#maximum benefit insurance

[informative-blogger123]

Discovering the Best Final Expense Leads for Your Senior Benefits Business

In the ever-evolving landscape of senior benefits, finding the best final expense leads can be a game changer for your business. As the population ages, the demand for final expense insurance is on the rise, creating a wealth of opportunities for those in the industry. If you're looking to tap into this market, understanding how to attract and convert leads for final expense insurance is essential. This article dives deep into the strategies and insights you need to effectively connect with potential clients, enhance your offerings, and ultimately drive success in your senior benefits company.

What Are Final Expense Leads?

Final expense leads refer to potential clients who are interested in purchasing insurance policies that cover the costs associated with funerals and other end-of-life expenses. These leads typically stem from individuals or families looking for financial security and peace of mind regarding future expenses. As a senior benefits company, your goal is to connect with these individuals and provide them with tailored insurance solutions that meet their needs.

Why Are Final Expense Leads Important?

As we age, the inevitability of life’s final chapter becomes a reality for many. The financial burden of end-of-life expenses can be overwhelming, making final expense insurance a critical consideration for seniors. By focusing on leads for final expense, you not only create a steady stream of potential clients but also fulfill a vital need in the community.

Understanding Your Target Market

To effectively market final expense insurance, you need to have a clear understanding of your target audience. Most often, this audience comprises seniors aged 50 and above who are concerned about their financial legacy. They are typically looking for affordable, accessible insurance options that provide adequate coverage for their needs.

Characteristics of Your Target Audience

When identifying your target audience, consider the following characteristics:

Age: Most leads will be seniors, usually between 50 and 80 years old.

Financial Situation: Many seniors are on fixed incomes and are looking for affordable solutions.

Family Dynamics: Some may have children or dependents they wish to protect from financial burdens after their passing.

Strategies for Generating the Best Final Expense Leads

Generating quality leads requires a multifaceted approach. Below are some effective strategies to attract potential clients.

Invest in Digital Marketing

In today’s digital world, having a strong online presence is crucial. Use targeted online advertising to reach seniors searching for insurance solutions. Platforms like Facebook and Google Ads allow you to create tailored ads that directly address the needs of your audience.

Search Engine Optimization (SEO)

Make sure your website is optimized for search engines. This means using keywords relevant to final expense insurance, such as “maximum benefit insurance” or “senior benefits insurance.” When potential clients search for these terms, your website should appear at the top of the search results.

Utilize Social Media

Social media platforms can be powerful tools for reaching potential clients. Share informative content about final expense insurance, benefits, and tips for seniors. Engaging posts can foster connections and encourage shares, expanding your reach to a broader audience.

Networking and Referrals

Building relationships with other professionals in the senior care space, such as financial advisors and elder law attorneys, can provide valuable referral opportunities. Offer them a mutually beneficial partnership where you can refer clients to each other.

Host Educational Workshops

Consider hosting workshops or webinars that educate seniors about final expense insurance and its benefits. These events can help establish you as a trusted expert in the field, allowing you to connect directly with potential leads.

Crafting an Effective Lead Generation Strategy

Once you have the tools in place to generate leads, it's crucial to have an effective strategy for converting them into clients.

Personalize Your Approach

When contacting leads, take the time to personalize your communications. Reference their specific needs and concerns, and explain how your services can meet them. This personal touch can significantly improve your chances of closing a sale.

Follow Up Consistently

After initial contact, follow up consistently without being overly pushy. Many leads require multiple interactions before they feel comfortable making a decision. Use various channels—phone calls, emails, and even handwritten notes—to stay in touch.

Educate Your Leads

Provide valuable information throughout the sales process. Share articles, guides, or videos that explain final expense insurance in detail. The more informed your leads are, the more likely they are to make a decision in your favor.

Offer Free Consultations

Consider offering free consultations to discuss the individual needs of your leads. This provides an opportunity for you to assess their situation and recommend suitable insurance options, further building trust and rapport.

Maximizing Benefit with the Right Insurance Products

The goal of your senior benefits company is not only to generate leads but also to provide maximum benefits to your clients. Offering a range of insurance products can help meet diverse needs.

Types of Final Expense Insurance

Understanding the different types of final expense insurance can help you guide your clients toward the right policy.

Whole Life Insurance

Whole life insurance provides coverage for the insured's entire life, with a cash value component. This option can be appealing for clients looking for long-term security.

Term Life Insurance

Term life insurance offers coverage for a specified period, usually at a lower premium. This can be an attractive option for clients seeking affordability.

Tailored Insurance Solutions

Every client is unique, and their insurance needs will vary. Offering tailored solutions can set you apart from competitors. Work with your clients to understand their specific financial situations and provide customized recommendations that best fit their needs.

Building Trust in the Senior Benefits Market

Trust is a crucial element when dealing with seniors and their families. As a provider of final expense insurance, it's vital to build and maintain that trust.

Provide Transparency

Be open and transparent about your products, fees, and the claims process. This honesty will help establish credibility and reassure potential clients that they are making informed decisions.

Share Success Stories

Sharing testimonials or case studies from satisfied clients can be a powerful way to build trust. These real-life examples show potential clients that you have successfully helped others in similar situations.

Staying Current with Industry Trends

The insurance industry is constantly evolving. To remain competitive, it's essential to stay informed about the latest trends and regulations affecting final expense insurance.

Continuous Education

Invest in continuous education for yourself and your team. Attend industry conferences, webinars, and training sessions to keep your knowledge up to date. This expertise will empower you to better serve your clients.

Adapt to Changes

The needs of seniors and the insurance landscape are always changing. Be prepared to adapt your offerings and strategies to meet new demands and expectations.

Conclusion

In conclusion, navigating the world of final expense insurance can be challenging but immensely rewarding. By focusing on generating the best final expense leads and understanding the unique needs of your target audience, you can position your senior benefits company for success. With the right strategies in place and a commitment to providing exceptional service, you’ll not only meet the demands of the market but also make a meaningful difference in the lives of your clients.

FAQs

What are final expense leads?

Final expense leads are potential clients interested in purchasing insurance policies that cover end-of-life costs, such as funerals and other related expenses.

Why is it important to focus on final expense insurance?

Final expense insurance addresses the financial burdens associated with end-of-life expenses, providing peace of mind for seniors and their families.

How can I generate more final expense leads?

You can generate more final expense leads by investing in digital marketing, utilizing social media, networking with professionals, and hosting educational workshops.

What types of final expense insurance are available?

The two primary types of final expense insurance are whole life insurance and term life insurance, each with its own benefits and considerations.

How can I build trust with potential clients in the senior benefits market?

Building trust involves being transparent about your offerings, providing excellent customer service, and sharing testimonials from satisfied clients.

