tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post700777021806805062..comments2023-10-27T20:27:57.900-04:00Comments on Kid Dynamite's World: AIG, Letting Houses Burn, Food Stamps and Soda, TunnelsKid Dynamitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17475987512856310577noreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-15702358879068840222010-10-12T20:08:31.020-04:002010-10-12T20:08:31.020-04:00Kid:
Title insurance is tricky in that it does no...Kid:<br /><br />Title insurance is tricky in that it does not usually cover some title defects people *assume* it should. One of the nastiest is so-called adverse possession / squatters rights. <br /><br />E.g. typical exclusion:<br />"Easements or claims of easements not shown by the public records, boundary-line disputes, overlaps, encroachments, title to filled lands (if any) and any matters not of record which would be disclosed by an accurate survey and inspection of the premises"vjknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-44749637300120253532010-10-11T17:59:13.550-04:002010-10-11T17:59:13.550-04:00yes - i am fully aware that I didn't have to....yes - i am fully aware that I didn't have to... but i didn't want to be penny wise and pound foolish... which brings us right back to the $75 fee in this post which the homeowner didn't pay... full circle.Kid Dynamitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17475987512856310577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-60161540539620521252010-10-11T17:06:32.108-04:002010-10-11T17:06:32.108-04:00KD wrote: "I've never felt like "the...KD wrote: "I've never felt like "the system" made me buy something I didn't want to buy in my life - until Title Insurance"<br /><br />You didn't have to! A lender might require a policy to protect their lien position, but that's the free market talking and you're welcome to find another lender that doesn't require it, or pay cash yourself.<br /><br />Title insurance is voluntary, after all.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05037715549911352465noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-91836096456610652382010-10-11T16:42:13.157-04:002010-10-11T16:42:13.157-04:00Steve - "One could argue the same about stock...Steve - "One could argue the same about stock brokers in 1999 or 2006" - yes - EXACTLY my point...<br /><br />I don't know - this was the first house I've bought, and the title insurance company (who was a big company, I checked them out) was the one that did the closing also. <br /><br />As you know, I'm a big believer in personal responsibility, and i've never felt like "the system" made me buy something I didn't want to buy in my life - until Title Insurance. But who knows - maybe someday we'll sit down and have a beer and I can thoroughly grill you on your business.Kid Dynamitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17475987512856310577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-6479011958231105772010-10-11T16:25:11.415-04:002010-10-11T16:25:11.415-04:00"How often does your company actually pay out..."How often does your company actually pay out on title claims?"<br /><br />The value of obtaining title insurance is not simply, or even mostly, about the tail-risk coverage. Title insurance is much different than P&C, life or health insurance you're used to, in that the source of underwriting risk is historical and theoretically knowable, as opposed to most insurance where risk is due to some unknown, future event. Title insurance is more like a guarantee, or an indemnity.<br /><br />The goal of the title underwriting process is to identify and eliminate all title problems before the real estate transaction is closed and the title policy is issued. It would be optimum for everyone involved to have no title claims, because that means all of the title problems were properly cleared. That title-cleansing process is valuable to owners and lien-holders (lenders), and is an important part of the proper functioning of the real-estate markets - as we are seeing right now with the problems with lenders in foreclosures.<br /><br />Not all problems are caught, of course, and the title industry does pay claims. But you shouldn't focus on Loss Ratios, because a great deal of cost and effort is incurred to AVOID (identify & fix) the presence of title problems that might give rise to future claims. Most of the title premium pays for pre-closing work done to make sure there aren't any title problems remaining, with some reserved to make sure that any problems that do crop up are able to be fixed.<br /><br />And yes, doing THAT correctly takes experience & skill, and the search/abstract/underwriting process itself takes a large amount of capital investment in technology systems & processes. Quick - how do you find out if your house in NH has a lien? The county recorders office? What about city tax liens, or state child support garnishments that attach to property, or a contractor's statutory mechanic lien that isn't yet on record? Should a purchaser care about a court judgment verdict several counties over? Federal, state or municipal easements or development restrictions that encumber property?<br /><br />How do you find all that out? Non-governmental, private title plants that have been developed at great private cost over the past 100 years. That's what title premiums pay for.