[DrCaleb]

Some moron paid $100k for a stale Cheezie poof that looks like a dead gorilla.

That will help society immensely!

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/07/harambe- ... 00000.html

Adam Smiths' assumptions that people will trade value for capital, a cheeto for $100k, once again fails.

[BartSimpson]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Some moron paid $100k for a stale Cheezie poof that looks like a dead gorilla.

That will help society immensely!

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/07/harambe- ... 00000.html

Adam Smiths' assumptions that people will trade value for capital, a cheeto for $100k, once again fails.

Diamonds that are used for jewelry are just as practical a purchase as the cheeto.

[DrCaleb]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Some moron paid $100k for a stale Cheezie poof that looks like a dead gorilla.

That will help society immensely!

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/07/harambe- ... 00000.html

Adam Smiths' assumptions that people will trade value for capital, a cheeto for $100k, once again fails.

Diamonds that are used for jewelry are just as practical a purchase as the cheeto.

Diamonds have value that people are willing to trade capital for. Who would the buyer sell a stale cheeto to?

[ShepherdsDog]

$1:

Who would the buyer sell a stale cheeto to?

Someone who bathes in Cheeto dust perhaps.

[BartSimpson]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Diamonds that are used for jewelry are just as practical a purchase as the cheeto.

Diamonds have value that people are willing to trade capital for. Who would the buyer sell a stale cheeto to?

There's obviously a market for this kind of thing yet here you are denying what's right in front of you.

I hate to say my friend, but the last year with Brexit and Trump has taught me that just because something is improbable to my mind does not mean it is impossible or that it does not exist.

If this guy was willing to pay $100,000 for a cheeto then there may yet be someone else out there willing to pay more for it.

A wise man would not rule it out. Underestimating the volatility and unpredictability of our fellow humans is an utterly foolish act in this time.

[Thanos]

Just because the impossible can happen doesn't mean that in the end it'll be good for anyone.

[BartSimpson]

Thanos Thanos:

Just because the impossible can happen doesn't mean that in the end it'll be good for anyone.

Doesn't mean it's bad, either.

On topic and if you haven't already seen it, it really is worth your time.

[DrCaleb]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Diamonds that are used for jewelry are just as practical a purchase as the cheeto.

Diamonds have value that people are willing to trade capital for. Who would the buyer sell a stale cheeto to?

There's obviously a market for this kind of thing yet here you are denying what's right in front of you.

There's no market! It's a market of one, unless you see stale cheezies listed on a mercantile exchange along with pork bellies and Florida oranges.

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

I hate to say my friend, but the last year with Brexit and Trump has taught me that just because something is improbable to my mind does not mean it is impossible or that it does not exist.

If this guy was willing to pay $100,000 for a cheeto then there may yet be someone else out there willing to pay more for it.

A wise man would not rule it out. Underestimating the volatility and unpredictability of our fellow humans is an utterly foolish act in this time.

I don't rule it out, I'm just saying one guy willing to pay that much for a snack item that can be had in bulk for $2 at the corner store is a symptom that Capitalism is terribly broken.

Like this next one:

[DrCaleb]

$1:

Kaléo’s opioid overdose drug went from $690 to $4,500—and senators want answers

Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and thirty of his colleagues sent a letter to Kaléo Pharmaceuticals Wednesday to question the company's price hike of its opioid-overdose-reversing device, Evzio.

As Ars has reported before, Evzio’s price rose dramatically over a short period of time—going from $690 in 2014 to $4,500 currently, according to the letter. Evzio is an easy-to-use auto-injector that delivers a dose of naloxone, a generic drug that blocks and reverses deadly opioid overdoses.

Amid the price increases, the country has been gripped by an epidemic of opioid addiction and overdoses. The CDC now estimates that 91 people die every day from an opioid overdose, and some hard-hit areas have even run out of morgue space.

Policymakers and health officials have been scrambling to get out ahead of the problem. Efforts include urging doctors to reduce opioid prescriptions, working on better addiction treatments and opioid alternatives, and arming everyone from first responders to grocery stores with naloxone. Amid those efforts, “this startling price hike is very concerning,” the senators wrote in their letter (PDF).

The company has argued that the high list price isn’t what most consumers will pay or even see. But the senators expressed worry for those who might fall through the cracks and also for state and local agencies that want to buy the devices in bulk.

The senators requested that the company answer three questions: what is the detailed price structure for Evzio, including production costs, and why has the price increased? How many devices has the company set aside for donation and how is it gauging whether first responders, states, and other public entities have adequate access? And what is the total amount of federal reimbursements Evzio received in the last 12 months? (Related to that question, they also ask: what's the percentage of customers who used federal funds to buy Evzio in that same period?)

https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/02 ... t-answers/

Another broken market. As demand skyrockets, and with many competition, price is supposed to fall, right?

Well, unless it's required to save people's lives. Then we can charge as much as we like!

[Thanos]

If you flatter him, like patting a dog on the head, he'll likely sign off on a free-for-all for you:

http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/this-l ... 1792682668

$1:

One of the many terrifying aspects of having Donald Trump as president is that he, like all children, is very easily persuaded. Single meetings and conversations can shape his entire, pliable worldview. The wolves of corporate America know what easy prey looks like.