[sayruq]

The Malawi government has finally spoken out on the arrest of Malawian farm workers in Israel, clarifying that 12 out of 40 individuals detained are from the country. According to Minister of Information Moses Kunkuyu, the 40 individuals, representing 13 nationalities, were arrested for leaving their designated work stations and seeking employment in town without proper authorization. Kunkuyu revealed that the group, including the 12 Malawians, had abandoned their farm work to seek jobs at a bakery in Bnei Brak, violating Israel’s labor laws and regulations.

Malawi and Israel signed a labor export deal in 2022, allowing Malawi to send unskilled laborers to Israel to work in various sectors, including agriculture and construction. The deal aimed to generate more foreign exchange revenue for Malawi and provide employment opportunities for its citizens. Under the deal, Malawian workers are expected to work in Israel for a maximum of 5 years, with a minimum salary of $1,500 per month. The deal also includes provisions for workers’ safety, health insurance, and protection from exploitation. However, the deal has faced criticism and controversy, with some opposition politicians and human rights organizations expressing concerns about the secrecy surrounding the deal and the potential risks to workers’ safety.

The arrest of the Malawian workers has raised concerns about the treatment of foreign workers in Israel and the effectiveness of the labor deal in protecting their rights. Human rights organizations have called on the Malawian government to take action to ensure the safe return of the detained workers and to review the labor deal to prevent similar incidents in the future. The incident has also sparked debate about the benefits and risks of labor export deals and the need for greater transparency and accountability in such agreements.

The mistreatment of foreign workers in Israel is well documented and would explain why the 45 workers escaped the farm to look for work elsewhere

[chronicallycouchbound]

I refuse to call government assistance programs “welfare” or “benefits”.

I’ve been on government assistance programs my whole life. I have never lived above the poverty line.

It’s a system that doesn’t care about my wellbeing, they care about doing the bare minimum to keep people alive enough to function and work, and if you’re disabled and cannot work, they give significantly less of a fuck.

And benefits?? What benefits?

Food stamps that run out within two weeks because I am budgeting with 8$ a day with literally dozens of dietary restrictions? Or do you mean the housing voucher that I have to never even have a gift card, penny to my name, Sams club membership, phone bill, literally anything that could be “income” in order to qualify? That same housing voucher system that if I mess up even once with I not only lose all government aid for at least 5 years, it’s also mandatory PRISON time for 1 year?? “Oh but they would never do that, right?” Nope! I have several friends who are now felons for minor lease violations and unhoused as a result! Oh maybe you mean the state health insurance that doesn’t cover most treatments, specialists, and testing I need and if I tried to make a gofundme to cover, I would lose aforementioned housing? Oh and we can’t forget all the money I get for being disabled, which is exactly 0$. I’m still fighting for SSI and have been for 6 years! That’s over 6 years with absolutely zero income. ZERO. And guess what, whenever I *do* get on SSI, I will lose my housing voucher. And I won’t be able to afford my current apartment because even in subsidized low income housing it’s too expensive for the maximum SSI “benefit” amount. And on SSI you can’t have savings over 2000$. Oh and they do make housing for people who are low income where you pay 30% of your income but I can’t even be on the waitlist since I don’t have any income. And on top of all this, I can never get married because I’ll lose all of the programs.

I could keep going. That’s not even half of the programs I’m a part of.

• None of them give me cash in hand. Even for vouchers I have to provide receipts for everything.

• Food stamps just straight up won’t even cover ineligible items. Which includes hot foods.

• I genuinely don’t believe that there’s a way to “game the system” and why would you? You would gain literally nothing.

• It’s designed to keep people poor. Once you make over a certain amount, you lose all or almost all benefits. There’s no way to slowly transition out of the programs, if you’re someone who’s able to. It’s all in or all out.

• All of these barriers are made significantly worse while unhoused/homeless. I’ve been homeless for over half of my life and there’s so many fucked up rules. If I missed one night staying in the shelter, I lost my housing voucher because I no longer was “verified as homeless” even if I was sleeping outside still.

[rainofaugustsith]

I've already seem one Pride related post about this, so as a friendly neighborhood disabled person, I'd like to clarify something about disabled marriage equality. Whether a disabled person loses their benefits when they marry depends entirely on the TYPE of disability benefit they have. SSI and SSDI are the two most common and they are not the same. SSDI: Social Security Disability Insurance. Based on earnings overt a certain number of recent work quarters. Not income or asset based. Your payment depends on what you contributed while working over the years. SSDI makes you eligible for Medicare. There are two basic ways to lose SSDI: a) you are deemed non-disabled; b) you earn more than the amount set forward for SGA (substantial gainful activity) for a period longer than a trial work period of nine months. OR: You turn 67 and then start collecting regular Social Security retirement instead. That's it. SSDI does not care if you marry, divorce, win the lottery, move to Tahiti for the winter. Where this gets sticky, however, is that SSDI recipients often have income low enough to also qualify for Medicaid as a secondary insurance, Section 8 housing help or SNAP (food stamps). Those things can all be affected if a person marries and additional income is added to the household. But - if they marry they will not lose their Medicare or their SSDI. SSI:

Supplemental Security Income. If you are disabled but don't have the work credits to qualify for SSDI, you get this. It often happens to people who are disabled as children or teens, or those who have been out of the workforce for a while. SSI has a maximum monthly payment of under $1000/month. It is income and asset based. If you have more than a certain amount in the bank, if you marry, if you have too many other assets, if you move in with friends, if a friend gives you regular groceries, it all counts against you. You're poor and it's designed to keep you poor, and to balance out any small amount of help you may get. SSI gives you almost nothing to live on, but also bars you from receiving any assistance that might help because it will be counted against you. SSI qualifies you for Medicaid. SSI is a cruel system. The asset limits, the marriage penalty and the in-kind rules desperately need to be updated. People should not have to choose between getting married and keeping benefits. But SSDI and SSI are two different programs, both called 'disability' and in this discussion it's important to remember that to avoid giving inaccurate information.

[misfitwashere]

December 16, 2024 

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

DEC 17

Today, President Joe Biden designated a new national monument in honor of Frances Perkins, secretary of labor under President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. The first female Cabinet secretary, Perkins served for twelve years. She took the job only after getting FDR to sign on to her goals: unemployment insurance, health insurance, old-age insurance, a 40-hour work week, a minimum wage, and abolition of child labor. She later recalled: “I remember he looked so startled, and he said, ‘Well, do you think it can be done?’”

She promised to find out.

Once in office, Perkins was a driving force behind the administration’s massive investment in public works projects to get people back to work. She urged the government to spend $3.3 billion on schools, roads, housing, and post offices. Those projects employed more than a million people in 1934.

