Yeah the US doesn't know how to be hardcore about censorship because you can still get any of that on cable or Netflix, or sometimes later at night on broadcast tv. But Canada does. If they don't like something, they ban it outright. And not like a "oh this library doesn't have that, but Amazon does" kind of ban, I mean they just plain make it illegal:
By the way, I see the real reason why you post anonymously now.
Or, you know, you could look at a financial dictionary since we're talking about finance.
Sure, how about this one?
https://www.investopedia.com/t...
Oh looky here, it even agrees with me!
Other types of hedges can be constructed via other means like diversification. An example could be investing in both cyclical and countercyclical stocks.
There may be figurative uses of hedging, just like there are figurative uses of "codified," but it takes some brainpower to work that out and realize it. (For instance, "codified into baseball" doesn't mean codified is some flexible word that means "added," it's a figurative use communicating "becomes part of the (figurative) laws of baseball."
Come on dude, you're not even good at splitting hairs. Look at the definitions even. Look at their example of its use in a sentence: The author tries to codify important ideas about language.. Is there anything you're good at? Certainly not finance, we've established that...
ure enough, the first google hit for "financial dictionary hedging" says "Hedging is the practice of offsetting potential losses from an investment by taking an opposite position in a related asset. Hedging is an effective risk management strategy, although it typically results in a reduction of potential profits." Which is pretty much what I said, and pretty much not at all what you're taking it to mean. Or was I to interpret your statements as "hedging is part of hiring a wide variety of minorities in your business"? Diversification DOES NOT HEDGE.
tsk tsk tsk
Here's another one:
https://www.financestrategists...
Diversification is an essential aspect of hedging, as it helps to spread risk across various asset classes and investments.
Srsly....
Earth to brick wall: does pre-paying your principal change what happens when you stop paying?
Depends. If I made two regular payments right now, then my next due date isn't for another two months. And you don't have to refer to yourself as a brick wall -- leave that to me.
You're not even using the work "risk" appropriately. "Putting even more into equities represents an increased risk profile" should read "putting even more into equities exceeds my risk profile"
Nope, I used it correctly. I maintain different portfolios with different objectives, and each has its own risk profile. In cybersecurity, we commonly compartmentalize risk. For example, there's what's called a high-side network, which has a much higher risk profile than say a public wifi network. We put mitigations in place for each until they collectively fall within what you're talking about, which is called risk appetite.
But again, I could care less, it's clear you will not allow me to educate you.
That would only make me less educated...I mean if I took your word for the meaning of "codify" or "hedging" and began using them your way, then I'd literally have lost some my existing education. I don't want to do that.
Think carefully about this: if it's about risk, why haven't your excess principal payments bought treasuries for the last two years? Because you have a bond ETF? If that's your answer, it at least explains how you arrived at the mistaken impression someone bought your mortgage for anywhere near par.
You just don't get interest rates and present value, at all. The reason your loan was sold? Not because yours "wasn't terribly important to them" but because the buyer let them get as little as 70% of their money out from under a contract that had them getting killed at, coincidentally, 2.75% less than any conceivable risk-free market rate would be.
No to all of that, though I'm not going to pretend to know what they based their purchasing decision on, because I've seen weirder shit than what I speculated earlier, and I'm not even an accountant. But given the way you've just been making guesses this entire time (seriously, you claim to be an expert in finance and you can't even get the terminology right) I think taking your word for it here isn't a good idea.
Speaking of credibility... you seem not to realize
Cheese you're still hell bent on attacking my credibility aren't you? Worse, you even claimed earlier that you didn't engage in ad hominem. Whatever...
they didn't pay anywhere near the current outstanding principal balance for your mortgage.
For that to be true, the previous lender would have to have gone into the refi already knowing that they were going to lose. At this point in time, the rates were already going back up with the general understanding that they'd never be this low again, and they gave me an interest rate that was still below the bond rate. Two months later they sell my loan (servicing AND the loan itself) to another company called Mr. Cooper.