An entirely typical thing for Donald Trump to do is: Have only the vaguest sense of what he “believes” in a policy sense, coupled with near-total ignorance of arcane policy details, and then come to a rash conclusion about an extremely important matter not by deep consultation with experts, but by asking himself how much he likes the most recent guy telling him something about it. This is how you get a President of the United States saying, in regards to Israel and Palestine, that “I’m looking at two states and one state, I like the one that both parties like,” for example. So while all presidents hold meetings with CEOs, lobbyists, and other powerful people, such meetings are particularly scary in the case of this president because he is apt to be talked into any fucking thing if it is presented in a way that strokes his own ego sufficiently and adheres to his endlessly manipulable notions of what might make America “great.”

Now, consider the very deepest structural problems that plague our nation. Among them is the outsized power of corporations—their ability to evade and overcome regulations that would benefit the common good by exercising influence in our broken political system. This is the structural problems that brought us hits like “The 2008 Financial Crisis,” and “All Toxic Pollution.” In normal times—even during a Republican administration—the constant tug-of-war between corporations and government regulations would play out in slow motion, susceptible to all of the intricacies of public pressure campaigns and Congressional lobbying and the arcane rules governing rulemaking processes at government agencies. In the past, in other words, even if you knew the Republicans were trying to help the rich and screw the poor, you could see it all coming.

Today, who knows? We are in unpredictable territory. And that is what is so unnerving about Trump’s meeting today with the Business Roundtable, the group that lobbies on behalf of major US corporations. Trump asked the group to tell him what regulations they dislike, and they compiled a letter, and now we must contemplate the possibility that this letter will be used as road map for the administration to pursue the business world’s wishes directly.

Here are just some of the highlights of the Business Roundtable’s list of “Top Federal Regulations of Concern” that they would like to see weakened or done away with entirely:

- EPA rules mandating new coal power plants have carbon capture technology;

- EPA clean water rules;

- Reporting requirements for large employers under the Affordable Care Act;

- The updated overtime rule that would make millions more working Americans eligible for overtime pay;

- Net neutrality;

- Basic corporate governance rules that allow shareholders “with insignificant stakes in public companies [to] make shareholder proposals that pursue social or political agendas unrelated to the interests of the shareholders as a whole”—which is to say, the ability of non-huge investors to participate in the governance of companies;

- Rules requiring major companies to disclose the ratio between the pay of their CEO and median worker pay (“The pay ratio rule, which requires chief executives to certify what is an arbitrary and often meaningless number, provides no material information to shareholders or investors,” asserts the corporate lobbying group, shockingly);

- Requirements that companies disclose their use of conflict minerals.

This is just a taste of the Corporate America Christmas List that has just been handed over to the Trump Administration. Anyone concerned about outsized corporate power may be concerned that the man leading the administration’s interaction with the corporate world is the immediate past president of Goldman Sachs—not exactly the profile of a public-minded regulator. Fortunately, our president is keeping a close eye on these CEOs to make sure that the public interest is first and foremost....

$1:

President Trump joked with manufacturing executives on Thursday during a business roundtable at the White House, goading the CEO of General Electric into telling a story about his success on the golf course... After inviting the group of corporate executives gathered in the State Dining Room to introduce themselves one by one, Trump interrupted Jeffrey Immelt, CEO of GE, to recall a golf outing the two had shared years earlier.

”Jeff actually watched me make a hole in one, can you believe that?” Trump told the table of business leaders. “Should you tell that story?”

Immelt obliged, drawing laughter from the room.

Everything is fine.

[DrCaleb]

$1:

'I will do anything I can to make my goal': TD teller says customers pay price for 'unrealistic' sales targets

Three TD Bank Group employees are speaking out about what they say is "incredible pressure" to squeeze profits from customers by signing them up for products and services they don't need.

The longtime employees say their jobs have become similar to that of the stereotypical used car salesman, as they're pushed to upsell customers to reach rising sales revenue targets.

They say there has always been a sales component to the job, but the demand to meet "unrealistic" quarterly goals has intensified in recent years as profits from low interest rates have dropped and banks became required — after the financial meltdown of 2008 — to keep more capital on hand to protect against a downturn in the market.

"I'm in survival mode now," says a teller who has worked at TD for more than 15 years, "because it's a choice between keeping my job and feeding my family … or doing what's right for the customer."

She and the two managers who contacted Go Public have worked more than 50 years combined at the bank. CBC has agreed to conceal their identities and location because they are worried about being fired.

"When I come into work, I have to put my ethics aside and not do what's right for the customer," says the teller.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-c ... -1.4006743

[raydan]

But the ads say that they do everything for the clients.

[ShepherdsDog]

difference of prepositions, 'for' can be replaced with 'to'.

[DrCaleb]

$1:

Hundreds of current and former TD Bank Group employees wrote to Go Public describing a pressure cooker environment they say is "poisoned," "stress inducing," "insane" and has "zero focus on ethics."

