Hi Virgo! This is House of Virgo doing your love reading for the next 24 hours for Virgo's son Moon Rising or Venus. Please remember some of the messages may or may not resonate. Just take a fifth, sleep the rest. Personal reading links are below this video. You can also follow me on my other Tarot channel called Moon Pitero. If you're new to my channel, okay. I'm also on Instagram at House of Virgo. Alright, let's see Virgo. Wow. Okay, past position of the world. The ten of wands. Five of cups. Okay. Current position, the moon. Five of pentacles. The six of cups. Future. Seven of swords. Six of wands. And you have the lovers. Alright. It's all about the energy. So we do have Aquarius, Leotaurus, Scorpio, Cancer Pisces, Gemini for those of you who need to know. So the past position, something ended and something new began in the past. Remember you were connecting with somebody here in the past put an end to a burden or struggle. There's a lot of grief and sadness that came with that. That could be you. Just remember these readings could be reversed. This very well could have been you that you put something to rest with the world. Okay.  And there's an element of the five of cups of feeling very sad. Okay. Some of you may have a sense of regret, but this could be your person as well. Something ended because it was very stressful. Maybe you ended it with them and they moved on or vice versa. But whomever, usually when I do these readings or looking at the other person, I feel like this person, perhaps sometime at some point in the past, there was this desire to start over, have something like to turn the page and start back at the beginning. But I feel like your person had a really hard time with accepting the love. It seemed like all they could ever really look at is those three spilled cups and not the two and not what was offered to them. It was too much of a burden. Either they tried to have a new start with you, but it was just very heavily weighted down. Their emotions kept them. They were just sad all the time. Or they just didn't feel like they could carry some type of burden or the stress of a relationship because of how I feel like there was a sense of uncertainty within them. It was much easier for them to just try to have their freedom because the burden to carry seemed like it was just too much for them. Let's get a clarifying card for the world card here. I feel like your person carried along with them in any new start intimate romantic relationship. They carry the burden of grief. This person always thought that they weren't lovable or that they would be abandoned. That's the heavy burden to carry, but they always kept trying to start over, perhaps with you or they would just leave it and go start over elsewhere until things got tough, until it was revealed that they don't feel good enough. They would just close the chapter with you and go to somebody else and then they would try to come back to you. See, they never got rid of that. They just kind of were like, well, if we start over, maybe it would be different. It's kind of like insanity, doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results so things are going to change as long as you keep carrying around those struggles. Right? So the world here, four of cups. See? Emotional unavailability. That's avoidance. This person had a sense of unfulfillment. You know, maybe that dates back to their childhood or they never got that love. You know, they traveled the world looking for love, but they could never connect or they felt unloved or unworthy of love. This person might have become indifferent to love or apathetic. Love would always come in because that four of cups energy can be like, they'd always have like, they'd meet somebody newer, they would meet you and it'd be like a surprise and they'd be happy there was love, but then they just could never get into it and they turn into that unhappiness. Let's see the 10 of wands here. The emperor, I feel like the emperor has just been showing up in Virgo's readings a lot. It was a very burden, a heavy, heavy burden for this person, male or female, to be in a leadership role in a relationship with you. Okay? Or even to think about becoming a father or being a good father. Okay? It was too much for this person to bear. So they went down into grief and sadness and you know, that feeling of I'm not good enough on their compare. This person might have traveled the world so much in their youth that they never really made strong roots or connections with people or in their younger years for some. It's possible that they sought much of their fulfillment online or communicating through text and all, which it's not the real world, you know, kept seeking to make a connection and then they'd meet someone new and then they would feel good at the moment. Like, oh, this person likes me, but then here comes that 50 cups energy. The past followed them everywhere they went. Let's get a clarifier for the past. Yep. The angel always with them, trying to bring them peace and balance and harmony, but this person just never believed maybe in divine timing. They had a hard time tempering their emotions. Okay. They