<br /><br />---<br /><br />"...I was under the impression, no offense, that title insurance was one of those bubble industries...like being a realtor during the bubble...I had the impression that "title insurance" was a job where you took a day or week long class, and then rode the bubble..."<br /><br />One could argue the same about stock brokers in 1999 or 2006, without questioning the underlying concept or validity of a equity share or debenture.<br /><br />A lot of what you're talking about are local escrow & settlement companies, which provide many closing services that are not title insurance. When you sit at a table buying or selling a house, signing contracts & deeds, signing HUD-1 settlement/closing statements, and giving/receiving large amounts of money - those are real-estate escrow/settlement services. Those businesses popped up left & right during the boom. Now, some of those entities might also have had an agreement with a title underwriter that allowed them to issue title policies along with their closing of escrow on the transaction, but the title work was done under the guidelines of the title underwriter and often using underwriter search & abstracting services. Confusing, I know.<br /><br />Your concerns could have applied to some real-estate settlement AGENTS who issued title policies during 2004-2007, but certainly not to the title insurance underwriters or the title insurance product. My company, for instance, has around $5 billion in cash+investments, and $2.4 billion in loss reserves, and portions of my company have been around for 100+ years.<br /><br />---<br /><br />KD - great blog & comments section. Disagree with you on HFT (at least how it appears to the masses), and now turnabout is fair play :)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05037715549911352465noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-19592626196161913502010-10-11T14:03:08.062-04:002010-10-11T14:03:08.062-04:00RFD:
"An opt out system and a sensible polic...RFD:<br /><br />"An opt out system and a sensible policy on a penalty rate eliminate the problem. "<br /><br />I agree completely.Kid Dynamitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17475987512856310577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-75359535818408351622010-10-11T14:00:55.815-04:002010-10-11T14:00:55.815-04:00Steve, as an insider, let me ask you this question...Steve, as an insider, let me ask you this question. You wrote:<br /><br />"In short, a title policy means "we did a search, abstracted all of the various sources of relevant information, interpreted what all of that means, and are now comfortable enough to guarantee your title and/or lien priority""<br /><br />Are the people in your business largely really good at this? By that I mean, are they really doing analysis? Or are they just putting a stamp of approval on it? Do you find problems often?<br /><br />I'm not saying that I'd be comfortable interpreting my own title search, only that I was under the impression, no offense, that title insurance was one of those bubble industries that any mook off the street could go into - like being a realtor during the bubble. Again, I don't mean to offend at all, and I hope you'll correct me if I'm wrong, but I had the impression that "title insurance" was a job where you took a day or week long class, and then rode the bubble... <br /><br />I'm sure there are lots of really good title insurers out there too, like you.. When I bought title insurance, I asked the woman more about the finances of the company - I can't evaluate her ability, I need to evaluate the company's financial ability.<br /><br />I asked her what % of title policies they have had claims on, by the way, and she was shocked at the question - I was clearly the first person to ever ask it. she never got back to me with an answer. <br /><br />Steve - where are you located (what market?) and how often does your company actually pay out on title claims?Kid Dynamitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17475987512856310577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-61471709473225845302010-10-11T13:26:39.103-04:002010-10-11T13:26:39.103-04:00If we are willing to agree it is a bad system, sho...If we are willing to agree it is a bad system, should we even be worrying about moral hazard? Change the system. An opt out system and a sensible policy on a penalty rate eliminate the problem. <br /><br />Here is another source mentioning the pets and stating they could have been saved. <br /><br />http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/04/firefighters-watch-as-hom_n_750272.htmlRFDnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-27737828165712345702010-10-11T12:57:03.483-04:002010-10-11T12:57:03.483-04:00KD: "not everyone takes out a mortgage."...KD: "not everyone takes out a mortgage."<br /><br />True, maybe 15% don't (not including recently-increased hard-money purchases by investors in Miami, Maricopa, et al), but in my opinion, that's even MORE reason to be worried about integrity of title, and be willing to pay to guarantee it.