proved be unable to overtake the Marquez brothers in the sprint but did finish on the podium. Marc first, and Alex second.
Bagnaia was further beaten up and ended down in 5th with no ability to hold off Digiantonnio's late charge. If only Digi had better qualifying!
The race was about equally poor for Quartararo. Marc, again, put on a clinic in getting to the front and holding it for the duration. Alex wrecked out in his second big mistake of the year, but the only one that counts as the first was spared by a red flag restart. Bezzechi looked strong and ran in second but was unable to overtake Marc with a half second gap at the end. Bagnaia faded and rallied to a distant third. Digi failed to duplicate his late charge, tangling with teammate Morbidelli, and finished 6th behind Vinales and Acosta.
The rookies had a fraught weekend with Ogura high siding and his bike burning. Aldeguer also high sided during the race. Chantra finally finished second to DFL behind Aleix Espargo as Honda's wildcard.
MotoAmerica ran at the Ridge on the west coast (best coast) but their premiere class, King of the Baggers, was absent.
Instead it was a Herrin, Beaubier, Gagne 1-2-3 both races in a fairly boring weekend.
Supersport's Scholz finished first and clawed back points against PJ Jacobsen. Blake Davis is developing well as a rider along with Ty Scott
Marc's races are even more impressive considering his two crashes Friday. One of which apparently bruised his junk pretty bad.
Watching him skip through the gravel and then clutch his groin and collapse was a relatable moment.
I have friends (a married couple) who lived in Geneva for a few years.
They both had excellent jobs (Pictet; restructuring law) and massive trust funds (both families worth well into 9 figures), but their first remark about Geneva after returning back stateside was … “It was SO expensive.”
And moreover: Draconian speeding laws, US citizens don’t get the tax benefits, etc.
Perhaps Jack should consult with our mutual friend Ted Gushue about the relative merits of living in St. Moritz vs. Gstaad!
I can't pronounce either so I wont go there. Lucerne I understand because of the Buick.
Lucerne was Safeway's house brand for dairy long before it was a Buick.
https://www.safeway.com/lp/lucerne.html
(The "Scotch Buy" line appears to be discontinued, unfortunately.)
https://www.brandlandusa.com/2017/07/12/safeway-house-brands-edwards-coffee-history/
https://www.defenestrationmag.net/2009/07/%E2%80%9Cscotch-buy-cookies-anyone%E2%80%9D-by-rachel-levy/
Cragmont seems to be gone too.
Yeah, I didn't remember that one: https://www.brandlandusa.com/2009/10/23/what-happened-to-safeways-private-brands/
They used to have those funky soda flavors like chocolate or strawberry or green apple. way before Jones Soda.
So can i not respond to the DM you sent me without installing Substack’s app?
Nope; I’ve never used the app: just use a real Web Browser like Librewolf/Brave/Firefox or Chrome!
https://www.ft.com/content/36871929-c8cd-4b30-8c9c-c36eccdf1042
Holy shit they really have an Audemars quote in there
He is sponsored by Loro Piana, AP, Acqua di Parma, etc.
Just shows how every brand needs to push down market to grow in the B2C space. Kind of wild to me but it makes sense, now I just need to get used to seeing it everywhere around me in Miami.
Never heard of this guy, but always welcome parody. Thanks for the link.
Maybe Jack's into it for the uh, 'stuff' he mentions.
I once used the phrase “toxic empathy” in an internet argu-, ahh, discussion, and was basically laughed out of the chat by the simpletons who seek to out-empathy the next guy. But that’s exactly what it is, doing what “feels like” the right thing because you want to be a good person, while having zero understanding of the 2nd, 3rd, nth order effects of doing “the right thing.” Why wouldn’t you give your kid candy and ice cream for every single meal? Doesn’t it make your kid happy? Why wouldn’t you want your kid to be happy you monster? Etc.
There's also suicidal empathy, like "Jews For Mamdani". Gad Saad talks about it.
white liberals probably suffer the most from
Well, the distaff half for sure. The only thing worse for our society than Affluent White Female Liberal - AWFLs, are leftist lawyers and judges who have no regard for the law or justice, only power.
AWFLs!
I’m stealing that!
It’s not original so you’re not stealing it from me.
He’s great! Many videos out there of him discussing suicidal empathy. I believe he has a book in the works about this, as a follow up to the Parasitic Mind.
Nothing unusual about that. Jews have this weird disconnect between their intelligence and their voting habits.
First off, the vast majority of American Jews don't have any deep knowledge about traditional Jewish values and beliefs. A large fraction are not affiliated with any synagogue or Jewish fellowship at all, and those who are affiliated with Reform and, to a lesser extent, Conservative congregations have likely been miseducated by their clergy into thinking that Judaism is a cross between the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man and whatever the Democratic party's platform is this year. Hence the "tikkun olam" dolts. Add the fact that they are likely to have been indoctrinated with leftist stuff on campus.
Also, half of Ashkenazi Jews (there are crazy leftist Mizrachi Jews but with their families having experienced the joys of being a religious minority in the Muslim world, they tend to be a bit more grounded in reality) have IQs under 115. We're not all Einsteins & David Mamets.
There are some cultural factors at play too. Jews have been refugees many, many times, so the culture has sympathy for immigrants, and they've been persecuted, so the culture has sympathy for the downtrodden and persecuted. Also, compassion for the poor and foreigners has been part of the Jewish religion going back to scripture. The Talmud (Yevamot 79a) teaches that Jews should be compassionate, modest, and perform acts of kindness if they want to act as Jews.
Of course, if current trends for birthrates, intermarriage, and assimilation, continue, within a generation or two the majority of American Jews will likely be religiously orthodox and politically conservative. My youngest grandson just finished 1st grade. His yeshiva had three 1st grade classes this year. At least half of non-orthodox Jews marry non-Jews and a minority of their children identify as Jewish (putting aside religious standards for who is a Jew). Orthodox Jews have very large families. With four kids, my son and daughter in law are likely to have the smallest family on their block. About 90% of American Jews raised as orthodox stay religious. Do the math.
What is a Christian? A person who accepts Jesus Christ as their savior.
What is a Muslim? A person who worships Allah.
What is a Buddhist? One who follows the teachings of The Buddha.
But what is a Jew? A person who was born into a Jewish family? A person who has chosen to follow the tenets of the Jewish faith? A person of Jewish ethnicity? A person who's only a Jew because of their name, and not their behavior?
Seems the answer is Yes, No and Maybe, but that's speaking as a gentile looking in.
A Jew is someone the Jewish religion defines as a Jew, specifically the child of a woman who is considered by Jewish law to be a Jew, or someone who has converted to Judaism in accordance with Jewish law. By Jewish law, I mean orthodox Judaism in its Ashkenazi, Mizrachi, or Yemenite forms. That means, yes, someone who was born Jewish but has even rejected Judaism could be still considered a Jew in the eyes of Jewish law. They're still bound by the covenant and are obligated to perform commandments. That doesn't mean, however that apostates are counted towards prayer quorums and the like.
0. The 'global south' has shown that it can produce infinity people
1. These places are crowded, usually violent, dirty, literal shitholes because that is what they are capable of creating. Any place they go in numbers will become those things.
