> 12 states are non-recourse, including CA and TX.
This wording makes it sound like mortgages are required to be non-recourse loans in the 12 states, but that's not the case. 12 states allow non-recourse loans, however they are not common for mortgages, with many lenders not even offering them.
Ha! That explains those weird videos of houses in neighbourhoods which looks like a neutron bomb or the Rapture. Cars left, coffe cups on the tables, sometimes facilities still working, TV on. Nobody there.
I don't have links, but look at Detroit during the crash of 2008. There were a lot of photos at the time of entire neighborhoods abandoned by people whose mortgages were underwater.
There's Fed Reserve research on this. The only thing recourse does is make borrowers a bit less sensitive to negative equity and only for high value homes:
"Importantly, recourse affects default only through lowering borrowers sensitivity to negative equity. Unconditionally, there is no difference between the default rates in recourse and non-recourse states."
"The effect of recourse is significant only for higher-appraised properties."
> Credit standards and interest rates will be different on non-recourse loans
"To the extent that borrowers in recourse states are less likely to default in response to negative equity, and are more likely to default in a lender-friendly way if they do default, lenders are likely to face smaller losses from default in recourse states. Thus, one might expect interest rates to be lower in recourse states. However, we find no evidence that they are; in fact, we find that loans are more expensive in recourse states."
Many recourse states require the bank to credit you the full appraised value, not the actual foreclosure sale value - because banks often bid against themselves at foreclosure auctions and control bid acceptance so they effectively set the foreclosure price. Various things (wages, personal property, retirement accounts) are often excluded from recourse for your primary home. In some states like Minnesota a jury must determine the fair market value of a foreclosed home. Other states have strict requirements (like short filing deadlines) or lengthy procedures (all attorney billable hours!).
This effectively makes non-foreclosure options way more popular - where a bank will ofter to take the deed and cancel the debt. In the end it is more cost-effective for the bank and better for the borrower.
Furthermore even if you get a deficiency judgement the old proverb "You can't squeeze blood from a stone" applies. Someone who can't pay their mortgage is unlikely to have significant assets to draw on. All you get for your trouble is a bankruptcy filing from the borrower. After all that time and trouble your deficiency judgement gets discharged anyway.
In the end recourse states mean more defaults happen through a voluntary non-foreclosure process but lending standards and interest rates are not that different and very few borrowers ever actually have a deficiency judgement let alone pay a dime toward one.
For the vast majority of people caffeine is very mild compared to cocaine. Coca leaves are in the ballpark of caffeine, however you would rate that subjectively. And personally I think I would have found it hard to tell which was which in a blind test.
As a side note coca tea (or chewed leaves) are often recommended for managing altitude, and chewing leaves did seem to help with headaches I was having at > 12k feet, but again it was fairly subtle, and I am not convinced it's not just placebo/a nice distraction.
If I’ve gone a long time without caffeine a single coffee could keep me awake up for two consecutive all nighters. As a regular drinker I still cannot handle more than one cup of coffee per day. It turns out that I have a number of genes that increase the intensity and the duration of effect. I think genes explain most of the differences in experiences with caffeine.
Same, the first time I ever had a cup of coffee I missed two nights sleep.
I have only done 23andme not a WGS like you, but I have at least one liver enzyme SNP that dramatically slows down caffeine metabolism. It took me quite a while to realize that the advice of "no caffeine after 5pm" or whatever needed to be something more like - no more than one cup of coffee before dawn.
Yeah, it would be nice if these general life rules / advice could be written down somewhere with the exceptions listed. I would have appreciated getting a personalized handbook that would have given me a heads up that I was different. Given the price of WGS being low enough to be generally available I think this is something humanity could benefit a lot more from.
That concept is so broad and generally useful it can only be broadly represented by something like Timothy Leary's statement of "think for yourself, and question authority."
Of course, knowing for sure specific facts showing that you are different in some way such that general advice doesn't apply is super useful because it saves you the effort of having to solve the problem on your own- you will always find new ones that nobody has already solved.
No, Aumann's theorem proves a much more limited thing. For one thing, it assumes agents have a common prior, which is a very strong assumption not present in most cases where people "agree to disagree".
When the disagreement starts from foundational subjective disagreements, such as what constitutes malpractice or intent or incompetence, etc, the theorem has nothing to say, and it is perfectly reasonable to say that you "agree to disagree".
In this particular trial it wasn't used for treatment but for prevention, the patients don't have HIV (and none had it at the end of the trial either because it was so successful!)
That said: generally there's no guarantee of continued treatment.
It does in fact prevent infection you have misunderstood.
It very clearly prevents infection incredibly well, proof of that in the real world is exactly why there is excitement over this drug.
It also sounds as though you misunderstood the mechanism, it interferes in both an early and a late step in the viral process, there no theoretical reason to describe it as "not interfering with infection".
From what I read, it interferes with capsid formation. Since HIV is a retrovirus, by the time capsid formation is happening it has already integrated itself with the host cell’s DNA.
That implies that as long as the drug is present, the virus won’t be able to replicate, however as soon as the drug is no longer present the virus will start replicating. Because the cell has been infected.
What is unique about Nicaraguan sign is that the entire process of evolving from a loose invented communication system with lots of pantomime and little regular linguistic structure into something with grammar and visual "phonemes" and a fixed core vocabulary was observed in real time over several generations of speakers.
As successive group of users were introduced to it as new native speakers they evolved it adding more and more structure, it doesn't start out fully language like at first. I can't think of any other case where that process has been documented in action.
Credit standards and interest rates will be different on non-recourse loans, and cancelled debt typically has to be reported as income and taxed.