Why would Mr. Cooper buy that loan? Well, I noticed a few things about them:
1) The payment portal is very spammy "Oh look you have a bunch of equity you're not using! You should refinance it all at 5% so you can have that cash right now!"
2) I did a bit of research into this company, and it looks like they're trying to pull a Wells-Fargo, only without the whole shitcanning tons of employees for not making their ridiculous numbers.
3) Apparently they have a keen interest in offering mortgages to people with so-so credit and a high interest rate.
All of the above considered, my hunch is they're trying to pull a Wells-Fargo, but in their mind without ending up like Wells-Fargo, or worse, to quote an annoying politician, "Fannie and Fweddy". So they're going around buying up a lot of mortgages, and I think they want to be diversified within the mortgage market itself. Mine would be useful as a data point within that low reward, even lower risk category, in their disclosure statements in order to give their investors the warm and fuzzies. Or something to that effect. I've seen bigger companies do dumber things, but from a perspective of hedging, i.e. reducing risk, it makes sense at the very least for giving the appearance of it. After all, a lot of financial types generally just get hung up on one thing, (kind of like what you've done a few times, so maybe you are a financier after all...) and strangely they don't seem to question it very much. Exactly how Wells-Fargo became a Wall Street darling just for having a high number of accounts even though there was no real revenue being driven from them and they had to break many laws just for the sake of claiming that they had it. Strangely, Wall Street didn't notice until that stupid number had nowhere else to grow and it blew up.
Speak of which, one thing I did get from accounting was how to find red flags. Our class had this project to study the 10K of a company called Gerber (not the baby food) in the sign business. All of the other students in the class gave them a favorable review, except me. The problem my very novice mind noticed was that they kept shuffling their credit around from lender to lender for years, which looked to me like they were just pretending to pay off their loans in such a way that the lenders wouldn't ding their rating. That can be used to show good revenue numbers to somebody just skimming over it, with debits and interest expenses lined separately. As I said, I was the only one who said they were a bad investment. Two years later I looked them up, and sure as shit their stock had tanked.
I feel similar bad mojo from people who invest student loan money into the stock market.
The lender that previously had my loan, by the way, is a loan servicer that mostly specializes in Fannie Mae owned VA and FHA loans, and all that goes with them. Although I'm eligible for a VA loan (it wouldn't do me any favors at the time,) mine is neither of those, and I'm betting they want to keep those as part of their overall strategy, but mine wasn't terribly important to them.
Yes, you are confusing them. To be hedged is to take a non-independent position to lower the risk of a first position. You don't hedge your bets at the track by buying a CD. You've made a bet, and you've bought a CD: you've diversified. Yes, what you're doing reduces your liability and "earns" you the interest savings, but you have no corresponding investment in the contrary. You are fufilling the terms of the contract, you are not adopting any kind of position that carries a directly related risk that will pay you if you don't.
Definitely not. Consult your trusty dictionary:
https://www.merriam-webster.co...
Diversification is typically a form of hedging, but not necessarily -- in fact it can even do the opposite. Say I had everything in an S&P 500 ETF in the hope that it grows over 10 years, but suddenly I decided to push 25% of it into an aggressive large growth fund. While that is diversification, it is not hedging, in fact it is the opposite because it only increases the risk profile by not only adding to capital investments, but skewing towards more risky ones. For a really simple example of hedging equity risk, suppose I did 25% S&P 500 ETF, 25% bond ETF, 25% international mixed cap blend ETF, and 25% income (dividend, mind you) ETF. That's classic hedging by diversifying.
In my case it's basically a choice of putting more money into my mortgage, or putting more into equities. Diversifying would be adding yet a third investment. Putting even more into equities represents an increased risk profile, exactly the opposite of hedging considering my equity investments are already greatly exceeding what I've already paid into the loan.