2. This is not my fucking problem. I don't care if it makes big line go up or helps boomers get their lawns and roofs done on the cheap.
3. I can figure out how to make my own tacos and curry. (They can keep their mud cakes.)
4. 10 bucks says these chicks fucked dirtier and smellier guys back home for much, much less.
5. We don't want your best and brightest either. Make your own country better.
ive heard that the billions sent overseas as remittances is making life over there more difficult as its driving up the cost of living
It would be trivial to tax remittances at very high rates. Both parties, including the pathetic cuckservatives in the GOP are against it. The new president of Mexico had a conniption over just the mention of it
I would be heavily supportive of such a tax.
https://www.avoidablecontact.com/p/wednesday-ort-air-fryer-supreme-commander/comment/132188673
When you're taking flak, it's a sign that you're over the target!
[edit; spelling 🤦♂️]
Very good! But, linguistic nitpick, it's "flak" surely?
🤦♂️ Yes, thank you!
See the title of this Far Side: https://dks.library.kent.edu/?a=d&d=dks19941209-01.2.45&e=-------en-20--1--txt-txIN-------
[note that Chrissie Hynde briefly attended said institution before decamping to London after the government shot several of her classmates]
Right, you don't hear the term "brain drain" anymore in relation to immigration, but it's still a valid concern
bingo on all points
i hate it when people say they want immigrants for their food
subcontinental slop is by definition easy to make
While I think food is a really really poor argument to support immigration, slop from anywhere is by definition easy to make.
Not all subcontinental food is slop. Sounds like that's all you've been exposed to.
seems to be all thats sold around here
i dont know of many complex indian dishes but ive never seen them sold here whole lot of butter chicken however
go figure
Proper butter chicken shouldn't look or taste like slop. But it's not real Indian food anyways. Look up it's history if you have time to waste.
butter chicken i do like though
i think over here we probably get the watered down versions of some dishes given how spicy some of them can be. i went to a proper indian restaurant (as recommended by a friend of mine) and while the flavor was great it was absurdly hot
went to go try it again years later and it was gone
Yes what you consider absurdly hot is generally medium for a real Indian.
Also they're terrible at the restaurant business. They open and close doors. All the time in months.
Indian food served by SF bay area restaurants is typically slop. Home-cooked dishes brought to the company pot luck had little resemblance to restaurant fare and was quite tasty.
Indian food is a Lovecraftian horror. Especially that street-vendor stuff in Mumbai and Bangalore.
slop is quite easy
a recipe's more involved
why eateries fail
slick haiku
America is under no obligation to fix mankind's age-old problems. It's like when cities broke up skid rows as actual physical locations. The bums and junkies just wandered into the places with names that ended in "Gardens" and "Heights" and wrecked those areas. If we take in the whole world, they'll bring their habits with them, trash our "nice neighborhood" of a country and then EVERYBODY loses. You have to protect the healthy sectors of society from the riffraff.
I am not going to watch the sting on the show, but I have questions. Similar to legal brothels in the hinterlands of Nevada, I am not going to participate in the market but I am also bothered by the asymmetry of information regarding pricing.
Are these single occupant units? If not, are all the occupants paying the same "rent"?
Is this a better deal for either party than Seeking Arrangements if that is still a thing?
Is this OK or does it fall afoul of some Canadian version of the fair housing act?
If the quality of services being rendered is poor, does the frequency then have to increase? Is it a free use thing?
Utilities?
ive seen listings for what amounts to a mattress thrown on a kitchen floor
its dire out there
I read about someone offering to share (non-sexually) a Queen bed for IIRC 900CAD/month, and the comments were "unlike a King, you can't even put up a divider."
welcome to canada
Christ on a Swiss Cake Roll!
There’s a subreddit that explores the subject of Canada’s absurd rental stock: https://www.reddit.com/r/SlumlordsCanada/
Most of it isn’t exactly for Canadians or by Canadians, but rather for a certain group, by a certain group ;)
kills me that they dont just seek any indian but indians from a very specific class
as if renting for the regular canadians wasnt difficult enough
Afroman already wrote that notice for you. CTRL + C and CTRL + V.
2livecrew made one as well.
Superb job by John. Can't really say much more..
"ahead of two BMWs, and the third-fastest Stock driver overall, behind a C8 and a Camaro SS LT1 but ahead of two C7 Vettes."
In every WAY that can be construed: OUCH
That endurance race sounds like a lot of fun. I don't know why you would say the passing was horrifying (except for having to trust the car next to you in the corner), since each of those passes have to make you feel like one Fernando Alonso each time one comes off. I know that's how I would.
Man, DO you complain.....
"As you can probably guess, the same CBC that embraces OnlyFans sex work is quite outraged at the idea of sex housing." LMAO WTF.....
"if you OF content creators out there think that GPT- 6.0 won’t be able to figure out your social security number and kids’ names in 2028 from an image of your left shoulder taken during your online “bad girl phase” in 2016 then you’re too naive to be using the Internet."
Please let this come true, Jah!
"I’ve come to believe that support for open borders is a flex. It’s the position taken by people who stand to economically benefit from having additional demand for their capital, whether the capital is real estate or investments or, I don’t know, Rolex Submariners. When you publicly state that immigration should be effectively unlimited, you are saying “I’m so rich, so successful, so unique and powerful, that I can only benefit from this.”
It’s like me saying, “Sure, I think women should be able to filter by height on Tinder.” That can’t hurt me, but it’s hell on the five-foot-eight crowd. And I can sound like a real advocate for women’s rights — “Nobody should ever have to take off their heels on a first date!” — while I laugh at what that policy does to other people."
For all of your readers who think I exist only to give you grief, THIS is PERFECTLY TRUE. You have hit the nail on the head.
"One of adulthood’s worst lessons is that things can feel good to us, or be beneficial to us as individuals, yet be inimical to society. Unlimited pornography. Low-cost recreational marijuana. Easy divorce. Lack of zoning laws. And so on. "
The hits keep coming!
"In a perfect world, however, this would get us all thinking about the consequences of feel-good decisions, for ourselves and others."
The lesson my soon to be 5 year old is already learning in her own way.
'That endurance race sounds like a lot of fun. I don't know why you would say the passing was horrifying (except for having to trust the car next to you in the corner), since each of those passes have to make you feel like one Fernando Alonso each time one comes off. I know that's how I would.'
These were novice racers and they weren't predictable. Which is why SCCA has this program: to help them get to where they want to be. I probably made two passes a lap for 110 laps. Some of them were... marginal.
Even double impressive to finish the race with no contact.
"he was observing a refueling mission over the Atlantic"
how does anyone even get chosen to do that in the first place
"third-fastest Stock driver overall, behind a C8 and a Camaro SS LT1 but ahead of two C7 Vettes"
nvm this is more impressive. how much do you have to suck to get passed by a child in an accord when driving a c7? otoh maybe this is the best evidence of you capability to instruct (and how competent your kid is)
"international students, are being targeted by ads offering rent-free housing in exchange for sexual availability"
they also openly discriminate against whites or non indians when posting places for rent or jobs for hire (because those are literally the only people ive seen do this) and despite being blatantly illegal nothing is done about it. locations near colleges and universites are getting crushed under the weight of these people and destroying the neighboring areas and stories of people living 12 to a basement arent unheard of.
the immigration numbers are likely far higher than whats posted due to the actual influx of people coming in under mulitple pathways like tfws or international students or on visas or those bringing their families in. its literally insane. its not slowing down or stopping. in ten years we could very well have 50million people here and a huge chunk will be indian immigrants.
there is no current solution being proposed by anyone near any power
It just occurred to me to ask if the refueling mission showed only the KC-135 or KC-46 on radar, and such mission supporting the return from a certain act of..uhh..DIPLOMACY in the Middle East! 💣
He disappeared off the flight tracker for four hours. His mother was apoplectic. I was outwardly stoic, at least.