<br /><br />(nothing to do with my employer - I'm not on the operational side)<br /><br />If that is my actual $300k leaving my bank account, and not just my signature on a promise to pay a big bank involved in the transaction, then I damn sure want to know that I am getting what I think I am buying - clear title to an unencumbered house that is now mine.<br /><br />That's not even talking about identity theft by the seller, latent claims by family members or heirs - how do you know the person singing over a deed in exchange for your $500k wire is the actual person on the deed? Think you're still gonna own that house when the real owner gets back from Europe?<br /><br />I wouldn't buy a large diamond without paying for a GIA certification, I wouldn't buy a car without a demonstrably clean correct title, and I wouldn't buy a house without a title guaranteed by deep pockets.<br /><br />I am biased due to my career, but there is too much fraud in the world for me to be assuming that risk in the largest financial transaction of my life. Know your competencies, and outsource the rest at a fair price, particularly catastrophic risks.<br /><br />But I'm also somewhat risk averse, so take that into account.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05037715549911352465noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-69980697912414716552010-10-11T10:11:44.230-04:002010-10-11T10:11:44.230-04:00Steve:
"and you couldn't advise that, be...Steve:<br /><br />"and you couldn't advise that, because no lender will loan you money without one. "<br /><br />not everyone takes out a mortgage.Kid Dynamitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17475987512856310577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-84865187824718899272010-10-11T09:42:36.860-04:002010-10-11T09:42:36.860-04:00"since you pay them to do a title search, you..."since you pay them to do a title search, you shouldn't also have to pay for title insurance."<br /><br />A search is not enough to make a policy committment - it is a mechanical search ("here's all the relevant documents - have fun interpreting that on your own"). Then there is abstracting & underwriting work beyond the search before you get to guarantee (which is really what a title policy is).<br /><br />In short, a title policy means "we did a search, abstracted all of the various sources of relevant information, interpreted what all of that means, and are now comfortable enough to guarantee your title and/or lien priority"<br /><br />You can buy a search-only packet in most areas, but that charge only covers the cost of doing the search, not the time incurred to interpret the results and guarantee the resulting opinion. If you have confidence in your dirt-law knowledge of easement conflicts and lien priority, then buy a search packet, come to a conclusion and insure yourself.<br /><br />"I still wouldn't advise anyone to NOT take it... " and you couldn't advise that, because no lender will loan you money without one. <br /><br />(disclosure-I work for a large title company/underwriter)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05037715549911352465noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-7381566972024132632010-10-10T23:11:45.323-04:002010-10-10T23:11:45.323-04:00RFD -
thanks - I don't want to argue the fact...RFD - <br />thanks - I don't want to argue the facts here, but I'm somewhat suspicious of that thing about the pets. I haven't read that anywhere else, and I"m surprised the wife in the video didn't mention her pets when she was talking about possessions she lost.<br /><br />I thought that the FD had said that they would intervene if there were lives at risk (pets too).<br /><br />I agree with you that this is a bad system. I"m somewhat surprised that the homeowner doesn't really blame the FD at all - he says they were just "following orders"... kinda like the Code Red in A Few Good Men...Kid Dynamitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17475987512856310577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-35717938448637816602010-10-10T22:17:48.906-04:002010-10-10T22:17:48.906-04:00I think it's really hard to say he gambled and...I think it's really hard to say he gambled and lost given they paid the fee in previous two years. This is a seems more like a bad system and poor judgement on the part of the fire chief/mayor. The homeowner offered to pay a penalty rate and they refused. <br /><br />Read more: Brian Dickerson: No mercy in Tennessee | freep.com | Detroit Free Press http://www.freep.com/article/20101010/COL04/10100450/No-mercy-in-Tennessee#ixzz120iZRd00<br /><br />This article also notes it took 2 hours for the fire to spread from the trash barrel to the structure which leads me to conclude that the firefighters would not have been in a high risk situation. <br /><br />I'm not sure I buy your the lack of moral hazard makes the neighbors better off. If it is anything like the small town where I grew up neighbors are already raising money for these people. <br /><br />Here is a source on the pets.<br /><br />http://www.examiner.com/political-buzz-in-national/animal-welfare-group-organizing-protest-over-tennessee-house-fire-controversyRFDnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-74162459225024016962010-10-10T15:18:39.802-04:002010-10-10T15:18:39.802-04:00RFD - I mentioned the penalty rate - I agree.