But you know what? Even if we took your definition, I'd still be correct, as the tradeoff I'd be making under your reasoning is two different means of securing retirement.
And it's not any payment at any time throughout the life of the loan. How do I know? Because that would make it a non-conforming mortgage, and your rate belies that. You will have a payment due every month until your balance is zero. That's what your mortgage says, and how I know you're only actually addressing the risk that you fail to make your final payment, which has of course moved forward in time as you've continued to pre-pay.
Umm...soo...if I were to stop making my payments right now, what do you think happens?
Are you really such a turkey you think I was suggesting that you find opportunities to make less than 2.75%?
Well I did have to explain to you the difference between hedging and diversifying just now...
Treasuries will indeed return more, so to some extent I wonder what your possible justification could be to do worse. Not the risk (if US Treasuries), not the liquidity, and not because you anticipate being unable to make an intervening payment in the future. What could it possibly be if not ill-consideration or debt aversion?
Well this goes back into that whole diversification vs hedging thing. Given your statements so far, particularly with your suggestion of using a student loan to invest into the stock market, I think you really don't understand why people commonly do a split blend (e.g. 80/20, 60/40, etc) of bonds and stocks in their portfolio or why that might even be a good idea.
>"All I got from that is Plato was such a prick that he needed a slave to play him music."
Then you missed the point, completely. I came to look at comments only just to validate what I was *sure* to be the case- that the first comments would be about slavery. So predictable.
Slavery was common across essentially all cultures and all areas. Most probably every one of us had many members being slaves in our family trees.
>"In a historical context, were I the slave girl, I would have punch the guy right in the face."
You have absolutely no idea what you would have done in "historical context." All you can do is try to do is to constrain your CURRENT moral context/experience and examine the entire societal conditions at the time.
Would I rather have lived back then? Hell no. We have so much to be thankful for now. And we should be amazed we even survived, much less prospered, despite the unbelievable challenges and conditions our ancestors had to endure.
You can talk about assassinating the president all you want. For example, from right here on the moon I have a perfectly lined shot that will hit both Trump and Biden in their right eyes with just one bullet and I'm about to pull the trigger. You only get into trouble if you're making a credible threat, just as you would for any other person really, though a credible threat against the president does carry a higher penalty. To be clear, there really is no country that is as liberal on speech as the US. Hell, just over the northern border, simply using the wrong pronoun can and has resulted in criminal prosecution. Some asshole wildling right here on slashdot used to always brag about having some lady prosecuted over it and then posting proof of it, followed by repeating many times "I'm a half-blind grandmother who has been raped."
You're confusing hedging with diversification.
Definitely not.
I understand you may think that every time you pre-pay some principal, you're hedging against the risk that you are unable to make the final payment whenever it is due. Not only are you mispricing that risk (you will never, ever be foreclosed upon for failure to make your final payment;
It's *any* payment at *any* time throughout the life of the loan.
it is simply too easy and cheap to await an attempted transfer of the property, which will be impossible without making the mortgagor whole)
You're ignoring a lot here. First, if you end up in a situation where you have to sell quickly, you're looking at giving up a lot of equity, if not ending up underwater outright, because you're basically forced to give favorable terms to whoever the borrower is. Second, I don't know if you've ever paid cash for a house before (I have) it makes the buying process so much easier and so much less expensive. Not only that, but because you don't have to deal with a lot of the red tape, you're in a position where you can easily win favorable terms.
but your "hedge" would be much more effective as, say, a purchase of Treasuries instead.
For the first several years of the loan that was, objectively speaking, a terrible idea. The bond rate was even lower than my mortgage, and then good luck trying to sell those after the rates went up if the government doesn't buy them back. It was only later last year where that kind of made sense. Even then, I'm more likely to sell it within the next 10 years than keep it for the full duration of the loan. I don't plan to, but you never know. And in that situation, I'd be in a position to net far more equity than treasuries would.