I'm genuinely interested in understanding how he was selected, as in what agency even does this sort of thing. I'm probably asking a dumb or obvious question.
He is a cadet captain and squadron commander in Civil Air Patrol who intends to attend the USAFA, so these opportunities tend to pop up.
So when you say on an actual tanker does that mean a ship or the refueling plane?
I mean a KC-135
For some reason I thought maybe he was at a base observing the mission.
Not on one of the actual tankers!
CAP has its benefits! (“Bennies,” as my Mom used to say! 😂)
that makes two of us
If you're 'in the system' so to say, it isn't that hard. I got to watch B-52's getting refueled over the midwest back when I was in ROTC. For guys like him who are in CAP, they get offered that stuff all the time, especially if they're already pilots. We used to see CAP folks often enough when I was in the service.
Youth and lack of fear play a little part here, though clearly not all of it. I remember getting the point by in a Sumitumo shod v6 s197 by a couple caged foxbodies on Hoosiers at Nelson. I was 23. Not everyone is going to be pushing like that and I’m fairly certain I might not do the same thing today.
It’s more or less EXACLTY why the Commander will make such a great pilot at his age. Consequences are never much thought of. Not meant to downplay any of it; just sort of the reality of life.
The kid used to maneuvering machinery in three axes
Driving around a track is an x- y- endeavor
i feel like if that were the case a lot more drivers would have their pilots license
Only the drivers who launch their cars airborne in their driving tests
Canada (surprisingly the name hasn't been changed to some unpronounceable native/African/Indian word), is perhaps five years behind the UK. England itself being maybe five years from violent ethnic balkanization.
I have a front row seat to the destructive diversity as I ride the subway to work in Toronto. The commute of the damned.
Two requests, first that the US liberate us. Regime change or simply add a few new states, I'm easy. Don't worry, Canadians won't fight back. Heck, the British had to tell people of Upper Canada to stop helping the Americans during the War of 1812.
Second request, as the subway is becoming intolerable (will leave its depravations to your imagination for now) what car should I make a daily as an alternative. My current fleet spans the years 1959-1999, none are really suitable.
I think it will be far cheaper and easier for us to liberate Canada than to have to fortify the border.
And I don’t mean fortify with Border Patrol, I mean fortify with the US Army.
Having lived in and exited bad parts of Chicago, bad parts of Chicago suburbs, and the bad US state of Illinois, there’s no reward for living somewhere ruled and populated by people who hate you and your way of life and everything you stand for. It’s best to leave as soon as you can to live and thrive in freedom. For much of my life I had to be on guard and always be looking over my shoulder. Now that I live someplace free I no longer have to do that and it’s liberating. I wish it for everyone.
You just made the case for why I an an immigrant.
Sure, and as I've said before, you're free to change the number to even a negative value if you do so feel.
I am a guest, and act appropriately.
In the case above, imagine what ataraxis's position would be if the residents of the state he moved to went out of their way to make him feel unwelcome.
Speaking of acting like guests, I wonder how flying a flag of Lashkar E Taiba in Delhi would go over with the authorities and general public.
I'm surprised people burning the US flag while flying one from any other country by an alien is tolerated. I put it down to the retardedness of Joe sixpack.
Poorly, but it does happen. I don't know why you're asking this, since they're a globally recognized terrorist organization.
Well having lived in both Michigan and Illinois people from Illinois are special and think they're special too, so it follows that they get special treatment.
They want all the benefits of colonialism without the actual colonialism.
https://youtu.be/9foi342LXQE?t=56
Updating my previous reply:
RECOMMENDED: The newest, cleanest Ford {Focus, Fusion, Taurus} or Chevy {Malibu, Impala} within your budget: "cattle not pets."
ALTERNATIVES: Mopar {300, Charger, Challenger}, Saab {9000, 9-5}, AMC Eagle. If you need lots of headroom due to a long torso, skip the 9000 (if you're leggy, it's OK!).
The Dodges are RWD with traction control. The difference between the "recommended" and "alternatives" is that you have to think about whether you want:
a) a disposable commuting tool that preserves time, energy*, and money for your existing classic cars
or
b) Yet another classic car that will be another labour of love and soak up the time, energy*, and money that you want to spend on your existing classics.
I never liked AMC Eagle, but it's old and, in some ways, the progenitor of 99% of modern commuter CUVs.
* Energy: mental, physical, and emotional
Speaking from experience, mopars with good snow tires are fucking tanks in the winter.
UPDATE: The downside to a) is "doing 90% of your driving in something you don't like." I like the Tornado idea!
That is the eternal question, boring and perhaps practical or economical or beautiful and energy sapping.
If you do adopt (I didn't say "buy") a Saab, first make sure that you have a good specialist mechanic
https://www.saabnet.com/tsn/faq/service/
(you can also try https://www.saabshops.com/)
Saabnet is a great source of listings:
https://www.saabnet.com/tsn/class/9000.html
https://www.saabnet.com/tsn/class/9-5.html
I had 78 XS with the 403, huge but good on gas. But the 71-72 is the purist version of the 71-78 generation but had a very thirsty 455.
April as you know, gas mileage was not even thought of as a consideration in the 71-73 GM FWD cars, the chain driver transmission and big block on top of it required front suspension components that ended up being utilized in 22 and 26 foot motor homes. I once took my Eldorado in to have a new set of 235/75-R15 installed and the young man could not believe the size of the front end components.
Oh yes I have a 71 Eldorado in the fleet and a 78 Biarritz (which is far more economical with the 425 - but not as frugal as the Olds 403).
Great combination, first and last year, just wish they had upgraded the dash in the 71-73 as a lot of people comment on the down market look of that dash with its light colored plastic wood and black plastic switches for the rear defogger and convertible top. But the great advantage is no quarter and fender extensions to crack and fall off. Best and happy motoring
"I ride the subway to work in Toronto"
i couldnt imagine the hell that is
crowded areas feel like sensory overstimulation now and every time i catch a whiff of bo in public i get flashbacks to college
if the us ever liberates us everyone is just moving south anyway
also just get a corolla or some other small cheap thing because no matter how bad it is its better than the subway or a bus
Think fwd for winter and bigger than a Corolla for safety, the highways around the GTA feel like Death Race 2000 warm up lap.