In 1935, FDR signed into law the Social Security Act that she designed and negotiated, providing ordinary Americans with unemployment insurance; aid to homeless, dependent, and neglected children; funds to promote maternal and child welfare; and public health services.

In 1938, Congress passed the Fair Labor Standards Act, which established a minimum wage and maximum hours. It banned child labor.

The one area where Perkins fell short of her goals was in establishing public healthcare. It was not until 2010 that President Barack Obama signed into law the Affordable Care Act.

Perkins’s work to build FDR’s New Deal sparked the modern American state.

Before Perkins, the primary function of the federal government was to manage the economic relationships between labor, capital, and resources. Property rights, after all, had been the basis on which North American colonists had found the justification to rebel against the British crown, and that focus on the relationships inherent in property ownership had continued to dominate the government American lawmakers built.

But Perkins recognized that the central purpose of government was not to protect property; it was to protect the communities of people who lived in the nation. She recognized that children, the elderly, women, and disabled Americans, all of whom contributed to society whether or not that contribution was recognized with a paycheck, were as valuable to the survival of a community as male workers and the wealthy men who employed them.

“The people are what matter to government,” she said, “and a government should aim to give all the people under its jurisdiction the best possible life.”

A majority of Americans of both parties liked the new system, but the reworking of the government shocked those who had previously dominated the country. As soon as the Social Security Act passed, opponents set out to destroy it along with the rest of the new system. A coalition of Republican businessmen who hated both business regulation and the taxes that paid for social programs, racists who opposed the idea of equal rights for racial and ethnic minorities, and religious traditionalists—especially Southern Baptists—who opposed the recognition of women’s equal rights, joined together to fight against the New Deal.

Their undermining of Perkins’s vision got little traction when they were attacking business regulation and taxes to support social services. Voters liked those things. But it began to attract supporters after 1954, when the Supreme Court handed down the Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, decision requiring the desegregation of public schools. That decision enabled those opposed to the New Deal to harness racism to their cause, warning American voters that a government that protected everyone would mean a government that used tax dollars paid by white Americans to benefit Black Americans.

Religious traditionalists’ role in undermining the New Deal grew in the 1970s. The new system dramatically expanded women’s rights, and when President Richard Nixon’s people worried he would lose reelection in 1972, they quite deliberately used the issue of abortion to claim that “women’s liberation” was destroying the family structure that religious traditionalists believed mirrored God’s relationship to his human flock.

By 1979, religious traditionalists had rejected the modern move toward women’s rights and made common cause with Republicans eager to derail the New Deal. In 1980 the support of those traditionalists put Republican president Ronald Reagan into the White House. Their influence grew in the 1990s as white evangelicals became the base of the Republican Party. By 2016 they had brought into the Republican Party a determination to reinstate a male-dominated, patriarchal world that resurrected the government Frances Perkins’s vision had replaced.

That impulse has grown until now, in 2024, attacks on women have become central to the destruction of the kind of government Frances Perkins helped to establish during the New Deal. Religious extremists in the Republican Party have in some states reduced or prevented women’s access to healthcare and are talking about taking away women’s right to vote, and the party itself has downgraded the role of women in society. When House Republicans released a list of their committee leaders for the next Congress last Thursday, there were no women on it. For the first time in 20 years, no House committees will be chaired by women.

“Very fitting in the MAGA Era—No Women Need Apply,” former Republican representative from Virginia Barbara Comstock posted on X.

In his term in office, President Biden has worked to reclaim Frances Perkins’s vision of a government that works for all Americans. When he took office, he promised to have a Cabinet that “looks like America,” and he created the most diverse Cabinet in American history. And he has emphasized women’s equality. In March 2024 he signed an executive order noting that, since women’s roles in American history have often been overlooked, it is imperative that we recognize the women and girls who have shaped the nation.

The creation today of the Frances Perkins National Monument tied together Perkins’s expansion of the government and the centrality of women to the American story. The event took place in the Frances Perkins Building, the headquarters of the U.S. Department of Labor in Washington, D.C., where acting secretary of labor Julie Su noted that Biden has been “the most pro-worker, pro-union president in history,” protecting pensions, defending unions, creating good jobs, and unapologetically wielding the power of the presidency on behalf of working people.

Su inducted the president into the Labor Department’s Hall of Honor, and Biden responded with the observation that “the American people are beginning to figure out all we’re doing is what’s basically decent and fair—just basically decent and fair.”

Then Biden spoke about Perkins and her work. He described how his administration has defended, protected, and expanded her vision. He reiterated that women have always been vital to the United States and insisted that they must be acknowledged both in our current society and in the way we remember our history.

As part of the day’s events, Interior Secretary Deb Haaland announced the establishment of five new National Historic Landmarks recognizing women’s history: the Charleston Cigar Factory in Charleston, South Carolina, where in 1945–1946, Black women led a strike that prompted the organization of southern workers; the Furies Collective, the Washington, D.C., home of a lesbian, feminist publishing group in the early 1970s; the Washington, D.C., Slowe-Burrill House, home of Black lesbian educators Lucy Diggs Slowe and Mary Burrill in the early twentieth century; Azurest South in Petersburg, Virginia, the home and studio of early twentieth century Black architect Amaza Lee Meredith; and the Peter Hurd and Henriette Wyeth House and Studios in San Patricio, New Mexico, where the two painted in the twentieth century.

In establishing the 57-acre family farm of Frances Perkins on the Damariscotta River in Newcastle, Maine, as a National Monument today, Biden acknowledged both the importance of Perkins’s New Deal vision of a government that benefits everyone and the centrality of women’s equality to that vision.

—

[bitchesgetriches]

Short-Term Disability Insurance Is a Waste of Money… With Two Very Specific Exceptions

Short-term disability insurance is an income insurance benefit you might get from your employer, your state, or a private insurance company. If you become too ill or injured to work, and your condition is covered, the insurance company will pay you a portion of your paycheck while you’re laid up.

Each policy is different. To give you an idea of what’s normal, an okay short-term disability insurance plan might pay out 50-60% of your former paycheck for a maximum period of 3-6 months. The most generous policy I’ve seen reimburses a full 100% of paychecks for 12 months. Some have a hard upper limit across all policies; I’ve seen $750 and $1,000 per week.

The only thing short-term disability insurance protects is your current income. Not your job, nor your future earnings, nor the actual health of your body. Understanding this is crucial to evaluating its worth.

Keep reading.

Did we just help you out? Tip us!

[beardedmrbean]

https://youtube.com/shorts/tfrvtVODQ5A?si=nWmux3kF1oDG-QH6

Oh what's this one going to be.......

The $750 goes out to everyone regardless of need so they can get whatever it is they need immediately without having to wait for the bureaucrats to start going through the applications for aid.

