Lead is softer and can accommodate the thermal expansion and minor structure movements with ease. It is also very durable, unlike plastics that can and will deteriorate when exposed to temperature swings, water and ice, and ultraviolet radiation.
3 Likes
Jeep Dip
1 Like
Aluminum is stiff. & There is nothing quite like the malleability of lead sheet. A well-constructed house will not be touching its chimney, as in the structural wood and chimney brick or stone will not be in contact, but maybe an inch or so apart, all the way up through each floor, and through the roof. That means thereās a gap at the top that must be flashed. Lead is the classical material used to flash that gap, because it is so malleable and conforms to whatever shape the chimney is or what the roof needs. Think about irregular stone shapes, compared to flat bricks.
But lead is old-school, as newer houses DO use pieces of aluminum or steel flashing and a bunch of caulking to flash a chimbley. Lead, thoughā¦ way easier to work with, despite the environmental toxicity.
For the hips and valleys of the other areas of a roof, lead is not used - itās extruded aluminum sheeting, or something called galvalume. Galvalume is just galvanized steel coated with a mixture of aluminum and zinc to prevent rust. Older homes used old-school uncoated galvanized steel sheet, often with generous amounts of tar spread around. Posh homes use rolled copper. Richard Dawkins uses gold hammered flat by children with the skulls of other children.
4 Likes
And what about the rich people who are making money off of the current system? Wonāt anyone thing of them?
The American government spends more on healthcare per person the Canadian one does. HOW?!?
2 Likes
How good was that? What happened?
Not much, persons without a bank account are still a huge problem - mostly because the banks still deny account openings for the poor and homeless (not systematically and hard to prove, but still).
In 2016 a new EU regulation will take effect, this time enforced as a law and not a wishy-washy self-commitment - letās see if this works, I am cautiously optimistic.
5 Likes
I wouldnāt count on that. Next time the banks need a bailout, FDIC is going to mean fuck all. They will take depositorsā money instead of government money next time.
1 Like
People said that last time too. Soā¦what evidence do you have of this?
If by ālast timeā you mean 2008, I remember barely anyone saying that the situation would definitely be resolved by giving depositors a āhaircutā ā I remember that being reported as one of the options on the table. Which is definitely what it was. In fact, by the time most people had any idea what was going on, the TARP bailout program was already approved. Bail-ins were considered, briefly, but rejected in favor of giving hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to the banks and then loaning trillions of dollars to the banks at essentially zero interest (quantitative easing).
So your demand for evidence is predicated on a false premise. But to try to bend over backwards to be reasonable, what would you even accept as evidence in the first place? I am talking about something that is literally unprecedented, so I canāt provide any statistics about it. I havenāt hacked any Fed emails, so I donāt have any secret insight to the fedās plans.
Iām probably basing my prediction on the same stuff youāre basing your antiprediction on ā background knowledge about finance and the opinions of people I respect who work in that industry.
So how about a solid prediction from you and the evidence for it? Why not show me how itās done?
ETA: Most talk about bail-ins seems to have occurred after 2008 in regards to what should be done in response to the next financial catastrophe. Any wonder why I ended up with the opinion I did, then?
1 Like
Sorry, Iām just going by what the insurance agreement says on its face. It isnāt on me to prove that the norm will continue to be the norm. It is on people making extraordinary claims to prove them.
Cool story, bro, though. Youāre clearly very excited by this. Me? Iām in lunch break and shipping a release tomorrow and have more important things to do than arguing on the Internet. 
That said, if something is just your opinion, you should probably qualify it as such and not stridently state it as a fact when it first comes up. As you say, you donāt have any secret knowledge missing from the rest of us.
How does insurance hedge against extreme loss or failure? They literally reinsureāthey take out insurance on the policies they issued. This is common practice, though at the very top the reinsurer of last resort is the Fed.
But that is why we bailed out AIG, because they were the largest non government reinsurer in the country (world? Hard to say). Without that step either depositors take a haircut (hello Greece and anyone with more than $100k!) Or you prop up the reinsurer.
I doubt the US would ever make depositors take a haircut, but it happens in other countries with strong currencies.
Jeez, not sure why all this hostility on the basis of me stating an opinion. Maybe your release isnāt going that well? No need to take it out on me.
Like everyone else in the thread did with their unfounded opinions on whether itās better to hoard gold, cash, water, or iodine tablets in case of the apocalypse? Oh wait, that never happened. You seem to be holding me to a different standard than everyone else. Did I piss in your Mueslix or something?
Could you please be more specific what you mean by āstridentlyā here? Is it more or less strident than the following opinion (note the lack of disclaimer pointing out that it is merely opinion):
It is simple. People are greedy bastards and say āWhy should I have to pay for all these idiots?!?! They can pay for their own damn healthcare.ā
1 Like
Now that QE is off the table, I would bet haircuts are back on the table.
Itās possible that the US would try to run up a bunch more debt to bail them out instead, but:
a) already acknowledged as a moral hazard, which is what spurred a lot of the talks about bail ins in the first place
b) thereās only so many times you can do this before other countries start wondering whether youāre really as credit worthy as a world military and economic hegemon is supposed to be
Itās charming that some people think that āthe norm will continue to be the normā even in the face of financial meltdown and despite prior evidence, but Iām not so sure that promises made in times of plenty hold up so well in times of trouble.
2 Likes
Yeah,it really is anyoneās guess, but its not like it doesnāt happen.
Which you failed to provide? When has the government not honored FDIC insurance despite promises to do so?
The FDIC was created in 1933.
AIG was created in 1919 and failed.
The FDIC is an independent government agency, but the failure of it could cascade to depostors losing money.
Of course I think more QE is about 10,000x more likely if we got to that point.
1 Like
In response to previous failures, runs on banks, national crises, etc. It seems to have worked since then though, even through 2008ās āNot a Depression.ā
Sure has! Letās not accidently privatize it though 
2 Likes
I and a friend actually trimmed about 3 inches all round off the lead flashing on my dadās roof and walked all the way through town with it in a wheelbarrow to weigh it in for money for booze and LSD. True story. I was a fucking dick as a teenager. Iām glad my kidās better than me, I tell you.
2 Likes
As far as you knowā¦ 
4 Likes