The new Camry was mighty impressive to me on a business trip to Buffalo a few months back. Quick enough and will have resale value when it’s time to sell it to a newcomer
i have no idea what fib or fabs is
I guess they decided that some ex vice governor of British Columbia wasn't sufficiently woke in his dealings with the Siberian-Canadians so Vancouver renamed Trutch Street to šxʷməθkʷəy̓əmasəm Street (I dare you to try and pronounce it), which translates to Musqueamview in English, after the name the local tribe gives itself. Signposts bear the English name below the official Musqueam name, because not even the Musqueams can pronounce the phonemes created by academics to represent their language, which had no written alphabet. My favorite part is that they included the English translation on the signs. I bet locals still call it Trutch Street.
I was once talking to an Indian (dot, not feather) chap at the NAIAS and he said that periodically in Bharat (he called it India, btw) anti-colonial activists will rename something with a Hindi or Sanskrit name, but locals will still call it something like "Victoria Station". It doesn't matter what bank owns the naming rights but Cobo Hall will always be called Cobo Hall.
From Grok:
"The Musqueam First Nation, whose traditional language is hən̓q̓əmin̓əm̓ (a dialect of Halkomelem, a Coast Salish language), historically did not have a written alphabet, as their language was primarily oral. Like many Indigenous languages in North America, hən̓q̓əmin̓əm̓ was transmitted through spoken communication, storytelling, and cultural practices for thousands of years. Written systems were not part of their tradition until contact with European settlers and the influence of colonial systems.
In the 20th century, efforts to document and revitalize the hən̓q̓əmin̓əm̓ language led to the development of a writing system. In 1997, the Musqueam First Nation formally adopted the North American Phonetic Alphabet (NAPA) as their orthography to represent the sounds of hən̓q̓əmin̓əm̓. This decision was made because the Latin alphabet used for English could not accurately capture the language’s unique sounds, including its 36 consonants (22 of which are not found in English) and distinct vowel sounds. NAPA was chosen for its specialized symbols, which are designed to document and teach Indigenous languages accurately."
the govt is way too absorbed with kowtowing to everyone but actual canadians to get anything accomplished and is especially overly concerned with its first nations people
frankly its just embarrassing
First Nations people at least have some legitimate claim to Canada.
Prioritizing people from literally the opposite side of the planet is evil.
"I still call it Pine Knob" (which is once again official)
The 20th century could have been lost also, but the AEL took action: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1907_Vancouver_anti-Asian_riots
https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaHousing2/
I have no insider knowledge, but what do you think about a manual Ford Focus (FWD and not particularly small)?
too small, too modern...perhaps
Given the ages of your existing fleet, I assumed that you were looking for more modern (and probably more reliable and less of a project). My personal fleet policy is that redundancy (in the engineering sense) is good, but superfluity is bad.
Once, I had an old Saab (they're all old now), and, in a David-looking-out-the-window-when-he-should-have-been-at-war moment, found a GREAT DEAL on another Saab of the same year. He (the car: Saabs have personalities) provided excellent and economical service with outstanding performance, but, through no fault of his own, drove me crazy! I would have had much better mental health with almost anything else, because the roles and purposes would have been more clearly defined and the vehicles would have had more complimentary strengths and weaknesses. Like even a Geo Metro would be clearly "an ultra-economical penalty blob whose purpose is a backup car if the Saab needs service during the work week."
Larger would be Fusion (a good friend has one and it's been good) or Malibu (I rented one and it was nice).
If you are willing to try RWD with traction control, then you can let Brampton solve Brampton and consider Challenger, Charger, or 300. The latter seem very much to your taste as I understand it.
UPDATE: See https://www.avoidablecontact.com/p/wednesday-ort-air-fryer-supreme-commander/comment/131598158
I'd try to find a Grand Prix GTP or one of its platform buddies with the supercharged 3.8. Literally good at everything if you can find a well cared for example. Perfect age, too. Even the most recent ones would only be a couple years newer than your '99.
2000 Bonneville SSEi ?
That'd do it! A little more power than the GTP if memory serves, but, to counter Wyatt, I think the softer edges make the Grand Prix the better looking of the two. Can't go wrong either way. Park Ave and Regal had it, too, or if you have a stash of "3" stickers, the Monte Carlo fits the bill.
96 Park Avenue Ultra would be the sweet spot…..scarce up here and expensive for a really good one.
Even cooler than the GTP in my opinion.
GTI or R?
Wouldn't those be basically Focus-sized with higher TCO? Any cost of this commuter-pod will be cutting into her budget for the existing classic fleet.
Point taken.
TLX or Accord?
I don’t know, there’s not much new that I find exciting. I suggest the Accord but would never buy one myself. They’re just so ugly in recent years.
My gedankenexperiment was mostly focused on something, ideally domestic, that would be highly economical for cheap commuting, DIY repair, and entry-level motorsports (AutoX / RallyX). I wanted to avoid the Honda/Toyota tax. Although Honda is often more domestic than the Big 2.x these days, I have considerable history (generally positive) with Honda products, but always in a non-DIY context (and on one of them, even the dealer techs struggle to properly stow the dipstick, which indicates to me that the rest of the car may also be unusually difficult to work on).
I agree with "not much new that I find exciting," but also "not much new that seems like a long-term economical option." I did a deep dive and plotted out all the economy FF platforms (Civic was not the first) by year of introduction, and realized that if the 1970s were a transition from Système Panhard (FR) to FF, the 2020's are possibly the transition away from manual transmissions, ICE only powertrains, and non-crossover bodies. Another issue is that platforms seem to be turning over much more quickly: VW Type 1 and Mini were produced FOREVER, Falcon was ~1960-1980, Fox lasted for decades, Volvo 200 1974-1993, Saab 99/900 1969-1993, Range Rover 1970-1996, etc. That seems to be much less common these days, which has implications for parts availability and also the longevity of knowledge.
Laura Secord would like a word with you.
that’s what big chocolate would have you believe ;)
I have no problem with big chocolate.
Nice event, I was driving the NC Miata in the photo above. I enjoyed seeing the spec racer out there.
Exceptionally handsome car! As you may know, we have three NC Miatas at the barn.
🚨 BIG BEAUTIFUL BILL FIXES SECTION 174 🚨
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/1/text
See SEC. 70302:
I.) DOMESTIC R&D can now be expensed in the current tax year, ending the DISCRIMINATORY tax treatment of engineers.
II.) FOREIGN R&D must still be amortized over 15 years. This helps provide a small disincentive to offshoring.
Also, the EV tax credits are gone:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/big-beautiful-bill-electric-vehicle-tax-credit/
Good. There go the sales for the Slate pickup.
Yeah would legitimately just fold if I were them…
$30k for a little EV only truck with 150 miles of range is a nonstarter. There is simply no market for that.
Agreed. No way it can compete with the Maverick now.
elon crying and puking and shitting now
or "comfortably numb" on MDMA & ketamine
This “America Party” bullshit is going to split the Republican vote.
Hakim Jeffries is salivating. Impeachment articles will be a ticker-tape parade come January, 2027.
Also, some car loan interest will be tax-deductible under certain circumstances.
"REMITTANCE TAX" "enacted" but completely neutered.