People that get those could have a billion dollars in the bank or nothing in the bank, but when it comes time to start actually going to work the person with a billion isn't going to get anything and the person with zero will (likely) get some aid in getting them back on their feet and time in whatever passes for a FEMA shelter.

I haven't heard anything about that being a loan either, with good reason.

Here's the AFP fact check on a lot of the various internet rumors about the aid going out.

AFP ranks high on my personal trust meter, for whatever that's worth to any of y'all.

_____________________________________

Jason Thomas Barnosky, associate director of the RAND Corporation's Disaster Management & Resilience Program (archived here), confirmed in an October 8 email that the $750 aid is a one-time payment that the agency does not consider a loan.

FEMA's rumor response page says recipients only have to pay the agency back if they get duplicate benefits through an insurance provider or another source.

"If you have insurance that covers your temporary housing costs, but you ask FEMA to advance you some money to help you pay for those costs while your insurance is delayed, you will need to pay that money back to FEMA after you receive your insurance settlement."

"There are other forms of assistance that you may qualify for to receive and Serious Needs Assistance is an initial payment you may receive while FEMA assesses your eligibility for additional funds," the agency's rumor response page says.

An October 4 press release about Helene relief efforts lists several kinds of additional aid survivors may be eligible to receive, including money to help repair or replace a damaged home (archived here). Other types of assistance could cover the repair or replacement of personal property and the costs of temporary lodging, medical or dental care, funerals, childcare and transportation.

The maximum aid for fixing or rebuilding a home, for example, is $42,500 (archived here). The exact amount depends on the damage assessed during a FEMA inspection.

Those seeking assistance can apply online at disasterassistance.gov, by calling 1-800-621-3362 or by downloading FEMA's app.  ___________________________________

Went through the same thing when Maui was on fire and everyone was screaming about them only getting $700 when it was just the same scenario we see here.

Not blaming people for getting pissed, there's a lot of bad information out there and going in with a knee jerk response on the whole thing based on what you're seeing online and such is something that is totally nonpartisan, (see people screaming about women now being forced to carry ectopic pregnancies or arrested for a miscarriage after RvW got overturned) so it's just a thing.

Next time this happens some more people will know better now.

[allthecanadianpolitics]

The New Democratic Party and a group of labour unions are calling on the federal government to change Canada’s employment insurance rules so that new parents, especially new mothers, are not denied regular EI benefits if they get laid off. In a letter sent Thursday to Randy Boissonault, Canada’s employment minister, and NDP MP Daniel Blaikie, along with the Canadian Labour Congress, Unifor and the Canadian Union of Public Employees, are demanding an end to “gender discrimination” in the program. A copy of the letter shared with Global News stated: “Under the current EI Act, special and regular benefits can be combined up to a 50-week maximum. Using qualifying hours for regular benefits reduces what you can claim in maternity and parental benefits, and vice-versa. “This means that women who have a baby and access maternity benefits lose their protection in the event of a lay-off,” the letter to Boissonnault reads.

Continue Reading

Tagging @politicsofcanada

[fans4wga]

'The Hollywood strike can and must win – for all of us, not just writers and actors'

Excerpt:

"The thousands of workers engaged in this enormous, multi-union Hollywood strike – something America hasn’t seen since 1960 – represent the frontline of two battles that matter to every single American. You might not naturally pick “writers and actors” to be the backbone of your national defense force, but hey, we go to war with the army we have. In this case, they are well suited to the fight at hand.

The first battle is between humanity and artificial intelligence. Just a year ago, it seemed like a remote issue, a vague and futuristic possibility, still tinged with a touch of sci-fi. Now, AI has advanced so fast that everyone has grasped that it has the potential to be to white-collar and creative work what industrial automation was to factory work. It is the sort of technology that you either put in a box, or it puts you in a box. And who is going to build the guardrails that prevent the worst abuses of AI?

Look around. Do you believe that the divided US government is going to rouse itself to concerted action in time to regulate this technology, which grows more potent by the month? They will not. Do you know, then, the only institutions with the power to enact binding rules about AI that protect working people from being destroyed by a bunch of impenetrable algorithms that can produce stilted, error-filled simulacrums of their work at a fraction of the cost?

Unions. When it comes to regulating AI now, before it gets so widely entrenched that it’s impossible to roll back, union contracts are the only game in town. And the WGA and Sag-Aftra contracts, which cover entire industries, will go down in history as some of the first major efforts to write reasonable rules governing this technology that is so new that even knowing what to ask for involves a lot of speculation.

What we know for sure is this: if we leave AI wholly in the hands of tech companies and their investors, it is absolutely certain that AI will be used in a way that takes the maximum amount of money out of the pockets of labor and deposits it in the accounts of executives and investment firms. These strikes are happening, in large part, to set the precedent that AI must benefit everyone rather than being a terrifying inequality accelerator that throws millions out of work to enrich a lucky few. Even if you have never been to Hollywood, you have a stake in this fight. AI will come for your own industry soon enough.

And that brings us to the second underlying battle here: the class war itself. When you scrape away the relatively small surface layer of glitz and glamor and wealthy stars, entertainment is just another industry, full of regular people doing regular work. The vast majority of those who write scripts or act in shows (or do carpentry, or catering, or chauffeuring, or the zillion other jobs that Hollywood produces) are not rich and famous. The CEOs that the entertainment unions are negotiating with make hundreds of millions of dollars, while most Sag-Aftra members don’t make the $26,000 a year necessary to qualify for the union’s health insurance plan."

Read more

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

December 16, 2024

Heather Cox Richardson

Dec 17, 2024

Today, President Joe Biden designated a new national monument in honor of Frances Perkins, secretary of labor under President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. The first female Cabinet secretary, Perkins served for twelve years. She took the job only after getting FDR to sign on to her goals: unemployment insurance, health insurance, old-age insurance, a 40-hour work week, a minimum wage, and abolition of child labor. She later recalled: “I remember he looked so startled, and he said, ‘Well, do you think it can be done?’”

She promised to find out.

Once in office, Perkins was a driving force behind the administration’s massive investment in public works projects to get people back to work. She urged the government to spend $3.3 billion on schools, roads, housing, and post offices. Those projects employed more than a million people in 1934.

In 1935, FDR signed into law the Social Security Act that she designed and negotiated, providing ordinary Americans with unemployment insurance; aid to homeless, dependent, and neglected children; funds to promote maternal and child welfare; and public health services.

In 1938, Congress passed the Fair Labor Standards Act, which established a minimum wage and maximum hours. It banned child labor.

The one area where Perkins fell short of her goals was in establishing public healthcare. It was not until 2010 that President Barack Obama signed into law the Affordable Care Act.

Perkins’s work to build FDR’s New Deal sparked the modern American state.