Some employees admitted they broke the law, claiming they were desperate to earn points towards sales goals they have to reach every three months or risk being fired. CBC has agreed to conceal their identities because their confessions could have legal ramifications.

TD insists all its employees are to follow the company's code of ethics, but many employees who contacted Go Public said that's impossible to do given the sales expectations.

"I've increased people's lines of credit by a couple thousand dollars, just to get SR [sales revenue] points," said a teller who worked for several years at a TD branch in Windsor, Ont.

He admits he didn't tell the customers, which is a violation of the federal Bank Act.

. . .

A former TD financial adviser in Calgary says he would downplay the risk of products that gave him a big boost towards his quarterly goal.

"I was forced to lie to customers, just to meet the sales revenue targets," he said.

"I was always asked by my managers to attach unnecessary products or services to the original sale just to increase the sales points — and not care if the customer can afford it or not."

. . .

Democracy Watch founder Duff Conacher says the fact that hundreds of bank employees have written to express concern over their high-pressure sales environment is an indication that Ottawa needs to act.

"We need the federal government to put rules in place and stop being so negligent — allowing the banks to get away with this unethical gouging and unethical sales practices," he said.

'We do it because our jobs are at stake': TD bank employees admit to breaking the law for fear of being fired

[Thanos]

Not sure how to fully understand all of this. Just genuinely grateful to live in a country where the government isn't bought and paid for by the insurance industry. There's a lot of these reports now that the end of Obamacare essentially means a fleecing of the American underclasses in a manner never before seen in US history, with all the benefits flowing upwards to the comfortable and wealthy. Multiple sources are saying that a senior living on $26K per year will be expected to eventually pay $15K PER YEAR for their own insurance.

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/ ... e-cbo-ahca

$1:

The Congressional Budget Office’s analysis of the GOP’s American Health Care Act is one of the most singularly devastating documents I’ve seen in American politics. For a thorough explanation of the findings, read Sarah Kliff’s explainer. But here is the one-sentence summary: Under the GOP’s bill, the more help you need, the less you get.

The AHCA would increase the uninsured population by about 24 million people — which is more people than live in New York state. But the raw numbers obscure the cruelty of the choices. The policy is particularly bad for the old, the sick, and the poor. It is particularly good for the rich, the young, and the healthy.

Here, in short, is what the AHCA does. The bill guts Medicaid, halves the value of Obamacare’s insurance subsidies, and allows insurers to charge older Americans 500 percent more than they charge young Americans.

Then it takes the subsidies that are left and reworks them to be worth less to the poor and the old, takes the insurers that are left and lets them change their plans to cover fewer medical expenses for the sick, and rewrites the tax code to offer hundreds of billions of dollars in tax cuts to the rich. As Dylan Matthews writes, it is an act of class warfare by the rich against the poor.

The result isn’t just 24 million fewer people with insurance: Of those who remain insured, the pool is tilted toward younger, healthier people who need help less, because many of the older, poorer people who need the most help can no longer afford insurance. As German Lopez notes, a 64-year-old making $26,500 would see his premiums rise by 750 percent. 750 percent! And with that 64-year-old gone, premiums are a little bit lower, because the pool is a little bit younger.

It is within this context that it is worth reading Speaker Paul Ryan’s response to the report.

“CBO report confirms it,” he tweeted. “American Health Care Act will lower premiums & improve access to quality, affordable care.”

Let’s break that down. According to the CBO, the lower premiums Ryan celebrates (which are, mind you, only 10 percent lower after 10 years — and that’s after rising initially) are largely the product of driving older people out of the market and letting insurers offer plans that cover fewer medical expenses and require more out-of-pocket spending. This is not “lower premiums” as most Americans understand the term.

But it is Ryan’s last five words that demand the most attention. He says his bill will “improve access to quality, affordable care.” I am trying, and failing, to find a way to read this statement generously.

Ryan is not arguing with the CBO score here. He is not saying the CBO is wrong and more people will be covered under his bill. He is saying the CBO is right, and its analysis proves his bill will improve access to quality, affordable care.

So he is saying that a bill that throws 24 million people off insurance is a bill that improves access to quality, affordable care. I am schooled enough in health policy rhetoric to know that “improves access” is meant to be some kind of dodge — you can have access to affordable health insurance even if you choose not to buy it — but a bill that makes heath insurance too expensive for millions to afford doesn’t improve access under any definition of the word.

Perhaps this is overthinking it. Perhaps Ryan did not know what his bill will do, and is now stuck defending it because it’s his bill, and he sees no other choice. Perhaps he has become the “This is fine” dog, cheerfully explaining away the fire raging around him, a fire he has set.

I don't know any other way to describe something like this as appalling, indecent, cruel, and inhumane. A whopping number of American seniors though voted for Trump and the GOP. Maybe this is what has to happen for them to finally learn their lesson about the movement that they've sold their souls to.

And, yeah, while this is all over the internet and mainstream sites, FOX/Breitbart, and the other fake news bastards aren't touching this issue at all. Go figure.