really had a hard time with that in the past. Their grief, this person just was so always sinking in their grief and their sadness or feeling sorry for themselves, you know. So the current energy here is the moon, which wow. I feel like this person is about to walk through or pass through this energy of the wild side and their domesticated side, the side that has expectations that they behave a particular way, society, environment, you, whomever, and then the other side that just wants to be wild and free. So there's an element with the moon here, where I feel this person, things are being revealed to them very slowly. Okay. Some unseen issues and problems and things that have happened in their life that they have not addressed those deep, deep emotions, you know, those dark shadows, those things that come out at night, those things that scare us off and make us run through your pentacles. This person has suppressed emotions. They suppress their emotions through work. Okay. I feel like one of the things that's coming up for them is they do want teamwork, they do want partnership, they do want to be married, but it was always like, do I do that? Can I do that? That the domesticated side? Or do I just stay wild and free? And what's really on their mind at this time, what's really starting to show up is a time for me to domesticate myself, be a good father, be a husband, be a good wife, be a mother, get married, commit, team up with somebody, collaborate, work, acquire the skills. How do I do this? So there are things like this coming up for this person presently. And then the five of pentacles is here. So we have two fives in the reading thus far. And again, the fives represent change and uncertainty, but they also represent realignment. There may have been inconsistency. Okay. So the reason why this person always felt abandoned or left out in the cold was because they could never commit to something. It wasn't anybody else that really just, I mean, I don't know that you left this person out in the cold, but I feel like this, your person couldn't not commit. I feel like they were able to commit to things in their life, other areas in their life, but the emotional intimate relationship thing. Their head was kind of always up in the clouds because they could never commit or they just couldn't. I don't want to say commit. For some it is that, but for others, this person struggled, they struggled in making a decision. They couldn't decide where they wanted to be or where they needed to be. And then those on the receiving end of that, other people would leave them. So they kept setting themselves up to be left. And I feel like this person is coming to terms with that. Presently, they do feel left out in the cold. They don't know where you stand or what you want. But I feel like they are recognizing and coming to terms with getting like a restored sense of how they feel about you and coming to terms with that they need to make a decision now. And they do. And then there's reconciliation. There's an apology this person. I feel like no longer wishes to live in the past, no longer being naive or having unrealistic expectations set on themselves and on you. And I feel like they either come in to apologize or just try to reconcile with you and express how they feel. Okay, queen of sorts. Okay, that's our first person to show up here. So Liebergem and I Aquarius. Coming in with the truth, not just with kindness and sincerity and a lovely expression of warmth and emotion, but also their intention here to come and reconcile with you. I feel like the message is mostly to be completely direct and open and truthful. Like it's real. Like if you were to ask, okay, this person's coming in to reconcile with me, but is it true? Is it real? Yes, because Queen of Swords is here. They mean it. They mean it. It's truly sincere. Okay, and it could be for some of you an error element. Okay, so, you know, it doesn't have to be a lover for some. It could be a friend or a family member or it could be an ex or a lover, someone you're currently dealing with. But going forward in the future, the Seven of Swords is here. So there's something here about a sense of like running away to honesty, betrayal, sneakiness. But what I feel, and I don't, I've never looked at this card and thought this, it's kind of in the reverse for me. Okay, there was a stalemate situation between you and this person. That's what the Two of Swords is. This person is coming in with their Five Swords, which is someone who is taking action, despite what others feel, think or say, just leaving behind any naysayers or anybody who would disagree. And they're climbing up that mountain to grab these Two Swords so that it no longer becomes a stalemate between the two of you. I've never said that before. But I feel like you're in that tent there and you've got those Two Swords going forward and maybe even feeling this now. Like you can't do anything about this. It's, there's a block here. You may have blocked this person from coming into your home or coming anywhere near your home, but this person sneaks up with those Five Swords. The Five of Swords is like somebody who is like determined to break through. Okay, but they do it in a way where they don't reveal it to anyone, right? They don't let anyone know. They just kind of like, this is what their intentions are and they don't, it's not that they have something to hide. Maybe they have people that told them that you guys weren't a good fit or you shouldn't be together. But I feel like this person doesn't care what anybody else says and they're coming in to, you know, compromise. They've made a decision here about you. And so the Six of Wands is here.  