Before Perkins, the primary function of the federal government was to manage the economic relationships between labor, capital, and resources. Property rights, after all, had been the basis on which North American colonists had found the justification to rebel against the British crown, and that focus on the relationships inherent in property ownership had continued to dominate the government American lawmakers built.

But Perkins recognized that the central purpose of government was not to protect property; it was to protect the communities of people who lived in the nation. She recognized that children, the elderly, women, and disabled Americans, all of whom contributed to society whether or not that contribution was recognized with a paycheck, were as valuable to the survival of a community as male workers and the wealthy men who employed them.

“The people are what matter to government,” she said, “and a government should aim to give all the people under its jurisdiction the best possible life.”

A majority of Americans of both parties liked the new system, but the reworking of the government shocked those who had previously dominated the country. As soon as the Social Security Act passed, opponents set out to destroy it along with the rest of the new system. A coalition of Republican businessmen who hated both business regulation and the taxes that paid for social programs, racists who opposed the idea of equal rights for racial and ethnic minorities, and religious traditionalists—especially Southern Baptists—who opposed the recognition of women’s equal rights, joined together to fight against the New Deal.

Their undermining of Perkins’s vision got little traction when they were attacking business regulation and taxes to support social services. Voters liked those things. But it began to attract supporters after 1954, when the Supreme Court handed down the Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, decision requiring the desegregation of public schools. That decision enabled those opposed to the New Deal to harness racism to their cause, warning American voters that a government that protected everyone would mean a government that used tax dollars paid by white Americans to benefit Black Americans.

Religious traditionalists’ role in undermining the New Deal grew in the 1970s. The new system dramatically expanded women’s rights, and when President Richard Nixon’s people worried he would lose reelection in 1972, they quite deliberately used the issue of abortion to claim that “women’s liberation” was destroying the family structure that religious traditionalists believed mirrored God’s relationship to his human flock.

By 1979, religious traditionalists had rejected the modern move toward women’s rights and made common cause with Republicans eager to derail the New Deal. In 1980 the support of those traditionalists put Republican president Ronald Reagan into the White House. Their influence grew in the 1990s as white evangelicals became the base of the Republican Party. By 2016 they had brought into the Republican Party a determination to reinstate a male-dominated, patriarchal world that resurrected the government Frances Perkins’s vision had replaced.

That impulse has grown until now, in 2024, attacks on women have become central to the destruction of the kind of government Frances Perkins helped to establish during the New Deal. Religious extremists in the Republican Party have in some states reduced or prevented women’s access to healthcare and are talking about taking away women’s right to vote, and the party itself has downgraded the role of women in society. When House Republicans released a list of their committee leaders for the next Congress last Thursday, there were no women on it. For the first time in 20 years, no House committees will be chaired by women.

“Very fitting in the MAGA Era—No Women Need Apply,” former Republican representative from Virginia Barbara Comstock posted on X.

In his term in office, President Biden has worked to reclaim Frances Perkins’s vision of a government that works for all Americans. When he took office, he promised to have a Cabinet that “looks like America,” and he created the most diverse Cabinet in American history. And he has emphasized women’s equality. In March 2024 he signed an executive order noting that, since women’s roles in American history have often been overlooked, it is imperative that we recognize the women and girls who have shaped the nation.

The creation today of the Frances Perkins National Monument tied together Perkins’s expansion of the government and the centrality of women to the American story. The event took place in the Frances Perkins Building, the headquarters of the U.S. Department of Labor in Washington, D.C., where acting secretary of labor Julie Su noted that Biden has been “the most pro-worker, pro-union president in history,” protecting pensions, defending unions, creating good jobs, and unapologetically wielding the power of the presidency on behalf of working people.

Su inducted the president into the Labor Department’s Hall of Honor, and Biden responded with the observation that “the American people are beginning to figure out all we’re doing is what’s basically decent and fair—just basically decent and fair.”

Then Biden spoke about Perkins and her work. He described how his administration has defended, protected, and expanded her vision. He reiterated that women have always been vital to the United States and insisted that they must be acknowledged both in our current society and in the way we remember our history.

As part of the day’s events, Interior Secretary Deb Haaland announced the establishment of five new National Historic Landmarks recognizing women’s history: the Charleston Cigar Factory in Charleston, South Carolina, where in 1945–1946, Black women led a strike that prompted the organization of southern workers; the Furies Collective, the Washington, D.C., home of a lesbian, feminist publishing group in the early 1970s; the Washington, D.C., Slowe-Burrill House, home of Black lesbian educators Lucy Diggs Slowe and Mary Burrill in the early twentieth century; Azurest South in Petersburg, Virginia, the home and studio of early twentieth century Black architect Amaza Lee Meredith; and the Peter Hurd and Henriette Wyeth House and Studios in San Patricio, New Mexico, where the two painted in the twentieth century.

In establishing the 57-acre family farm of Frances Perkins on the Damariscotta River in Newcastle, Maine, as a National Monument today, Biden acknowledged both the importance of Perkins’s New Deal vision of a government that benefits everyone and the centrality of women’s equality to that vision.

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[raynbow-shimmer]

Listen to me, as someone who used to work in health insurance billing and customer service, I have seen some fucked up things. My best paid claim from insurance was over a million dollars billed. You know how much worker's compensation insurance paid? 700k. The rest of 300k+ was a write off. I don't want to think about what would have happened if my patient didn't get hurt on the job. I wish they hadn't gotten injured given what happened to them, but it is what it is sadly. If that patient would have had a copay and coinsurance, I am sure the bill would have been outrageous. That's fucked up. I don't want to think about what would happen if the ACA is walked back. Lifetime maximums? Go fuck yourself.

I also worked for a company that made custom prosthetics for children. I actively watched them hike their prices so that they could get more out of parents/renegotiate prices with insurance. The prosthetics weren't always covered by the insurance either. Texas Medicaid? You better have a generous relative because the prosthetic was not covered under any circumstance. That would leave parents with a bill of 1600 to 3400 depending on the state to get a prosthetic that their child really might need. Fucked up.

Don't get me started on supplemental insurance either. Worked there too doing customer service. I got really good at looking at the billing codes to see what was covered and what wasn't. Observation for 23 hours and 59 minutes in the ER? Too bad, you need 24 hours to get paid out. And cancers and heart attacks, oh my god. Carcinoma in SITU? Welp, it's not classified as malignant yet, so no cancer payout for you. Minor heart attack? It has to be a major heart attack for that to be covered. Someone died in a car wreck with a BAC over like 0.08? Sorry, you're not getting that life insurance payout. It's fucked up. Soul sucking work.