Search for "SEC. 70604"
The rate is only 1% (not the proposed 5% or 3.5%), AND it only applies if paid with cash or check, NOT credit card, debit card, or bank transfer. Why even bother?
https://www.thenationalnews.com/business/money/2025/07/04/remittance-tax-united-states/
Disappointment at Breitbart: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2025/07/01/republicans-slashed-planned-tax-remittances-migrants/
Disappointment at Newsweek(!) calling out India specifially: https://www.newsweek.com/senate-big-beautiful-bill-remittance-tax-indian-immigrants-2092719
More details (mostly that it is RETROACTIVE to TY2022): https://us.fi-group.com/one-big-beautiful-bill-act/
Never automatically trust anyone in a position of power—whether that is government, corporate, private, ngo, social club, track club, religious, or otherwise. Trust has to be continually earned.
Corollary is that you need people to seek positions of power bc those create and keep order. Otherwise the hierarchy of organized criminal violence will win everytime.
Let’s add more than $3 trillion to the national debt, cut medical care for the poorest Americans, hugely pump up funding for Trump’s masked private police force, funnel tax breaks to the very richest, expand the gravy train for munitions manufacturers, and all because you lot simmer in your crab bucket hatred for immigrants and women with blue hair. While we’re at it, cut clean energy, subsidize the oil companies, support fascist governments, scrub any mentioning of global warming or other environmental pressures that are the *cause* of people wanting to leave their own shitholes and come to ours. Job done.
'Let’s add more than $3 trillion to the national debt,'
Nobody cares. They didn't care when Biden added $7.5 trillion. Fiscal responsibility is a lost cause. I'm not saying this to excuse Trump, or to perform whataboutism. Just stating the fact.
'hugely pump up funding for Trump’s masked private police force'
Come back to me when they burn down a building full of kids, or shoot a pregnant woman in the head while she's holding her baby. Scratch that. Come back to me when they do what the "antifa" heroes MacArthur and Patton did to American citizens during the Bonus Army march. Some people are so eager to get a taste of stolen victim valor they can't be bothered to crack a history book.
'all because you lot simmer in your crab bucket hatred for immigrants and women with blue hair.'
Who is "you lot" here, exactly? I personally housed South American immigrants for nearly a DECADE while they worked through the process. At my own expense.
'cut clean energy'
Clean energy is a sinkhole of wasted money, and part of the reason we spend trillions. Worse yet, the trillions get spent on Solyndra style graft rather than on a genuine Manhattan Project of clean energy. Which we already did, by the way; it was called the Manhattan Project. Any plan that omits nuclear for solar and wind is pure fantasy.
'scrub any mentioning of global warming or other environmental pressures that are the *cause* of people wanting to leave their own shitholes and come to ours.'
In the words of Joe Rob -- Come on, man! Do you really think that people want to leave Venezuela and Somalia and India and Pakistan because of GLOBAL WARMING? Do ya see anyone leaving Texas or Florida over it?
Let's be thoughtful and logical in these discussions. Otherwise it's just emotions competing for vicarious satisfaction.
Yes, fiscal responsibility is a lost cause.
I find David Bahnsen's Capital Record podcast and blog informative about US debt. We won't see a hyperinflation spiral like Argentina or Zimbabwe. We WILL see anemic growth and relative economic decline like Japan.
THAT said, the US looks good compared to lazy EuroLand. Or corrupt China. Yes, the US has corruption too - like the '09 bailouts and public sector union grifts. But we are pebbles compared to the mountain of "Installed Base" Chinese Communist Party corruption.
There are solid reasons for wealthy Chinese to invest wealth US and Canadian condos. They want a trusted out.
By the way, very "nice" Switzerland gives local governments a veto vote over each new immigrant. For some reason, that's not much reported.
David Bahnsen likes to mention the USA'S TINA attributes.
There
Is
No
Alternative
I agree completely. And it's the 4th of July.
'Cleanest dirty shirt.'
If there was an alternative currency the only US solution would probably be default.
see what i mean?
Here in the central Texas area Donald Trump and the GOP have personally caused historical flooding.
It's still raining heavily as I type these words.
The acceleration of climate change in his 6 month rain of terror has been alarming.
They are not cutting Medicaid. They are reducing the rate of growth and eliminating people on it who don’t qualify.
Stolen benefits by ineligible people is still theft. Who is going around advocating for stolen wealth to be retained by the thieves?
Not sure if this is a trick question, but the simple answer is the party that starts with a “D”.
The longer answer is that the bill known as Obamacare is basically a poison pill for the budget of the US Government. A key feature of Obamacare is that when states expand Medicaid, US Government share of that new Medicaid benefit increases, so Obamacare was and is a way to blow-up the healthcare system, financially speaking, by further distressing the US Government’s financial state, and then “forcing” the US Government to move to single payer healthcare “to save costs”. There was a lot of discussion on the right about this back when Obamacare was being pushed through the house and senate, and the people talking about it were called kooks and conspiracy theorists. Now we can literally see how Obamacare is bankrupting and exploding the US debt in real time. So when the left says “this cuts Medicaid” they are lying because they are still hiding the fact that Obamacare was designed to do this (incentivize states to take lots of free money in the form of Medicaid reimbursement and move us all along the way to single payer). The left didn’t consider that someone like Trump would come after Obama, and that he would actually build the Republican Party to a level where they would have the power to, not undo Obamacare, but reverse some of the evil inside of it.
Based take.
Everyone on the government payroll is presumably advocating for this, since they're all living off of stolen wealth.
It was meant as a rhetorical question to the original poster who brought it up… either they say explicitly that’s what they want or understand what the reality is below the surface by applying the ‘above average’ IQ that everyone here has except me.
You’re dead right about govt. employees though.
Emotional dysregulation plus Gish gallop. A perfect example of the hysterics currently in vogue.
hey wait this isnt a tiktok comment section
>muh fascist government
lol k
"hugely pump up funding for Trump’s masked private police force"
based. yeet the illegals over the wall and put that shit on payperview
"you lot simmer in your crab bucket hatred for immigrants and women with blue hair"
yeah because neither of those groups did anything to degrade the standard of living or freedoms in the west in any way shape or form right
"global warming or other environmental pressures that are the *cause* of people wanting to leave their own shitholes and come to ours"
yeah the us is the sole reason some third world wasteland became too hot and inhospitable therefore they should show up and be granted access to the greatest country in the world
alright
“Show up, be granted access, and subsidized by taxpayers.”
literally that
the amount of money thrown around makes my head spin
The fact that Sleepy Joe (or NYC) put the illegals in FIVE-STAR HOTELS made my head explode! 🤯
FIVE-STAR HOTELS
https://tenor.com/view/not-anymore-silence-of-the-lambs-hannibal-lecter-anthony-hopkins-cheeky-gif-8621424748041108924
Settle down, Francis.
a lot of that certainly works for me!
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/harry-you-dont-need-to-sell-it-to-me
That hood dent is trailer hitch sized and height.
re. housing, I'm reminded of the old joke with the punchline, 'we've already determined what you are, now we are just haggling over the price'.
Its the height of a deer head, leaned into the road from the shoulder.
Rats with hooves. I wonder if the business generated by Michigan's hunting season is more than the agricultural damage they do.
I live less than 3 miles from the Detroit city limits, and I've seen deer in my backyard this year.
I almost hit a young buck (still with felt) in Rouge Park last week. There’s also a sizable pack of turkey running around there.
“I almost hit a young buck…” taken out of context could get you canceled.