ple...RFD - I mentioned the penalty rate - I agree.<br /><br />please cite your source for saying that the family's dogs died - and if the firefighters could have saved the dogs. you know I'm a dog lover.<br /><br />here's the relevant quote for me: ""I thought they'd come out and put it out, even if you hadn't paid your $75, but I was wrong," said Gene Cranick."<br /><br />http://www.wpsdlocal6.com/news/local/Firefighters-watch-as-home-burns-to-the-ground-104052668.html<br /><br />he gambled that he wouldn't need insurance, and he lost. <br /><br />by the way, not everyone is worse off. All of the other homeowners are better off for the LACK of moral hazard here, and the firefighters may or may not be better off as they didn't have to risk life and limb. The homeowner is clearly worse off, because he made a horrible decision to not buy insurance.Kid Dynamitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17475987512856310577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-59189987727583810482010-10-10T14:56:54.695-04:002010-10-10T14:56:54.695-04:00Re: Fire
The firefighters letting a house burn do...Re: Fire<br /><br />The firefighters letting a house burn down is absurd. Granting that you can't purchase insurance after your house is on fire, they should put the fire out for some price. If you compare it to a medical setting, they are both the insurance company and the hospital. The firefighters were on scene because the neighbors were insured and the homeowner offered to pay. Everyone is worse off because of this stupidity, the fire company could have gotten paid and the family would still have a house, not to mention their dogs who were killed in the fire.RFDnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-90514991135595281892010-10-10T07:49:13.242-04:002010-10-10T07:49:13.242-04:00"Trying to prevent certain foods to be bought..."Trying to prevent certain foods to be bought may make the policy makers and taxpayers feel good, but does it even has a chance to WORK?"<br /><br />that's nonsense. of course it can work. anything they want to work can work. fyi, i think the proposal was for a limit to calories per ounce for soft drinks.<br /><br />We're having a similar "that will never work" debate in my town, where we're moving our trash funding to "pay by bag" - people have to buy special bags to dispose of their trash in, the proceeds of which are used to fund the transfer station costs. The point is to remove it from the tax base and fund it on a per-use basis instead, but the morons in my town spout crap like "taxes never go down!" ummm - well, if you don't do this program, taxes will not go down. 100% guaranteed. if you DO do it, taxes will go down if the numbers work out right...Kid Dynamitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17475987512856310577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-34885674862820225162010-10-10T01:50:40.099-04:002010-10-10T01:50:40.099-04:00"just because Obesity isn't the biggest i..."just because Obesity isn't the biggest item driving cost doesn't mean we shouldn't try to prevent subsidizing it with entitlement programs."<br /><br />Grrr! I didn't say that. I'm just saying that attempts to do so are pretty much futile. Trying to prevent certain foods to be bought may make the policy makers and taxpayers feel good, but does it even has a chance to WORK?<br /><br />As a simple example, (among many other troubles) what d'ya think food makers would do if this measure come to pass? Simple! They would require knowing all the precise rules and then lobby, negotiate and contest them until surrender:<br /><br />Food Manufacturers: "So, what's prohibited now?"<br /><br />Regulators: "Sodas!"<br /><br />Food Manufacturers: Sodas? Define sodas. Where are your criteria that define a soda?<br /><br />Regulators: We use the USDA criteria.<br /><br />Food Manufacturers: Really? I see here that HFCS (High Fructose Corn Syrup) is a no-no but it says nada about cane sugar. Hmmm!<br /><br />Regulators: Wait a minute here! This is still sugar, ergo calories and that's a no no.<br /><br />Food Manufacturers: What? You wait a minute now! Criteria sez USDA definition of soda, nothing more. You cannot just make stuff up like that on the fly.<br /><br />Regulators: Just watch me! I am not letting a loophole getting in the way of fighting obesity.