They want to take your hand. They want to come into union with you and have that deep partnership. That's just it. That's that twin-flamed thing. This person definitely is coming back in and hoping to win your favor.  They're ignoring all that. So show me the Seven of Swords. Okay, yeah, look at them. They've been definitely, or they will be. The reason for that Seven of Swords energy is to come is because I feel like this person, there's persistence. They're persistent. That's what's driving them. This person is holding up their boundaries and walls too. I feel like there's people who tell them, or maybe it's the thoughts in their head because it is sword energy that have said, no, don't go forward with Virgo. No, don't do it. It might be fears, right? Because they didn't feel they were good enough. Perhaps they're just ignoring it now. And I feel like this person wants to strange. I know it's going to sound strange. It feels like it's like this is that person's ops. You know, this is the person that's like standing guard the gate so nobody can get in or come in and say anything while they come to you. This is like their decoy, their front. This person says, sorry, but this person here isn't available. I'm blocking the entry because they're going somewhere could be sneaking away on a vacation or just coming to see you or something or communicating with that about that, you know, like in a kind of a deceptive way, like, hey, I'm going to be they might show up at a pub that you go to or they might show up, you know, they're going to be in town or something. You know, it's just their intention is to come remove these two swords as stalemate. So they've got somebody here that's kind of covering for them. Crazy message. Let's see what the six of wands energy is. Three of cups. Yeah, they want reunion. This person, they want to win your heart. They definitely want to win your heart. They're even going to if they have sisters or they have connection with friends or whatever, like it's going public, not others that they're connecting with their this person's intentions going forward is to reveal after this connection gets made, they're going to reveal to others that they have won the heart of Virgo and they're going to parade that around that they not not in a bad way. Don't take it wrong. It's a good way. I don't it's interesting because I feel like it's mostly coming from the fact that this person is really seeing that living on the wild side while might be fun and adventurous. It's lonely out there. That's that lone wolf right there. Your person's been like living that lone wolf lifestyle and they're looking to be more civilized and more domesticated. And that's what the change is and they know you're the one that they can do that with. Okay. So do they get a lot of attention from the opposite sex or others? Yes. Are they going to enjoy that? Yes. Does that mean that anything nasty is going on? No, because the three of cups is in the upright. This is more like friends, celebrations and a circle of support. This is people around them. Once they come out and they win your favor who are going, they're going to come out with it and they're going to have a lot of support for your connection and then the lovers is here. Okay. So there could be marriage or a sense of like coming together once and for all and both of you making this decision to end up in union. Again, that's a twin flame. You've been some of you burgers have just been ongoingly dealing connecting with a twin flame. Let's get some clarity. Show me the lovers please. Okay. Tower. There is definitely be careful. There could be, you know, this is a shock. This person is going to marry you Virgo. You both like you maybe some of you might have been waiting for it. Some of you might gave up on it, but there's also like physical explosive physical sexual union as well here. And there's definitely that energy is going to be there. Be careful because that could, if you're not trying to have a child, that could very well happen because it's obvious that there's no protection on that. You know, the tower could be a very foul symbol. There's no protection there or there could be like if there is protection like a crack or a leak, so to speak. But in more symbolic terms, there's an energy here of like this connection is going to be like absolutely explosive. This, you know, massive change coming here. The tower isn't always negative. It feels scary because everything shakes up, you know, when lightning strikes, it's scary. It's a big kaboom.  