No. Deer and related species (elk, moose, antelope) are kosher because they have split hooves and are ruminants, but they still have to be slaughtered and inspected per kosher rules. Also, hunting for sport is prohibited by Jewish law and considered cruel. It's permitted to hunt and trap for skins (Jews have been in the fur business for a while, the first Jew in Michigan was a fur trader). Selling the meat might run into issues because technically you can't operate a business that from the outset is based on selling non-kosher food but you can derive incidental benefit, for example if a beef carcass is found upon inspection to not be kosher it can be sold as non-kosher meat.
I've had kosher venison but I think I prefer lamb and beef.
My late mother worked as an office manager for the local fundraising office of Bar Ilan University and my ex and I got comped to one of their big dinners. I particularly wanted to go because the caterer was the best kosher chef in Detroit and with a lot of potential bar mitzvah and wedding reservations in the audience, I knew they'd put on a good spread.
I was waiting to get some venison at the hors d'oeuvres table and a nicely dressed older woman wearing some pricey jewelry said to me, "How could you eat such a beautiful animal?" I replied, "Have you ever seen a polled hereford?" "No," she said. "Magnificent animals, and they taste really good!"
Why can't some religion someplace have a little fun with dietary rules?
"In order for the food to be sanctified, the animal must first be run down in the parking lot by a truck with no less than 150 horsepower."
My grandmother, O'B'M', would say, "A shailah is treif," i.e. a question isn't kosher, which can mean, if there is any question, it's probably not kosher, but the way she used it was, if you don't ask the rabbi, he can't say it isn't kosher. She was a very practical woman.
It happened at 2am, I was coming home from the airport, and I never saw the deer until after I hit him. For one terrifying moment I thought it was an Amish kid.
makes sense
the little amlettes are spooked by cars too
Wow!
Note to self: become a Canadian landlord (just kidding!)
Kinda sorta OT question about: debt. We don't have much, just a 30 yr fixed mortgage @ >3% and a single credit card that has a balance that ranges from $1-3k on average. Own all the cars, etc. no other loans or BS owed. Single breadwinner (me) until my wife decides to either go back to work or not (say in the next ~2 years).
We're not in dire straits panic mode, but '24 and this year has been a little expensive (some extra capital gains taxes, more CA home insurance horseshit, fixing deferred issues on the home etc.). Bills always creep up and unfortunately my employer has not delivered on a COLA (yet). We would be fine keeping things as is - paying the monthly mortgage + interest and keeping the CC balance from getting kooky - but would we benefit from some kind of David Ramsey type plan to get the house paid off, etc. in X amount of time?
My financial outcomes are bad so ignore me, but paying off a 3% mortgage (with tax deductible interest) when the prime rate is 7.5% would be a huge mistake.
Consumer debt is bad, but DR goes way too far in the opposite extreme. You would basically need a top 1% income while simultaneously denying your children proper food, housing, and education to live according to his rules.
You are also paying off your debt, particular a mortgage, with continually devalued USD.
Wow, this is like twice in one year that I agree with you 100 percent!
Must be a sign of the end times!!!! :-D
What he said. I have a low rate mortgage and two low rate car loans. They can all run to the end.
This is what my thinking was, but I wanted to make sure I wasn't missing some other angle
If I may suggest— no matter what your income level is, have a healthy cash reserve. 6 months? 9 months? Let it earn 4% easy for the moment and it’s there if you need it, and you don’t have to worry about “what if something bad happens” for a while. Instead of paying off low interest rate debt accumulate cash.
Credit lines can, and often are, reduced in tough times, so credit is not a substitute for an emergency fund.
I actually think Dave Ramsey is not conservative ENOUGH when he magically says "6 months should be enough to get back on your feet." Maybe in past decades for semi-skilled work, but for specialized stuff it can take a long time (even in the 1980s/1990s I think I heard adults saying "1 month for every $10k in salary," but even that is an estimate, not a guarantee).
See MY other reply to Jeff below. Waited to see if someone else brought it up first.
A friend got an adjustable-rate mortgage a couple of years before COVID and then spent the next few years working 80 hours/week and paying it off. Now he has a car loan and a second mortgage to build a garage.
I disagree with this philosophy, though I've heard it many times.
All the rich folks I even knew told me that it's all about the cash flow, and anything you can do to increase it, you do.
Yeah, I've got 2 years left on mine if I only pay the minimum, but if I'm out of it sooner, that increases my cash flow. And I can see the advantages of that.
Also, the government holds all of the notes in the USA (well, maybe only 90 percent) and well, I don't exactly trust them. I remember when JC allowed a law to go through that let credit card companies change their rates on outstanding debt. So what about that contract...
How much more cash flow would you have not paying that monthly payment?
I dislike having any personal debt. Look at what the Covid scam did to your income stream. It sure messed mine up a great deal, but at least I was prepared for it. What happens when they do it again? (And they will - because now they know they can).
If you had to pay your house off in 60 days could you? Especially if your investments are suddenly only worth 50 cents on the dollar (or less?)
Personally, the only debt I'm okay with is debt that other people are paying off for me and even then I'm cautious to make sure none of it will splash back on me if the government (who hates us) decides they want to fuck everybody over (again).
Yes, a lot of financial people say to use your house as an investment. I notice all of those people grew up very rich. I also suspect they've got a fully paid off house someplace. All of the truly rich people I've known always owned their own house. Because fortunes can change in the blink of an eye and they're always a lot easier to weather and recover from if you're not living on the streets.
If you live in a high COL city, throw in 4 or even 5 figure property taxes. Those almost never go down, even in housing crashes.
Debt, even housing debt, is like a suitcase to drag around. Even if it's empty and light because of the strategies mentioned above, you have to lug it around.
You set these up 30 years before you were born?
Ramsey also had an extremely stupid article where he advised buying a $1000 car from a dealer, saving $100/month for a year and upgrading to a $2200 car at a dealer, then $3400, etc.
a) This neglects employment difficulties inherent gn a $1000 car*
b) A $1000 car is probably going to cost more than $1200/year in repair/maintenance*
c) This neglects the "spread." Dealers would give you $500 trade-in for Car #1, then turn around and price that very car for $2500 or $3500.
It's hard to take him seriously after that.
* MOST $1k cars for MOST people, who are not skilled mechanics
im not sure a $1000 car is actually functional and legal to drive
The article was in USD and a few years old. Multiplying it by a practical amount only makes his point weaker.
LISTEN TO THIS:
https://youtu.be/kzim1iYhmGA
Dave Ramsey? That man's as out-of-touch with reality as a traffic cop writing a speeding ticket.
Have six months of income in the bank. Don't pay $500 a month for a new car, buy a used one outright for $15,000 cash. Make becoming debt-free your only financial goal. Cut up your credit cards. Live on ramen noodles and rainwater till you pay off your mortgage.
The man's insane.
Yeah, I will add that profligate spending may be unwise or even immoral, I've seen some of his followers become extremely nasty, money-obsessed people.
Yeah, THAT and his advice seems to be aimed at penny-pinching misers who already have like eighty grand in the bank.
