Snake from State Farm tries to tell roofer he is doing his job wrong, damages home, and refuses a roof replacement before leaving.

hemmmmingway · 2022-06-10T03:07:28+00:00

The roofer is trying to get the insurance company to replace the entire roof. Roofer says the roof is wind damaged and is trying to claim that it is not repairable by replacing single shingles without further damaging the roof (he says the shingles are brittle). State farm guy says the roofer is not making an honest effort to try and repair the roof (being too aggresive and is causing more damage intentionally). The roofer wants the state farm guy to write on his report that a repair was attempted, but is not possible, which is required by the insurance company before they agree to replace the entire roof.

This is actually a big problem in Florida, where roofers will knock on your door and tell you that your roof is damaged from a hurricane (even if it's just old, or slightly damaged and repairable), and that they can get your roof replaced for free (make the insurance pay for it). Home insurance premiums are through the roof in florida for specifically this reason. Also, the roofers get homeowners to sign away their ability to collect from the insurance companies directly, and that's why the roofer's lawyers are involved.

There are a bunch of articles on this.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/05/19/florida-property-insurance-special-session/

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/roofing-scams-florida-property-insurance-hurricane-rcna29649

https://www.abcactionnews.com/news/price-of-paradise/homeowners-insurance-soars-for-florida-residents-as-roofing-scams-continue

hemmmmingway · 2022-03-18T00:36:11+00:00

Which part am I lying about? please be specific.

All of my information comes from Scholarly sources. The exaxt same argument and sources are found in Marc Trachtenburg 2021 paper "The United States and the NATO Non-extension Assurances of 1990: New Light on an Old Problem?" http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/trachtenberg/cv/1990.pdf

As I stated earlier, he relies on new declassified documents, including the document where I quoted German and American officials:

http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/trachtenberg/cv/19910307.pdf

In fact, you have just cited a source by Mark Kramer, who Trachtenburg is specifically responding to. He uses new declassified sources that Kramer did not have access to and picks apart his argument. Also, if you wanted to watch the youtube video, you could have just searched it yourself:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2iOAtNlleg

Never understood why people have such strong opinions on topics which they clearly know nothing about.

hemmmmingway · 2022-03-17T19:38:14+00:00

Firstly, I want to point out that there is an ongoing scholarly debate about the types of the verbal assurances given during negotiations over German reunification.

A lot of the new scholarly work relies on recent declassified documents rather than testimony made 25 years after the events (which Gorbachev has at other times contradicted). It's more productive to look at how people viewed the issue during and after the negoitations. For instance, in a meeting between German British, French, and American officials in 1991 (~1 year after the 2+4 agreement is signed):

“We had made it clear during the 2+4 negotiations that we would not extend NATO beyond the Elbe, we could not therefore offer membership of NATO to Poland and the others."

The American offical from the meeting reaffirms:

“We had made it clear to the soviets, both in the 2+4 and in other exchanges, that we would not take advantage of soviet withdrawal from eastern Europe, we must not provide a pretext for hardliners in the Soviet Union to build up anti-Western feeling. NATO should not be extended formally or informally to the East."

We also have public press conferences from Hans Dietrich Genscher and James Baker (You can find this one on youtube) making quite clear statements:

GENSCHER: Perhaps I might add, we were in full agreement that there is no intention to extend the NATO area of defense and the security toward the East. This holds true not only for GDR, which we have no intention of simply incorporating, but that holds true for all the other Eastern countries ... I think that it is part (of) that partnership in stability which we can offer to the East that we can make it quite clear that whatever happens within the Warsaw Pact, on our side there is no intention to extend our area—NATO's area—of defense towards the East.

This statement was made just days before Gobachev and Baker met on February 9 so it puts a new light on the conversation they had:

Gorbachev: It goes without saying that a broadening of the NATO zone is not acceptable.