I'm not talking about one out in a field somewhere. I mean, that's like hits the house. This is how this is going to feel. It feels like a spark happens. You know, I'm just hearing that. Fleawood Mac gypsy song lightning strikes maybe once, maybe twice, but it changes everything. This is like divine intervention. The ego is stripped away. And there's an energy of, I know, there's a connection between spiritual insight and wisdom. And that's between the two of you. It's like an I know that we're meant to be together in all of our nakedness and all of our vulnerabilities. If you're a male, if you could see the male is looking at the female, the female's form, the attraction to the female that, you know, he looks at her. But the female is looking up to spirit. The female trusts her intuition. She trusts God. She has to because the snake is on her side. The evil and the temptation is always with her. She can at times be the temptress, but she seeks spiritual insight and guidance. That's how she avoids snake. And the male over here, he's got the tree of knowledge. Okay. He's very wise, but the tree is on fire. And for me, it's burning up because everything this man thought that he knew when he looks at her, it all is gone because she is the light. She is the way for him. Everything that he does going forward has everything to do with her. Okay.  Let's get a couple of angel wisdom messages for you, Virgo. Yep, there's that seven of cups again. Make a choice. Stop procrastinating or over analyzing. Get clarity on what your desire move forward. There may be too many options or maybe addictions. Well, as I said, your person is making this decision now. And maybe so are you strength, personal power and assertiveness portrayed with kindness, compassion that brings about forgiveness, realizing that you're stronger than you knew. That's Leo energy. And that also we have Scorpio energy there is power. That's eight that represents authority, strength, organization, control and materialism. There's a crown. I'm seeing a crown. Somebody is like getting a crown placed on them. And somebody is getting the crown knocked off of them. I feel like there's some... I just feel like you're taking your rightful place, Virgo. King of pentacles. There we go. Compassionate, accomplished, charismatic, grounded. A time of great success, financial security and prosperity, the Midas touch, everything turning out beautifully, a supportive parent and or spouse, a good person to work for. Okay, this could be you, Virgo, or this is somebody that you're dealing with who's of the earth element. They don't have to be earth, but they come across with that element who's possessing the earth element. Okay, so that was just a little bit of confirmation. I feel like somebody here is gaining the courage and the strength to finally make this decision to stop procrastinating. They're getting clarity on the fact that they desire you and wish to move forward with you. All of their options and addictions, they're putting them away. Very grounded energy. Okay, they wish to be successful with you, Virgo. So in love, congratulations. So I hope you enjoyed your reading. I will see you in 24 hours for your next reading. Please do hit like, share and subscribe here on my channel, and I will speak to you very soon. Take care.


So my name is Jeremy Galula. I'm a senior staff technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. And my name's Ernesto Falcone. I'm the Legislative Counsel at EFF. My work primarily is focused in Washington D.C. with Congress, and I also work in the state legislatures representing EFF and the issues we fight on on civil liberties and technology. So, you know, we're joining us now because right now at this very second, the United States Senate is holding a debate over whether or not we're going to have consumer privacy when we go online. There is a vote pending, you know, I've looked to my left because we actually have the Senate floor live in front of us. And this is a vote on whether the Federal Communications Commission can enforce the law to protect your privacy when you go online, namely controlling the power of cable and telephone companies who have an extraordinary window into your activities when you use the Internet. Jeremy, why don't you kind of give people kind of the perspective of to what extent are we talking about the power of the ISP? Because I think regularly I see a lot of folks think they don't have any, you know, there's no difference between cable and telephone companies and kind of what the Internet companies can see, Google and YouTube and the rest. But there is some pretty fundamental differences. Totally. So to be clear what the Senate's voting on is the FCC passed these rules that would keep your Internet service provider from spying on your traffic, snooping through it, inserting ads into your traffic, basically just playing with your Internet connection for something other than providing you Internet service. And when you think about it, you know, as Ernie said, you know, there's a lot of tracking going online, companies like Google and Facebook, ad networks, analytics companies. But the difference, the real difference between say what your ISP can see and what a company like, you know, Google or Facebook can see is Google or Facebook only see the data that your browser sends to their websites. When you're on Facebook, Google isn't seeing anything. When you're on Google, Facebook isn't seeing anything and vice versa. Plus, you can install tracker blockers onto your into your browser that just block this third party tracking outright. EFF has one. It's called Privacy Badger. It's free. It's easy to install in Chrome or Firefox. And so you can really easily just disappear from this sort of tracking. But you can't disappear from your ISP's tracking.  