By the way, did I mention that my loan was just purchased by another company a few months ago? Obviously some investor(s) value that 2.75% than they do bonds or stocks.
He died for the sins of the future Kennedys?
>"Snap or Flatpak , they are all the same buggy"
It isn't just buggy, they are HUGE and COMPLICATED. Some of them even have their own dependency hells, and updates are much slower and riskier. And due to those complication, it makes customizing and maintaining stuff a lot more of a pain.
No distro should be dependent on containers for anything. It is a nice option to have if you need something unusual or you are running an older distro and need a newer package. But forcing them is really awful.
>"I kind of wish Mandrake was still around, Mageia is a good tribute"
I couldn't agree more. I used Mandrake for many years, then Mandriva, then Mageia. Best KDE distros ever. Well-configured, pretty, great management tools. But I left Mageia for Mint on my home systems because development continued to slow and mindshare had shrunk enough that it was too painful to get things I needed when it wasn't in their repos.
As for desktop, when I left Mageia for Mint, I decided to force myself to try Cinnamon. I thought for sure I would end up installing KDE/Plasma a few days or weeks later. Nope, it is actually good enough for what I need. I was surprised.
>"If Ubuntu shut down, there'd be no Mint."
Wrong
https://linuxmint.com/download...
>"if Debian shut down there'd be no Ubuntu."
If Debian shut down, a crap-load of distros would disappear.
https://wiki.debian.org/Deriva...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I, too, am also using Alma. Seems we are much alike.
But I think Redhat is going to continue to get more aggressive. Plus there are fewer and fewer supported packages. One of my main uses is an application server (yes, for actual thin clients) and that can be difficult at time with *EL, since it is much harder to find desktop apps. Sometimes I steal from [old] Fedora. Sometimes I compile myself. The destruction of X is particularly threatening and annoying.
About the only downside seems like weight: at 16.9Wh/kg their 1.2kW modules weigh 75kg. Will be interesting to watch.
Yeah, Na-ion is not for cars.
First, what little time we get for vacation (the only time most of us would go the distances where we'd need to charge mid-trip), those charge times are eating into our vacation time. We want to spend that time at our destination, not sitting around waiting hours for a charge.
I vacation around the US in an EV all the time, and it's really not an issue. Not unless your vacation travel is of the "pee-in-a-bottle-no-stopping" sort. If you aren't hardcore about minimizing travel time, making stops for decent meals, and stops for bathroom breaks and leg stretching, you'll find that you spend little if any time waiting for the car to charge. What you do is drive for 2-3 hours, then stop for 15 minutes for bathroom (and charging), then drive for 2-3 hours, then stop for an hour for lunch (and charging), then drive for 2-3 hours, then stop for 15 minutes for bathroom (and charging), then drive for 2-3 hours, then stop for an hour for dinner (and charging), then drive for 2-3 hours, then stop for the night (and charging).
Basically, you just make sure that whenever you stop for biological needs, you do in a place you can plug in. This is quite easy to do.
You do want to pick hotels with chargers to overnight. If you don't, then you'll probably have to 30-45 minutes in the morning to charge (during breakfast?).
I've done several thousand miles of road trips with an EV in the western US, where distances are long and cities are far apart. It works fine.
You can go 200 miles sometimes without seeing a gas station, let alone any kind of EV charger setup.
You actually can't in the US, not on the interstates, anyway. Tesla has the US interstates covered, with chargers every ~75 miles. Sometimes this means there's a Supercharger out in the middle of the desert, sure. There's always a gas station/convenience store there, too. Also, you don't actually have to think about when/where you're going to charge. The car's navigation system tells you where you need to stop and for how long.
If you get off the Interstates, you can find larger distances between L3 chargers. In practice I've never found it to be a problem, though.
That's a generalisation - some have transmissions.
What EV has a transmission? They have a reducing gear, but AFAIK, that's it.
"Ninety percent of baseball is half mental." -- Yogi Berra
