News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Proof that there's always money from Uncle Sam to help the super rich.
There are plenty of people affected by this fire who are not super rich. Something like 1 in 34 Americans lives in LA County, IIRC, and most of them aren’t super rich. Yes the Palisades area is pretty affluent, but not all of the surrounding areas are. What’s more, the effort to STOP the fire protects everyone.
Besides, most of who we think of as rich in LA is nowhere near the level of the ultra-wealthy whose wealth we should be redistributing. The 400 richest Americans have over $5 trillion in wealth. A-list actors and directors and movie producers are a drop in the bucket in comparison.
The numbers in this are now out of date because it’s from 2021, but it’s still worth looking at.
Oh, I'm not opposed to stopping the fires. the best way way to do that is to tax anyone burning fossil fuels out of existence.
Yeah! Don't hate the people who only have enough wealth to not work for the next several generations! There's even RICHER people out there!
The median home value in the palisades is $3,485,831. That's more than double the median lifetime earnings of an American.
And all of the money they have is still dwarfed in comparison to only 400 people. I'm not saying their wealth isn't extravagant but most actors didn't receive their wealth from exploiting millions of working class people.
Yeah, they only get their wealth at the expense of hundreds of supporting staff who make next to nothing in a predatory industry.
Actors are hella exploited too. Sure, someone who is living in a multi-million dollar home is likely to have "made it" such that they're able to shield themselves from much of the exploitation that most actors face, but actors aren't responsible for the industry being predatory. In many cases, they're the saps that fell for the bait (I say this as someone with a few friends who are actors, who struggle to pay basic bills).
Two co-workers of my other half lost homes, one lost a family member too. They are service workers, I can assure you they are not rich.
Perhaps you prefer everyone gets nothing as long as it prevents the rich from getting anything too? That’s some republican level thinking - y’know, where no poor people get any help because a freeloader or two might get something.
I think the heart of the accusation is "initial" in the headline. We're all seeing a repeat of bank bailouts, ppp loans, etc, where the bucket is going to run out immediately before anybody who actually needs it gets a drop, and everybody else is going to end up footing the bill.
The difference between your service worker friends and their ultra wealthy neighbors is that your friends will likely have their insurance claims denied, delayed and defended. Meanwhile the wealthy neighbors will cash in on their multi-million dollar art insurance on top of the housing insurance, even if they managed to have their servants sneak the art out in their spare bentley.
Then next year when your friends are still scraping by on savings the increase in premiums will come in so they can help pay for the payouts that went the rich.
If they are lucky they'll get 80% of the value of the house paid out and nothing for belongings.
You didn’t answer the premise.
You prefer everyone get nothing in order to stick it to the rich?
Why even have middlemen that earn a profit for shareholders for property insurance?
My problem is with the system, not the little guys.
Is that your answer? So you're saying you do prefer that no one gets any government help as long as it's sticking it to the rich?
That's what you take away from shareholders and property insurance? Those terms don't seem to be government ones at all, whatsoever, today.
Maybe if the system was socialized or nonprofit instead of private it could be better, but people are too selfish/corrupt. The insurance industry profits greatly from the delay, deny, defend method and that's the way it'll stay.
You're going through a lot of effort to dodge a simple question: do you believe that everyone should get nothing as long as it sticks it to the rich?
It should be easy to answer without changing the subject.
No, dumbass.
There, was that so hard?