They're the ones who carry the request back and forth. And so if these rules get repealed, it'll give ISPs a lot of latitude in what they can do.  That's something that these rules would prevent. That's something they want to do. They're already doing to some extent right now. And it would allow them to do it even more.  You know, they can sell that data to marketers straight up. They could also snoop through your traffic to determine that sort of thing. You know, what are you browsing for? And then inject ads. They could insert ads into your browsing. So you'll actually see ads on top of the ads that already exist, which I don't think anybody wants in their internet browsing. They can do things like pre-install spyware on your phone. So this is mobile ISPs too. We're talking not just the Comcasts and charters of the world. We're talking Sprint, Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile. And so when you buy a phone from them, they could pre-install spyware on it that tells them, you know, these are the websites that Jeremy is visiting. These are the websites Ernie is visiting. This is what he's browsing for. And the real annoying thing there is that depending on how they install it and what it does, even if your traffic is encrypted, so a lot of people say, oh, there's nothing to worry about because I use, you know, all my sensitive traffic is encrypted over HTTPS, you could easily, if you were a phone company, install something on someone's phone before you sell it to them that just bypasses that encryption. Another one that's really, really creepy is basically inserting tracking IDs into your traffic.  I'm just going to override that and insert more tracking cookies and you can't do anything about it. And we saw Verizon do this. This was that whole zombie cookie issue, the undeletable, undetectable cookie that Verizon said, oh, we'll just insert this into all of our customers' traffic. So there's a lot of really disturbing things and outrageous things. And to be clear, these are all things that these companies have already done. So we know they can do it. We know they've done it before. We know they want to do it. And our concern is that without these rules, they're going to do it again in the future. Well, and let's kind of go into kind of what the rule. So, you know, it's worthwhile to remember that the companies, when they engage in these activities, were kind of entering a legal gray space. They had to really debate whether or not they was even legal for them to do it. And the FCC, when they updated the Privacy Rules a little about a year ago, less than a year ago, I mean, pretty much put a red line and says, no, not lawful. Because even that Verizon issue, they got in trouble at the end of the day, correct? They did. But it's unclear, you know, if this sort of rule is rolled back, whether or not the FCC could enforce it again. So one thing I'm curious, Ernesto, is, you know, these rules sound pretty common sense straightforward. Get the consumer's consent before you use their private information for something besides providing them Internet access. So who is pushing back against this? Which, I mean, obviously the ISPs are because they want to sell the data. But which lawmakers, I mean, this sounds like a pretty underhanded thing to do. I mean, it sounds very much sort of like the swamp culture that Republicans have been fighting against and saying they're going to get rid of, you know, draining the swamp in D.C. So who's actually going along with the ISPs here? So the primary author of the Senate bill that's moving right now is Senator Jeff Flake from Arizona. And I think what the cable and telephone industry have done is essentially convinced him and a handful of legislators are pushing along that what they're doing is no big deal, right? That what they're doing is not real seismically changing the privacy rights of American consumers. And at this moment, these senators believe that. They're incorrect when they think that. But that's what they think. And they're misled at best or misguided at worst. It's worthwhile to remember that these companies have been controlled in this sense in terms of they have to have your permission before they use your personal information for the better part of 20 years. And right now they just see an opportunity to kind of bamboozle Congress. You know, this is namely like Comcast, Rise and AT&T, kind of the biggest players who have legions of lobbyists in D.C. that actively talk to Congress, that have basically convinced them that repealing the current SEC broadband rules will somehow