<br /><br />Food Manufacturers: Cane sugar is responsible for obesity now? The mere ingestion of cane sugar in a drink is obesogene? No shit Sherlock: got some studies to back this up? Think you could win that in a court of law, Buster?<br /><br />I’ll spare you the rest of the saga that would include call to lawmakers, PR blitz about freedom of choice and the creeping specter of the big bad go-vermin mingling in the private lives of citizens and blah blah blah!<br /><br />As I said before, the soda tax in Philly was tried; good intention, terrible idea that got quickly wrestled to the ground, and died.Cetamuahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10003386989005291824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-41313517181909780322010-10-09T22:23:04.740-04:002010-10-09T22:23:04.740-04:00Cetamua - to me you're saying "the engine...Cetamua - to me you're saying "the engine is the biggest expense in the car, so you don't need to worry about the tires"... to use a stupid analogy...<br /><br />just because Obesity isn't the biggest item driving cost doesn't mean we shouldn't try to prevent subsidizing it with entitlement programs.<br /><br />If you want to give me a good reason why we should subsidize the ability of food stamp recipients to make themselves fat and sick, I'm still listening. But you haven't provided one, and I doubt you can.Kid Dynamitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17475987512856310577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-68729751368037937602010-10-09T22:18:23.545-04:002010-10-09T22:18:23.545-04:00KD:
"Other costs are growing faster than obe...KD:<br /><br />"Other costs are growing faster than obesity's costs. Great. that's yet ANOTHER issue."<br /><br />That's exactly the point. Obesity, contrary to what is usually thought, isn't a simple problem to control. There are other costs which causes should be tackled first and foremost.<br /><br />Mayor Bloomberg is getting into a potentially huge political, social and public health mess for a very uncertain return. I ought to know: it's been tried in Philly with the soda tax and it was an unmitigated disaster, even if the idea was sound.<br /><br />There are plenty of other targets that would provide much more bang fro the buck instead of mucho fang for the f...Cetamuahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10003386989005291824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-35038916047598853622010-10-09T12:14:33.892-04:002010-10-09T12:14:33.892-04:00I find it rather impractical to discriminate again...I find it rather impractical to discriminate against individual food items.<br /><br />If you really want to avoid obesity you should limit the caloric intake to something like 0.3 GJ per month, e.g. make SNAP use a dual currency, one limit in dollars and one in kcal. Then people could buy as much soda as they want, but never enough to get fat?<br /><br />With this in place the only other thing you have to do is prevent SNAP recipients from making any extra money and they will slim to perfect size! A Gulag might do the trick. It seems such a program should be in the hand of the federal government, as this is where SNAP came from. The only remaining question is if one should have a single location somewhere in Nevada or have the Gulags be decentralized (one in most counties). How many people are we talking about here? And I presume none of them votes, right?IFnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-78804869958263717032010-10-09T08:34:23.785-04:002010-10-09T08:34:23.785-04:00Nope, Cetamua - that's definitely not "A&...Nope, Cetamua - that's definitely not "A" game material. <br /><br />Talking about the problems with our health care system OUTSIDE of obesity doesn't mean obesity shouldn't be prevented. There is also a major flaw in the article's claim that even if we kept Obesity from growing, costs would still increase 65% because of a continuation of the other trends in costs... you need to hold other costs constant if you want to find out the impact of obesity!!! Other costs are growing faster than obesity's costs. Great. that's yet ANOTHER issue.<br /><br />from your own link:<br /><br />"“From 1987 to 2007 the share of adult Americans who are obese has more than doubled –from 13 percent to 28 percent.” Over the same span, the amount that we spend on health problems associated with obesity has soared: “health care spending per adult grew substantially in all weight categories between 1987 and 2007,” the researchers write, but “the rate of growth was much more rapid among the obese. Spending per capita for obese adults exceeded spending for adults of normal weight by about 8 percent in 1987 and by about 38% in 2007.”"