I also think his "blame the individual" advice serves to squelch necessary political action about changes to the economy. To be fair, SOME people do have spending problems ("MC Hammer"), but in many other cases, decades of anti-American-worker policies have turned many careers into below-subsistence traps. And while I do agree that an individual can't wait for political deliverance, it doesn't benefit society for people to tell themselves "my problem is not that the factory I worked at moved to China, the problem is that I spend too much." (But it has possibly kept some pressure off of the billionaires and Mitch McConnell types.)
Yeah I’ve owned I think five different cars that cost $2k or less, including an ancient Ranger I once bought for $600. Put new brakes on it and ran that for a year.
Today, $5ish thousand sounds about right for something I would expect to last at least a little while. There are still a handful of relative bargains out there — think any base model W body from the mid 2000s — but since C4C the absolute bottom end of the used market has never really returned. Add to that inflation and just how much it costs to repair a car made this century and it’s all just a bit miserable to buy cheap.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHDpr1rQjlE
Watch this, ditch Dave Ramsey, follow The Money Guy channel and their Financial Order of Operations. You are in minor setback territory, not "My dad cosigned my HD3500 so I could tow my 84-month financed fifth wheel to the KOA, 'cause that's all we can afford" territory.
My non-professional advice: The only debt you currently have that you need to erase is the balance you are carrying on your credit card. That interest is most likely in the mid-teens if not higher which is easy to let get out of hand if you're not careful.
My outlook on paying down mortgages is as follows:
0. How much is your home worth? If it is worth more than the total value of your loan at maturity (principle plus all interest) then I think you'd be foolish to push money at paying down your mortgage.
1. Is your mortgage payment equal to or less than what it would cost you to rent the space you NEED (not necessarily what you have, but what you would need to live)? If it is then I wouldn't pay up on it.
2. You always need housing, and in my opinion it is the only true fixed expense we have, again when you look at the cost of what you need.
4. Only consider putting more money against your house, after you're tax advantaged accounts are fully funded, and you have a sufficient safety fund stashed away for incidentals.
Another thing that has helped me with budgeting for home repairs is to build out an amortization schedule for major appliances and wear items, i.e. roof, windows, water heater etc. This gives me a rough idea how much I need to have stashed away per year to cover those costs as they come due for replacement. I do the same thing with car payments, after the note is paid off, I keep making the payment into my brokerage account so I have a large amount available for a down payment when it comes time to replace the vehicle. Your mileage may vary, but these things have helped me keep it all manageable in my overly analytical mind.
And 1 more thing, Dave Ramsay can get fucked. The smartest thing I did when I lived on a fixed income, was buy a cheap new car with a warranty. I went through a few sub3k shit boxes and they were the fast track to pissing off my boss, and figuring out how to absorb 500-1500 dollar unplanned expenses versus the reliable always known $297/ month for 5 years new car that didn't break down. There is such a thing as good debt, if it ensures gainful employment, or grants you access to opportunities you wouldn't otherwise have you should utilize it to the fullest, responsibly.
You and your wife sound financially responsible, so I would ride that beautiful mortgage rate to Year 30. I personally prefer liquidity than to have my $$$ stuck in bricks and mortar where it’s harder to utilize. Plus you will be paying off that mortgage with inflated dollars for the full term.
I’m retired and my 30 year mortgage ends up when I’m 90, God willing. I did this purposely as the returns in my portfolio far exceed any returns the house investment will accrue.
Think of your monthly mortgage payment as cheap rent. That’s how I look at it. Could you realistically rent another house as nice as your house for what your mortgage payment is? I know I couldn’t.
For additional perspective, go on to the online Inflation Calculator and enter the starting year of your mortgage and your current monthly payment to see what your payment is in today’s inflated dollars. It will probably be eye opening. Oh, and congrats on the low rate!
A house is also the antithesis of diversified.
Answer #2: Budget problems are solved by an increase in revenue, a reduction of expenses, or both. The CC interest is, unfortunately, an expense.
I'm aggressively paying off debt... at this point, all I have left is real estate to pay off, which some will argue is "good debt"... I'm trying to erase my "good debt" as soon as possible.
Ramsey is salesman, he's got a brand, but essentially he's right.. there's just no such thing as "good debt". For all the strategies of cash liquidity, inflation vs interest rate, etc... think of it like this: you will only live a certain number of years, you will only earn x amount in those years... you can spend a larger number to service debt, or a smaller number to service debt... spend the smaller number.
I think the "good debt" / "bad debt" thing is mostly stupid. Student loans on a worthless degree are not "good debt," a mortgage on a much more expensive house than you need is not "good debt," and a young person MIGHT require a loan to obtain a reliable vehicle.
Putting that aside, congrats on getting rid of most debt, but aren't there any investments that return about the same as the tax-effective rate on your mortgage?
(If you have AMPLE liquid assets, paying off a mortgage COULD be wise.)
Obviously everyone's situation is different... in my case, I'm at peak earnings, career relatively secure, with real estate my only remaining debt... I'm relatively diversified between retirement strategies, I have about 3-4 months of immediate savings (I know that's a bit short... like I said, everyone's situation is different and I'm keeping the liquidity short to pay off debt as I'm confident my career is secure to do that)...
This is why I'm not throwing extra income at investments... I'm attacking debt. Paying off the mortgage - if you can - is ALWAYS wise. ("if you can" here means not taking obvious risks) Again, look at it over a lifetime: if you had a choice, do you want to pay $800k for your house, or do you want to pay $400k for your house?
Enron was considered a very secure job at one point also.
I would want to not have to fire-sale my house at month 4.5 of unemployment.
Much harder to extract money when desperately needed out of bricks and mortar vs. an investment account. Liquidity rules.
I think of it in fundamentally different terms: it's much more comfortable to live in a house than in my investment accounts.
Sure, everything is a calculated risk, because we can't predict the future... my point is to get to where I wouldn't have to fire-sale anything. There's much less urgency in a situation of unexpected job loss when you have no debt...
I think that's wishful thinking.
Property tax, car insurance, health insurance, health deductibles, groceries, utilities (gas, electric, Internet, phone, ...), fuel, vehicle maintenance & repair, and registration all consume thousands of dollars of liquidity each month, and nobody is going to give them to you for free just because you've paid off your mortgage.
And looking for work requires a phone, computer, etc., and often a relocation which you may have to pay up front.
My friend lucked out and was able to get a car loan and a second mortgage (at much higher rates) shortly after he paid off his mortgage. Lucky for him, at least he kept his job.
I think this is something that you are clearly very passionate about.
The only debt we have is a mortgage, at 2.75%. I'm making 4% in a money market account and have been getting 20% -ish in the stock market the last few years. I'd be a retard to take stock or money market to pay down the mortgage.
Do remember to factor taxes into that 4% interest to know where is the crossover point.
On the other end, remember to factor in the mortgage interest tax deduction.
Which for most people is worth nothing because they take the standard deduction.
That's great. My point is, what are you doing with your returns? Likely reinvesting, correct? To make more returns... and so on...
At some point, does it make sense to be sitting on a pile of returns....... while sitting on sizeable debt?
That's why I framed the idea in the context of lifetime income and X amount over a lifetime servicing debt... the caveat here is not everyone has the income to make that decision... but if you do have income - whether you're earning a lot at work or investing - it doesn't make sense to pay more to service debt when you don't have to...