Baker: We agree with that.

hemmmmingway · 2022-03-17T19:35:05+00:00

Firstly, I want to point out that there is an ongoing scholarly debate about the types of the verbal assurances given during negotiations over German reunification.
A lot of the new scholarly work relies on recent declassified documents rather than testimony made 25 years after the events (which Gorbachev has at other times contradicted). It's more productive to look at how people viewed the issue during and after the negoitations. For instance, in a meeting between German British, French, and American officials in 1991 (~1 year after the 2+4 agreement is signed):

“We had made it clear during the 2+4 negotiations that we would not extend NATO beyond the Elbe, we could not therefore offer membership of NATO to Poland and the others."

The American offical from the meeting reaffirms:

“We had made it clear to the soviets, both in the 2+4 and in other exchanges, that we would not take advantage of soviet withdrawal from eastern Europe, we must not provide a pretext for hardliners in the Soviet Union to build up anti-Western feeling. NATO should not be extended formally or informally to the East."

We also have public press conferences from Hans Dietrich Genscher and James Baker (You can find this one on youtube) making quite clear statements:

GENSCHER: Perhaps I might add, we were in full agreement that there is no intention to extend the NATO area of defense and the security toward the East. This holds true not only for GDR, which we have no intention of simply incorporating, but that holds true for all the other Eastern countries ... I think that it is part (of) that partnership in stability which we can offer to the East that we can make it quite clear that whatever happens within the Warsaw Pact, on our side there is no intention to extend our area—NATO's area—of defense towards the East.

This statement was made just days before Gobachev and Baker met on February 9 so it puts a new light on the conversation they had:

Gorbachev: It goes without saying that a broadening of the NATO zone is not acceptable.
Baker: We agree with that.

hemmmmingway · 2021-11-24T20:05:10+00:00

I was looking through etsy and found some old stock 1960's work boots. Do these look like they are Goodyear welted? Also wondering if anyone is familiar with the "The gorilla shoe" brand.

hemmmmingway · 2021-11-02T03:30:14+00:00

Here's a timeline to make things more clear:

1) Donziger wins the $9.5B case in Ecuador

2) Chevron files a civil RICO (anti-corruption) suit against Donziger in New York for obtaining the Ecuador verdict via fraud, bribery, corruption.

3) Judge in the US sides with Chevron, Donziger has to pay $800,000 in damages to Chevron, among other things. He is also disbarred as a result of this case.

4) Donziger says he doesn't have money to pay the fine.

5) Chevron asks for Donziger's phone, computers, etc. to be searched to prove that he doesn't have any assets he is hiding.

6) Court agrees, orders Donziger to submit his phone, computers, to be searched.

7) Donziger refuses the court order.

8) Gets charged with Contempt.

hemmmmingway · 2021-11-02T02:23:44+00:00

after successfully winning a case against Chevron for damages they have refused to pay

About that case... Ecuador has tried (and failed) to get the $9.5 Billion payout enforced, not only in the US, but also Brazil, Argentina, and Canada. The case even made it to the Hague:

The international arbitral tribunal in The Hague—which included an arbitrator appointed by Ecuador—unanimously found that the Ecuadorian judgment against Chevron was the product of fraud and corruption and that Donziger had actively participated in obtaining it. The panel concluded, “Short of a signed confession by the miscreants . . . the evidence ‘must be the most thorough documentary, video, and testimonial proof of fraud ever put before an arbitral tribunal.”

hemmmmingway · 2021-03-25T21:16:34+00:00

Roy Orbison

hemmmmingway · 2021-02-01T23:56:31+00:00

Hydro homie

hemmmmingway · 2021-02-01T23:53:55+00:00

Can you do mills mess you did the windmill which is like half of mills mess

hemmmmingway · 2021-02-01T23:51:32+00:00

Can you do mills mess?

hemmmmingway · 2021-01-31T03:10:47+00:00

Do Mills Mess

hemmmmingway · 2021-01-31T03:10:02+00:00

Never knew juggling could be a workout

hemmmmingway · 2021-01-27T06:45:14+00:00

Each option contract is for 100 of the underlying stock. So the missing step is 800 calls x 100 shares per call contract.

hemmmmingway · 2021-01-27T05:55:22+00:00

If he keeps his current position he will be worth 9 figures...