<br /><br />so, Obesity rates doubled, and spending on obese patients increased at 4 1/2 times the rate as spending on others. <br /><br />treating obesity costs a lot of money. it's a fact. just because other stuff costs money too doesn't mean we shouldn't battle obesity.Kid Dynamitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17475987512856310577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-17674573864901867622010-10-08T22:35:57.971-04:002010-10-08T22:35:57.971-04:00"Again, if you're going to tell me that M..."Again, if you're going to tell me that Mayor Bloomberg is out of line here, you better bring a damn good argument with you."<br /><br />How about this damn good argument?<br /><br />http://www.healthbeatblog.com/2010/09/no-obesity-is-not-driving-health-care-inflation-part-1.htmlCetamuahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10003386989005291824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-42856518672523005832010-10-08T21:23:32.907-04:002010-10-08T21:23:32.907-04:00Bernard - I thought of what I'm trying to say,...Bernard - I thought of what I'm trying to say, which is this: if you want The State (and by that, I mean, the Gov't) to take care of you, you have to take care of yourself too. it all stems from that.<br /><br />so maybe Bloomberg is trying to avoid being part of the problem, the "problem" being that states take the Federal money and subsidize unhealthy behavior for it. Good for him, again.<br /><br />I'm not sure if your point is that NY doing the "right" thing doesn't really help them- because they still have to pay for everyone else doing the wrong thing? ok - sure. one step at a time. when everyone does the right thing, everyone wins... we'll take it one state at a time!Kid Dynamitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17475987512856310577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-58347659859296735122010-10-08T20:37:43.300-04:002010-10-08T20:37:43.300-04:00The trouble is you don't have a choice. If a ...The trouble is you don't have a choice. If a state want highway money, it has to meet the fed requirements. If Montana decides the fed requirements don't make sense for Montana, they don't get a discount on their fed taxes. If the states want education money they have to meet the NCLB requirements, but they again can't get a discount on their fed taxes, without that the states have a harder time raising the state taxes to pay for better education. <br /><br />I'm actually ok with states setting requirements on money they hand out because if you don't like the requirements you can move and your votes for state government have more influence. <br /><br />You can't get away from the fed though.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04940722690936818415noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14963913.post-80036945186297279442010-10-08T19:35:37.269-04:002010-10-08T19:35:37.269-04:00Bernard - interesting point about how it's not...Bernard - interesting point about how it's not NYC's money. I think one possible counter to that is that misuse of the food stamp money causes NYC to have to spend money on other stuff (treating diabetes, obesity, etc), but I see your point.<br /><br />I have no problem at all with requirements for money recipients. As to your last example, I've previously suggested that I'd be in favor of more people receiving gov't healthcare if they weren't allowed to eat at McDonalds... it's kinda like how I'd be in favor of more people receiving mortgage assistance if they weren't allowed to blow their money on flat screen TVs and Iphones...<br /><br />draconian? Maybe - all i'm saying is that if you're going to be on the Public dollar, you can't blow yourself up too so that the public has to pay more. It's kinda a lengthy topic for a comments section, but anyway...<br /><br />if the gov't decides to take all of everyone's money, and decide how it gets spent, well, that's probably not the kind of country I'm going to live in (there are countries like that which exist - kinda - right? it's called communism...)Kid Dynamitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17475987512856310577noreply@blogger.com