I get why someone would have done something about it. (Luigi is still innocent until proven guilty, so I am not blaming him at this time.) For profit healthcare is a scam. It's not just the insurances, it's the for profit healthcare systems too, including hospital systems, pharmaceutical companies owned by the insraunces, and the medical equipment supply companies. It's the for profit hospitals who bill an elastic bandage at 35 dollars (!!! Just looked this up on my local for profit hospital system's chargemaster, jesus christ!) so they can get the tiniest bit of a higher payout than what it is worth from people who lack insurance. It's the drug companies owned by the insurances who hike up prices. It's the durable medical equipment companies who think they can get away with charging outrageous prices for any sort of assistance device. It's not the independent doctors who are trying to run an office (usually). It's not the nurses who are just trying to do the best they can while being underpaid and overworked so that the for profit system can do it's job for the shareholders. And it certainly is not the poor customer service agent you are screaming at over the phone. Policies are policies, which means that the customer service agent's hands are basically tied. All the red tape. It's insane. It's the bloated for profit healthcare system that is to blame for our problems.

Elizabeth Warren and other Senators have currently proposed a bill that would break up healthcare conglomerates and force them to sell off their stakes in pharmaceuticals. This would possibly be a game changer. Health insurances would have to negotiate with pharmaceutical companies to get the best prices on drugs. Because we know they don't want to pay. It wouldn't benefit them to recommend a higher cost drug anymore. That money wouldn't be going in their pockets. I highly suggest you look at the information behind the bill as it develops. I have also read there is a similar bill that was just proposed by the House too.

Please, contact your representatives. Tell them about the Senate's Patients Before Monopolies Act. Get impassioned and tell them what it would do for you. You voted for them, tell them what you want. These are your representatives. And if they don't care, try your hardest to fire them next go around. Healthcare is of the utmost importance to the people. It's literally a life or death situation at times. More people should care because it affects everyone. The time is now, it's time to push for a better future.

P.S. Please don't yell at the customer service workers. It's not their fault. It's a shitty job with shitty moments. I've cried with people because something wasn't covered before. The for profit healthcare industry is fucked up.

[entitledrichpeople]

is this factually true for all of america? https://prnt.sc/LmJPFf0JCCaF

Generally, yes. Though SSI and SSDI are different, with SSI being the program that applies to those who were disabled young or had very low incomes during their working years and SSDI is higher with far fewer income and asset limitations but is still inadequate.

SSI's maximum payment is below poverty level ($914 a month maximum) and yes, it is counted against other anti-poverty measures like food stamps. Basically every time I get an extra dollar from SSI, I lose one from food stamps. On SSI you're not allowed more than $2000 in assets total (with some exceptions, like primary residence) and no income from any sort more than $1913 of income from any source. If you can work, you're not eligible.

SSDI levels are based on income during working years, if you paid in more than so many quarters (it's possible to have income so low it doesn't count) and payments tend to be significantly higher than SSI. The asset cap doesn't apply, nor does a general income prohibition, except income through work. Living on SSDI alone is difficult, even on the higher end, but some of this group have pensions or spouses with higher incomes. If you're on SSI and you marry they automatically cut your benefits even if you partner has no income or is also on SSI-it's a bad idea to marry if you get SSI, but people on SSDI's spouse's income isn't counted against them.

As to health insurance, both SSI and SSDI qualify you for (certain parts of) medicare, which, yes, has obscene drug prices generally. People on SSI also almost universally qualify for medicaid, though how the combination of the two gets administered is absurdly inconsistent between states & can fluctuate a lot. Medicaid tends to be better than private insurance when it comes to paying for drugs and testing, but discrimination by healthcare providers is rampant and, again, this isn't consistent state to state. I live in one of the better medicare states, but the way they farm out administration means you lose some aspects of medicaid when you qualify for both. Medicare pays for medical equipment in a way that medicaid never did for me, but medicaid alone never complained about name brand vs generic or tried to nickel and dime me to death by making me pay $1 to get some of my prescriptions.

You can't afford typical rent on SSI, let alone rent on the extremely small amount of housing that is accessible to people who use wheelchairs. Public housing also has only a few accessible spots and elevators in most public housing are constantly non-functional. Depending on where you live, those waitlists-even for extremely inaccessible or frankly unsafe and run down apartments-can be years long. Some places use a lottery system.

Oh, and if you get hospitalized for a month they take your SSI for that month so you can't pay whatever nominal level public housing insists on, so you can end up being evicted for being hospitalized.

If you don't have family that can take you in, it's extremely easy to end up homeless on SSI. And if you do have people that can take you in, the power dynamics of that situation enables a high rate of abuse.

As absurd as it sounds "it's illegal to not be poor on SSI" is the literal truth.

[dailyanarchistposts]

Section II: The Real Distribution of Wealth

The question should be put thus: Is competition a means of ASSURING work to the poor? To put a question of this kind, means to solve it. What does competition mean to workingmen? It is the distribution of work to the highest bidder. A contractor needs a laborer: three apply. “How much do you ask for your work?” “Three francs, I have a wife and children.” “Good, and you?” “Two and a half francs, I have no children, but a wife.” “So much the better, and you?” “Two francs will do for me; I am single.” “You shall have the work.” With this the affair is settled, the bargain is closed. What will become now of the other two proletarians? They will starve, it is to be hoped. But what if they become thieves? Never mind, why have we our police? Or murderers? Well, for them we have the gallows. And the fortunate one of the three; even his victory is only temporary. Let a fourth laborer appear, strong enough to fast one out of every two days; the desire to cut down the wages will be exerted to its fullest extent. A new pariah, perhaps a new recruit for the galleys.... Who would be blind enough not to see that under the reign of free competition the continuous decline of wages necessarily becomes a general law with no exception whatsoever? -- Louis Blanc, 1840 [982]

Before imagining what a society would be like in a Communist economy, a just understanding of a Capitalism economy is in order. It may be true that we understand the mechanics that control a Capitalist economy, such as class war, subsistence wages, competition, and the like. But, in our modern economy, just how much wealth that is produced goes in to the pockets of the Capitalist class, and how much into the pockets of the Proletariat class? To understand the nature of creating a Communist economy out of our current Capitalist society, we must understand the wealth distribution as it exists today. I shall answer those questions here.

Essentially, we are looking for is what economics refers to as an opportunity cost value. It is a difficult number to pinpoint. What does society lose when capitalists of the retail industry compete with each other? First, it requires greater manpower to supply the needs of all store-owners. By having a multiplicity of shops that all dispense the same products, each one only fulfilling a very small amount of its full operating potential, society has lost a certain amount of land and labor. If society were to collectivize the means of production in a manner that benefits the people, by centralizing distribution centers to their maximum potential, then the people would have that additional labor and land at their disposal. It is an inexact value lost by a profit-driven economy over a people-driven economy, as they each measure value differently.