We're reinvesting, and will continue to (God willing) build wealth. Think of it as opportunity cost - by paying off the low interest loan you lose the opportunity to make considerably more by investing.
I understand (and have) the desire to be entirely debt-free, but the numbers don't lie.
I get that... my point is, at what point do you not just go ahead and take your capital and attack the debt?
Think of it this way (using the same example as I replied above).. does it make sense to pay $800k for your house over 30 years just to look at a large investment account that... does what exactly?
Everyone's "attack point" will be different... but over a lifetime, it's the same decision... pay more to service debt, or pay less to service debt
Never. It would cost more in lost investment income than to service the debt. That goes double with low interest debt in an inflationary economy.
Eliminating debt (just a mortgage at a sub 3% rate in my case) would increase my immediate cash flow, but at a cost. I would have to reduce my cash flow in the short term to put more money against the loan. For me I would have to stop or reduce the amount I am investing in my brokerage account to do so. Which would reduce my future state cash flow because I would not be taking advantage of compound interest on the brokerage account, which is currently showing 11% annual returns over it's lifetime (>4x what I am paying to carry my mortgage).
A simple example, say we have a 30 year mortgage on $200,000 at 3%apr = $843.21 payment. If I were to double the payment to $1686.42 per month, I would have the house paid off in 141 payments, which would eliminate 219 payments and save $66,034.00 in interest. By doing so I would decrease my monthly cash flow by $843.21 for 11 years and 9 months. Assume that after the loan is paid off, I take that $1686.42 and invest it into my brokerage account for the remaining 219 months to get us to 30 years. I would have approximately $1,113,350.05
Instead of paying extra every month, I open a brokerage account and invest the additional $843.21 each month into my brokerage account. After 30 years I would have $2,131,872.72 or an extra $1,018,522.67 after 30 years.
Obviously this requires someone to be disciplined enough to actually invest that money, have trust in the market, and be patient for this to work out for them, but it clearly shows that this is the way to spend the smaller number when you are able to net sum your entire portfolio.
I get those numbers, but a couple of things here... like I said, everyone's situation is different (although I will generally maintain that the "wealth" people seek - financial freedom - is more likely debt freedom)...
1) a sub 3% mortgage hasn't been realistic lately, and is probably not realistic going forward... now obviously in your case, it changes the calculation (I'll still suggest as I have in other comments that if you earn a compounded return, would you then pay off debts?)... so let's use my specific situation: a $225k mortgage at 7.75% (if you're interested, it's a $300k closing price on a second property). On scheduled payments, monthly interest alone was $1600/mo... the $225 borrowed would be well over $450k paid over the full term of the loan... in less than 2 years I'm now around $90k to go, dropping fast, and interest is about $600/payment now... at this rate, I will have erased over $200k in obligation...
Now, I'm not sacrificing lifestyle, reasonable savings, or retirement planning to aggressively attack debt... so again that's just my situation. But I look at it fairly simply... I would rather pay around $320-330k (down payment, loan and interest) for my property vs $525k (full-term repayment plus down payment)...
...WITH the added benefit of getting "wealthy" (obligation-free) much earlier... yes, my principal payments directed towards aggressive investing may yield compounded returns... or, maybe they don't. But dragging out my mortgage will absolutely yield a penalty.. guess which strategy I've decided to go with...
As a final note, I think $225k is much lower than the average mortgage, so the numbers only get bigger with most people. Depending on their situation, they potential reduced hundreds of thousands in debt obligation in just a few years... yes, they should also be investing. But I think for most people, the financial freedom they seek - "being wealthy - is living debt-free.
"I will generally maintain that the "wealth" people seek - financial freedom - is more likely debt freedom"
My definition of financial freedom is being in a position to not need fulltime employment, to live the lifestyle you are accustomed to. If one spends all their money to pay off debt they would still need an income stream to pay for their operating costs, food, taxes, consumables etc.
"I'll still suggest as I have in other comments that if you earn a compounded return, would you then pay off debts?"
I could, or I could buy a Porsche, or fake tits for my wife, and any host of other things. The whole purpose of the exercise I did was to show that on a certain path a person is "wealthier" by not paying their mortgage off early and investing the money instead. Anyone can manipulate the specifics of my calculations for their situation to see if the math works out for them. Even at your 7.75% rate, you have opportunity to increase your cash flow month to month by taking that extra money you spent and investing it. The margin is much smaller but it is still there.
"On scheduled payments, monthly interest alone was $1600/mo..."
I'm struggling with this math, based on the information you provided the payment shouldn't be much more than $1600/mo, are you sure your interest rate isn't higher?
You provide a perfect justification for your actions, by stating that your not sacrificing anything else to pay off this note early. If I were to purchase a second property, I would also be inclined to pay it off quickly, since it is a luxury good, not a necessity.
"As a final note, I think $225k is much lower than the average mortgage, so the numbers only get bigger with most people"
The larger the loan balance the more it makes sense to me to not pay it off early. In that situation it is more likely that the available expendable income is less than it would be with a smaller loan. So, an individuals cash flow would be further constrained with a 500k mortgage at 8% trying to pay more against the loan versus a 200k mortgage at 3%. Remember income is relatively fixed so moving money towards a loan takes it away from somewhere. Cash flow = wealth right? See the first line I quoted from your response for the answer to that question.
In my example you could miss a lot of those $800 payments to your brokerage before you took a major hit on the 1 million dollar upside on the back end.
I will close this out by saying, what I tell a lot of people when talking financial strategy, regardless of your specific plan, the fact that you have a plan makes the odds good that things will work out well for you in the end. It's the people who haven't thought through their financial situation that go on to get fired from their job and fall further into debt when they listen to Ramsay and sell their warrantied new car for a loss and buy a 1k beater that they can't afford to fix.
Re: the math on my numbers... sorry, the $1600 was P&I, which breaks down $150/$1450. So my mistake, but obviously $1450/mo just in interest is still a significant amount...
I can also buy a Porsche or fake tits for the stripper (I'm not married), I'd just rather do it without a big mortgage, too...
Definitely agree about having a plan.. like I said, I'm investing, too. Just much more aggressive towards debt.
"...they listen to Ramsay and sell their warrantied new car for a loss and buy a 1k beater that they can't afford to fix"
I don't mean to sound like a Ramsey cheerleader, I really don't listen to him that much... but let's be honest here, I think 1) overspending on cars you can't afford is probably a pretty big problem, and 2) I'd would say that scenario specifically (getting rid of a new car for a problematic beater) is probably a lot less prevalent than people who find themselves in financial trouble from bad investments...
The Bottle Rockets > Dave Ramsey:
http://youtu.be/kzim1iYhmGA
Those numbers are not risk adjusted but I certainly hope it works out that way for you!
Those numbers loosely mimic my personal finances, but so far my strategy has worked well for me.
The only thing I'm not seeing mentioned here is how much extra interest you think is left on the mortgage if you let it ride to the end and how much is your risk tolerance in making extra payments for as long as necessary to get it down.
I personally would also see going debt free as an opportunity to aggressively diversify with future dollars into other investments.
But why not diversify starting right now?
No good reason. It's 50/50.
I get a lot more adventurous if I don't have debt, but someone else could be different.
Sending you a message