protect privacy because there's an underlying law that regulates them today. But at the same time, you know, undo what they call harmful regulation, which is essentially bogus to say the in kind terms. So which Senate, I mean, you mentioned Jeff Flake from Arizona, but like how do we think people are going to vote on this? You know, this vote's going to be happening in 20 minutes. Like how do we think it's going to shake down? You know, I think it's tightly divided in the United States Senate right now. And what I really want to convey to folks is if you have a moment to pick up the phone and call your senator and to tell them where you stand on consumer privacy, demand that they stand up for your legal right to have your information protected when you go online. So to be clear, you can go to act.eff.org and right on the page right there, there is a, you can click, you'll get to our action alert where you can, we will automatically connect you. You punch in your address will automatically connect you to your senators and representatives. Are there particular senators we're targeting? Yeah, we're pushing for every single senator, but the reality is about 30 senators or so have already come out in favor of ending consumer privacy. If you go to the bill is SJ Res 34. And you can see who it is on the co-sponsor list. The folks we're targeting and pushing hard are folks who have made their opinion public. Senators from, Susan Collins from Maine for example, Senator Portman from Ohio. So if I list out states, if you're in these states, call those senators ASAP. Yeah, so let's be clear. These are the senators we think we can convince. Unfortunately, this has become a very partisan issue and we think it's going to be almost a party line vote. And so what we need to get are Republican senators who either haven't made up their mind yet. Maybe they're going to be facing reelection within a year or two. And so we need to get them to vote no on this. Yeah, and let me kind of, it's worthwhile to explain why this is really kind of a Senate Republican player right now is, one, they're the majority party in the United States Senate that control the agenda. And two, the procedure that Senator Flake from Arizona, the author, is pursuing is called the Congressional Review Act, which allows him to bypass the filibuster which would have required eight Democratic senators to have agreed. So really, for the most part, this is within the ballpark of the Senate Republicans have decided as majority party whether they would agree by 51 votes or not. And they have 53 seats in the United States Senate and the Democrats have 47, sorry, they have 52 and the Democrats have 48. So just purely on a 52 vote margin, they can get this through to the House. The next step would be obviously the United States House will then take it up and the fight will continue from there. Yeah, so again, we're targeting senators like, you said Susan Collins? Yeah, I mean, if you look at the states that... Portman in Ohio, Toomey in Pennsylvania. There's Senator Garner from Colorado. These are senators who have not taken a public position that if three of them decided to vote no right now in the next 30 to 45 minutes or withheld their support by abstaining from voting altogether, if they're undecided, then they would kill the bill. They would prevent it from moving forward. So we've got some questions. So I'll just jump in the first one actually we get is, you know, can I just browse in incognito mode to avoid being tracked by my ISP? Unfortunately, the answer is no. All incognito mode does on your browser is it basically deletes cookies when you close the browser. So it actually helps you avoid being tracked by companies like Google or Facebook, DoubleClick, it doesn't do anything for tracking by your ISP because it doesn't change how your traffic is sent. Your ISP can still see all of the traffic. The only way you could avoid being tracked by your ISP if these rules get repealed is using a VPN and that costs money. That just straight up... The Republicans in Congress are basically saying, we're going to say that people have to pay a privacy tax if they want to keep their data private and that'll take the form of a VPN.  We think that you should be able to browse freely without having to worry if your ISP is snooping on you. Well, and if I can add to that too, I mean, what's ironic in all this is Senator Flake and the proponents of repealing these rules are arguing that the FCC overreached, right? And that's a common refrain. The government overreached and frankly we see very often that the federal government does overreach in other instances. But sometimes the government gets it right, right? Like once in a while there's times where, and in this instance, the rules are your ISP can't look in your browsing history. The ISP cannot know what you do on applications. And we see no reason why that's not a good rule, right? We see that that kind of squares the rules that govern cable and telephone back in place of where Congress decided in the 90s. And if you look at, I mean, that's the unfortunate thing, is I think senators have forgotten their own decisions