In 2005 in the United States, workers received $7 trillion in compensation. [983] The gross domestic product for personal consumption expenditures was $8.7 trillion. [984] Even if the wage earners spent every dollar they had earned, there was still $1.7 trillion spent on personal consumption. This gives us a minor indication of the immediate differences between those who labor and those who earn a living by possessing property. If we were to absolve the economy of the trees that bore no fruit, we would see the loss of real estate, legal services, management, and administrative industries, relieving the total payroll of $1.17 trillion in payroll. [985] Laborers of the retail and wholesale trades, the assistants and servants of the capital-owning class, provide no value in their services, and would also be removed from that economic position, granting $0.85 trillion in payroll. [986] The finance and insurance industry, which provides no value except to those who own and control the industry, grants its employees $0.53 trillion in payroll. [987] This brings the total of useless industries to $2.55 trillion in payroll. Certainly an economy must possess the means and methods to distribute products to the community; the present industry remains so bulbous from its intention. It does not seek to serve the people, but to gather a profit. Wholesale trade, for instance, does not deliver the product to the end consumer. It only places the product of the mines, factories, and farms into the hands of another who must then distribute it themselves. The role of those employed in this industry is to increase sales. The economy still retains its transportation and warehousing industries, sufficient to the purpose of this industry. Abolishing these useless industries would relieve the payroll costs of $2.55 trillion. Each person’s wages increase by the difference, with the new, unused labor market joining a meaningful area of production. This, along with granting all profit to the worker, would give them a value of $8.7 trillion instead of $4.47 trillion.

The idea of eliminating useless industry as a means to improving the economy is not a new one. By increasing the wages and improving working and living conditions, many of the repelling aspects of laboring are removed. Where the population enjoys the benefits of its economy, there will be many more willing to contribute their efforts and toils to producing the social product. In his book Utopia, Thomas More entails a plan where the idleness of both wealth and poverty are removed...

... then consider the great company of idle priests, and of those that are called religious men; add to these all rich men, chiefly those that have estates in land, who are called noblemen and gentlemen, together with their families, made up of idle persons, that are kept more for show than use; add to these, all those strong and lusty beggars, that go about pretending some disease, in excuse for their begging; and upon the whole account you will find that the number of those by whose labors mankind is supplied, is much less than you perhaps imagined. Then consider how few of those that work are employed in labors that are of real service; for we who measure all things by money, give rise to many trades that are both vain and superfluous, and serve only to support riot and luxury. For if those who work were employed only in such things as the conveniences of life require, there would be such an abundance of them that the prices of them would so sink that tradesmen could not be maintained by their gains; if all those who labor about useless things were set to more profitable employments, and if all they that languish out their lives in sloth and idleness, every one of whom consumes as much as any two of the men that are at work, were forced to labor, you may easily imagine that a small proportion of time would serve for doing all that is either necessary, profitable, or pleasant to mankind, especially while pleasure is kept within its due bounds. [...] And thus from the great numbers among them that are neither suffered to be idle, nor to be employed in any fruitless labor, you may easily make the estimate how much may be done in those few hours in which they are obliged to labor. [988]

Some may argue with me on the matter of removing the retail trade industry. Naturally, every economy must possess a method of distribution for the social product. If we were to keep the retail trade outlets, it would mean keeping the value of stores at the cost of a payroll at $0.467 trillion, for 2005. But, it certainly can be agreed that wholesale trade provides no value; it acts solely as a middleman merchant between vendors of products and those who produce them. Their total payroll for 2005 was $0.389 trillion in 2005. The mechanics of the economy direct and coordinate labor and capital in a manner that increases the labor of all, so that the capital-owning class can possess their profits. Not only does its losses allow for an idle group of owners and lords, but its inefficiency costs the whole of society a great deal collectively. If it can be given that an entire sector of a trade industry produces no fruit that is consumed by the public, then there is certainly a great deal of maximizing efficiency that can go on in the retail trade industry. There must be a reorganization of labor and industry according to the needs and direction of society. It is not simply a matter of giving the profit of the capitalist to the worker; but it is a matter of giving the right to the direction of the economy. Otherwise, the worker does not truly possess a right to collective ownership of the means of production.

Relieving the economy of the employees who provide no value would naturally output itself as unemployment, but in a Socialist economy, where capital is organized according to the interests of labor, it would simply reduce the amount of labor applied to the industry. The equation could be written another way. Instead of reducing the amount of workers employed in fruitless industry, those workers would migrate to useful and productive industry. In this case, laborers would receive the same pay, but with a significant reduction in the amount of time and effort necessary to achieve the final, social product. For instance, the $4.2 trillion difference of $8.7 trillion could be expressed as a 48% reduction in labor to create the same product, or it could be written as a 93% increase in payroll for the laboring class. In either case, it’s a matter of socialization of the economy and capital in order to provide for the people’s needs as they themselves desire. It should be enough for the economy to become socialized. Not only must it organize to eliminate non-value producing industries, but it should fairly distribute the social product to those who produced it. The numbers above provide a small sampling of the type of reorganizing that would happen. The greatest obstacles to a relationship between labor and those possessing the means of production are poor working conditions, low pay, and long hours, the results of a profit-driven economy. These minimal estimates are based on the present working model of the Capitalist system. It would be impossible to achieve an accurate figure of the complete value lost by the exchanges of Capitalism and the advantages of collectivizing the means of production, but these numbers are a start.

One of the primary arguments against such a collectivization of the means of production is that industry would lose its lords and masters. Without the merchants and traders of real estate, legal services, management, and administrative labor, the conflicting units of society would need to work together on mutual, associative, and free relationships in order to receive their subsistence of living. The farmer would need to rely on the steel worker for his tools, just as the engineer must rely on the farmer for his daily sustenance. Without masters of economy, these groups would be required to exchange the products of their economy on the basis of achieving the mutual interest of all parties.

[darkmaga-returns]

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. may now Make America Healthy Again. One of his first measures will be removing “an industrial waste product” from America’s water supply that has been deliberately added since 1945.

On January 25, 1945, Grand Rapids, Michigan, began water fluoridation. By 1960, water fluoridation had reached 50 million households and doubled to 100 million by 1975. Why? The government began adding fluoride to the water based on a 1930s study that stated a small amount of NATURALLY OCCURRING fluoride could protect teeth from decay.

It is odd that the government does not force insurance companies to treat teeth as a medical expense. It is difficult to gauge if these measures have actually prevented tooth decay, as access to dental health is far greater now than it was when trials began in the 1930s and 1940s. Who is responsible for adding fluoride to the water? California, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, Ohio, and South Dakota have state mandates requiring fluoridated water. Other states like Maine, Utah, and New Hampshire permit the public to vote. Water utilities companies are responsible for maintaining water fluoridation systems. The EPA has federal oversight over the process and set a maximum contaminant level for fluoride at 4.0 mg/L. The Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 forbids the EPA from actually mandating fluoride or any additive substances to the water supply, but they do have oversight.