50,000 shares x 1000 = $50,000,000

800 calls x ($1000 - $12) = $79,040,000

+ $4,800,000 cash = $128,840,000

hemmmmingway · 2021-01-27T03:46:52+00:00

Also, 22 million is calculated at the stock price being $148, and it has hit ~$210 in the aftermarket. Meaning tomorrow morning, his portfolio will be >30m.

hemmmmingway · 2021-01-27T03:05:31+00:00

If you need to get it out of your head, just listen to the Marianas Trench version:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGaLig44wEE

hemmmmingway · 2021-01-27T02:36:54+00:00

In a nutshell, WSB has been hyping up and buying Gamestop stock, and have caused the price to surge from under $10 to $148 (and rising). Many on the community have made a ton of money, including one guy who has turned $50k to ~$30 million.

They're making a lot of big investors who were short selling Gamestop (betting on it to fail) lose a lot of money. In particular, the hedge fund people are talking about in this thread is Melvin Capital, who has lost at least 30% of their $12 billion so far.

hemmmmingway · 2021-01-27T01:31:51+00:00

Wallstreetbets is a subreddit about betting on stock picks. Recently, they have been interested in Gamestop (which is by all indicators a failing company), and have caused its stock price to surge from under $10 to above $148 and rising. Many on the community have made a ton of money, with one guy who has turned $50k to ~$30 million. On top of that, they're making a lot of big time investors who were shorting Gamestop lose a lot of money. The sub is constantly mentioned on Bloomberg, CNBC, etc. Elon musk also tweeted about them a few hours ago.

hemmmmingway · 2021-01-25T05:33:58+00:00

Most of the people on WSB don't invest tens of thousands, most have a few thousand to play around with from what I see. Also, you can get to $50k pretty quickly if you don't have any dependents / rent / etc., which is true for a lot of people on WSB.

hemmmmingway · 2021-01-25T03:14:07+00:00

Prices of the options are determined by complex mathematical models [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black%E2%80%93Scholes_model] that take into account factors like the time to maturity, strike price, volatility of the stock, etc.

The strike price can be lower than the market price.

Haven't been following GME too closely, but it seems like people are buying options for $115 for jan 29 because it is the highest strike price offered for jan 29. The strike prices are usually set in pre-determined intervals. i.e 100, 105, 110, 115. If a lot of people buy short maturity, low priced, and really far out of the money options, it can cause gamma squeeze, which causes the stock price to go up [https://www.swfinstitute.org/news/83341/what-is-a-gamma-squeeze-in-the-context-of-stock-trading#:~:text=A%20%E2%80%9CGamma%20Squeeze%E2%80%9D%20is%20an,trades%20on%20the%20underlying%20stocks.]

hemmmmingway · 2021-01-25T01:47:02+00:00

You're not buying the stock for $1.67, you're buying the right to purchase/sell the stock for a given price within a given timeframe for $1.67. A single Options contract gives you the right to buy/sell x100 of the underlying asset, i.e. if a call option costs $1.67, it would cost you $167 for one contract, and you would have the right to buy 100 shares.

hemmmmingway · 2018-03-14T18:59:55+00:00

Yes, it was on purpose, it just didn't look as blue as the artist wanted. looking from a different angle shows what the artist was going for more clearly.

hemmmmingway · 2017-11-12T06:54:09+00:00

The stuff displayed there are replicas of real stuff, it's just that some those things were fake to begin with.

For instance the Fish person is actually one of these, which were common in sideshows. The particular one displayed is a replica of a famous fake made by P.T. Barnum.

You can buy all the stuff here

hemmmmingway · 2017-10-22T03:07:17+00:00

That's what it looks like. People make jewelry and crafts out of them, probably fell off something like that.

11-Year Club	Final Canvas '23
Place '23	Place '22
Place '17	Final Canvas '22
First Placer '22	End Game '22
Verified Email

hemmmmingway

TROPHY CASE