I disagree. A higher turnover rate means paying the new guy less money. You’ll see this more often when they want to annoy people into quitting so they don’t need to pay unemployment.
They’re using the psychology correctly. It’s just awful for people as a whole. But it can temporarily make their books look good (high sales, low expenses) and justify bigger bonuses for the board.
I hope this will make it clear how much people actually pay on their retirement accounts. Far too many people I talk to don’t realize that they are paying an “expense ratio” on their investment funds.
The groan I just grunt. Well done, hotdogman. Well done.
Most 401k’s will mail checks when people want to roll funds over. Sometimes to the receiving companies, sometimes directly to the client. They won’t even overnight it or put a tracking number on it either. Just snail mail hope it shows up some day.
Fair. The 2% inflation that the FED is pursuing by raising rates is because that’s the economic sweet spot. If we end up in a 10 year deflationary period then that would be catastrophic. I was moreso referencing a short term “return to 2019 numbers” type of deflation that I believe could be a good thing for people.
Since the FED is focused on a 2% inflation hedge and we’ve raised interest rates so much, they would just lower them again to prevent a repeat of Japan. They’re predicted to lower them next year because of this.
Ahhh gotcha. We’re basically saying the same thing
I’m not sure what you mean by underwriting it and declining coverage anyway. But you’re correct, it is challenging to get somebody approved for taking medication relating to anxiety/depression. If they have a history of being hospitalized, they will not approve the underwriting.
It’s surprising that your wife got declined for being 10 lbs under weight. If that was truly the only problem, I’d be able to get that approved through just about anybody. Which company did you use?
Financial planner here. Deflation is bad for “everybody” that wants to talk to you about it. It’s bad for financial planners because it makes the stock market go down, so we make less money. It’s bad for politicians because everybody that votes seems to think the economy consists of however high the Dow Jones gets. It’s bad for companies because it’ll cut into their profits. The more these entities can convince you that deflation is bad, the more likely people are to campaign against it.
The real truth of it is that deflation is good for PEOPLE. People are not the economy. The concern I have is that during a deflationary period companies tend to do more layoffs and cut corners on quality control. As long as income & unemployment stay the same then deflation would be a very welcome reprieve from these last couple of years.
This is why the union strikes are so important right now. If people see that the current union strikes work, then they’re far more likely to unionize when companies start to do layoffs. Really the only way for companies to protect themselves from deflation is to screw over the workers, and unions stand in direct opposition to that move.
Corporate person only when convenient.
DOJ wants people to realize just how large Google is. Google doesn’t want people to realize how big they are.
Typically the limit is 2 years.
Wouldn’t affect the payout, but it would increase your premium.
Typically no. Life insurance companies don’t like anything regarding mental illnesses. Largely because it’s under researched, so they just say “no thanks.”
Come on in! There’s cookies.
Reddit? No. I was thinking moreso Meta. They have the deeper pockets and a proven track record of breaking privacy laws to their own benefit.
My tin foil hat is telling me it’s one of the other social media companies funding a hacking group to do it. They stand to have the most to lose, and they’ve seemingly decided to enjoy changing the narrative regarding multiple topics. Lemmy stands directly against what the bigger social medias stand for.
I have no evidence to back this though. As a business owner I just know that things become very consistent when people are being paid, and very inconsistent when they aren’t. These attacks are seemingly very consistent/organized.
Heh my bad. Thanks
It’s true. All new inventions have a morality issue to them. And those moralities need to be weighed heavily before implementing them.
But it can also be used to guide a secluded operative back to his troop. It can be used to detect road mines that otherwise would have exploded.
New technology is just a tool. It’s the people choosing how to use it that makes it moral/immoral.
I could see some cool military applications for this too.