So what’s the problem? “On January 20, the Trump White House will advise all U.S​. water systems to remove fluoride from public water. Fluoride is an industrial waste associated with arthritis, bone fractures, bone cancer, IQ loss, neurodevelopmental disorders, and thyroid disease,” Kennedy posted on X. Kennedy believes that fluoride does not have a clear health benefit to the public, but it is responsible for causing an array of life-altering ailments.

On September 25, 2024, a federal court in California ruled against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in a case involving fluoride. The court said that current levels of fluoride violate the Toxic Substances Control Act. Judge Edward Chen declared that there is “substantial and scientifically credible evidence” that fluoride poses a serious health risk and emphasized concern over fluorides effect on the developing brains of infants.

“In all, there is substantial and scientifically credible evidence establishing that fluoride poses a risk to human health; it is associated with a reduction in the IQ of children and is hazardous at dosages that are far too close to fluoride levels in the drinking water of the United States,” the judge wrote in his ruling.

[oediex]

If anyone is in need of some good news re: abortion

There is currently a discussion within the government of Belgium to extend the possibility of abortion beyond the current 12-week period.

Abortion was legalised in Belgium in 1990. At the time, the then-king of Belgium refused to ratify the law (this is usually just a formality) due to ethical objections. This was resolved by declaring the king "incapable of reigning" for a short time, which allowed the then-federal ministers to ratify the law themselves.

Currently, abortion is possible up to 12 weeks of pregnancy. The person wishing to end their pregnancy will have a consultation with a psychosocial health care professional to discuss it. There is then a 6-day period in which the person has the time to think it all over. You can take more than 6 days as well, but that is the minimum required. After that, you can have your abortion either at an abortion centre, or at a hospital (when there is a danger for the health of the person undergoing the abortion, or when that person wishes to have it done under anaesthesia, or when it's past the 12 weeks). There are currently 7 abortion centres in Flanders (about half of Belgium, approx. 6 million people).

Abortion beyond 12 weeks of pregnancy is legal under certain circumstances, such as when the health of the pregnant person is at risk or when it is known the unborn baby has an incurable illness.

Illegal abortion can lead to a fine or imprisonment for both the doctor and the person undergoing abortion.

Minors can have an abortion without permission from their parents.

The whole procedure is 4 euros if you've got health insurance. Note that every person living in Belgium is required to have health insurance, which is very cheap - about 8-9 euros per month, with tons of benefits. Without health insurance, it's between 100 and 550 euros (depending on where it's done).

The person undergoing abortion can also be seen at an additional appointment afterwards if such need arises. You can always go to an abortion centre afterwards as well, for both physical and mental support. They will also support you in choosing the right contraception afterwards.

That's the current situation. Here's what the discussion is mainly about:

Extending the maximum period to either 14 or 18 weeks. The 14 weeks is what the christian centre party currently part of the coalition is accepting (this changed recently, before they did not want to extend it at all). 18 weeks is what the other coalition parties want and what has been suggested by an expert committee made up of scientists. Most of these experts actually suggest it should be extend to 20 or even 22 weeks, but 18 is what they presented to the government (because of 1 expert).

Other notable suggestions the expert committee has presented (there are a total of 25 points):

More effort with regards to prevention, education, and access to contraception

certain contraception methods, such as coils or implants, to be free for longer (some of them are currently free until 18, some until 25, etc.)

The 6 days to "think it over" between the first discussion and the actual abortion should go

easier access to abortion medication

decriminalise the person undergoing abortion or doing an abortion themselves when it is done illegally

Source (in Dutch)

[e-carlease]

But what models can you choose? As at August 2024, there are two key options to consider including:

Long Range Single Motor - from £59,990 this standard model benefits from the plus pack for Harman Kardon premium sound, HUD, Zinc Deco, Pixel LED lights, powered-operated tailgate, auto-dimming exterior mirrors, rear control screen (for the passenger), 12-way adjustable seats, power reclining rear seats, heated front/rear seats and steering wheel, 3-zone climate control, air filtration and 22kW AC charging. The car also includes camera-based interior mirror, LED interior and exterior lights, rain sensing wipers, automated crash protection, hill hold and descent control, 10.2” driver LCD display, 11-exterior camera system, 15.4” central display, wireless smartphone charging, adaptive cruise control, insurance telematics, launch mode, dashcam, keyless entry, alarm and battery preconditioning; and

Long Range Dual Motor - from £66,990 this allows you to get the Performance pack including the 22” Performance alloys.

Colours include Magnesium (free) or the chargeable Snow, Electron, Storm, Space and Gold. Inside, you can go for the Charcoal or Mist with the Zinc deco or upgrade the Nappa leather. In terms of packs, you have the Pilot Pack (Piot Assist and change assist), Pro Pack (21” Pro wheels and Swedish gold seats) and the Performance Pack (22” alloys, Engineering chassis tuning, Brembo brakes and Swedish gold accents). Other options include the Electrochromic glass roof (which replaces the standard panoramic roof), body-coloured lower-claddings and the privacy glass. You can add the fully-electrically retractable towbar too.  

But how does the Polestar 4 perform - is it a good EV?

Long Range Single Motor - The RWD SUV option will have a 94 kWh usable battery which will offer 0 – 62 times of 7.4 seconds, 112 mph top speeds and 200 kW (or 268 hp). Expect a combined winter range of 260 miles with warmer weather allowing for 350 miles. On charging, the 22 kW AC max will allow 5 hours and 15 min 0 – 100% charging times with the 200 kW DC maximum allowing 31 minute 10 – 80% times. A cargo volume of 526L is available with this car. It has a vehicle fuel equivalent of 131 mpg. This option can tow 750kg (unbraked) and 1500kg (braked). There will be Bidirectional charging with the V2L announced for this option. A Heat Pump is standard and

Long Range Dual Motor - the AWD SUV option will have a 94 kWh usable battery which will offer 0 – 62 times of 3.8 seconds, 124 mph top speeds and 400 kW (or 536 hp). Expect a combined winter range of 245 miles with warmer weather allowing for 325miles. On charging, the 22 kW AC max will allow 5 hours and 15 min 0 – 100% charging times with the 200 kW DC maximum allowing 31 minute 10 – 80% times. A cargo volume of 526L is available with this car. It has a vehicle fuel equivalent of 123 mpg. This option can tow 750kg (unbraked) and 1500kg (braked). There will be Bidirectional charging with the V2L announced for this option. A Heat Pump is standard.