as Congress, but they've told the FCC 20 years ago. Consumers have the right to decide by, you know, whether or not their information is used in ways they don't agree. And the FCC adopted a consent regime. So you're going to see, undoubtedly, if you confront your senator and they voted for this today, you're going to see them kind of do this game of saying, I believe in privacy and the FCC was wrong and where it went. And that somehow their vote didn't actually undermine your legal right to privacy. All that's ridiculous. It's all obfuscation to try to get away from the fact that the people who are pushing them to do it is your cable company, your telephone company, who see an opportunity right now when Congress is engaging in multiple repeals of multiple things in all directions to kind of exploit the ignorance of lawmakers who decided that these companies do not have the right to use your information without your permission. So another question we get is, you know, isn't the federal... So we've been talking about, to be clear, we say, FTC, Federal Communications Commission. But isn't the Federal Trade Commission, the FTC, the one that's supposed to be regulating privacy? So both agencies that are involved in this space and have been involved for a long time. The extraordinary problem right now that we're facing is that if you're living in the states of California, Oregon, Washington, Montana, Nevada, Alaska, Hawaii, and Arizona, ironically enough, given that's the senator pushing this, the Ninth Circuit recently ruled that the FTC does not have the power to discipline what are called common carriers, which is essentially your telephone and cable company. Wait, so you're saying that the court said that the FTC can't regulate, can't discipline, like if my ISP sells my data without my permission, the FTC can't do it because the court said so. So it's a recent, yeah, it's a recent decision. This is AT&T mobility versus FTC. And what the court found was since the Federal Trade Commission historically has not been allowed to go after what are called common carriers, and since the bribe-end industry is a common carriage industry that from this point forward the FTC doesn't have jurisdiction.  And, you know, they're counting on ignorance in Congress to not see that they are basically freeing them in a way that they've never been freed in the past. So we'll be left to our own devices. Like, there will be no cop on the beat to protect us from invasive ISP practices. I mean, it's going to be very difficult at the federal level. The states can be more active, but at the same time, this is how sophisticated the ISP industry is in lobbying. I mean, I've worked, I've had to fight these folks for a very long time for most of my career. And what they do, what they did at a number of states, including our own home state here in California, is gotten themselves deregulated out of public utility commissions and restricted the power of state attorney general to go after them with the argument that the federal government already regulates us. So therefore, why do we need regulation at the state level? We have too many regulations. We need to cut back on some. So there are parts of this country that there is no consumer protection agency that has clear power to police them. These are companies that, you know, I've lived in five places in the last six or seven years. Everywhere I went, I had only Comcast as my option as high-speed internet. You don't have a lot of choice in a lot of places. So we've got another question. Matthew asks, is there any wordage, if it passes, that it will allow them to give it, I presume our data, openly to law enforcement without a warrant?  And they're just like, sure, here. So wherever a warrant is required now, it will still be required. However, the challenge is it's a third-party doctrine and still pollutes kind of our privacy rights when it comes to law enforcement. Namely, when you share your data with a private company, the courts have taken a fairly lenient view of that you've lowered your reasonable expectations of privacy, which is kind of the legal term for when a warrant is required by the Fourth Amendment. The argument I have told a number of members of Congress is wherever the private industry goes in terms of aggregating, collecting, and amassing people's information, the government's not that far behind. This is going to be a moment when ISPs suddenly become, because again, just to remind people, ISPs don't do this as a general matter outside of really pushing the limits of the law that existed prior. They will not be allowed, if Congress did not pass this law, to collect your information in terms of where you browse what applications you use. Yeah, I think that's the big point, is that if this gets repealed, then ISPs will start collecting more information, and so there will be more for them to give the law enforcement with or without a warrant. Whereas if these rules stay on the books, there's no reason for your ISP to start recording your browsing history, because they can't start making money off of it without your permission. And so I think that's really where the key distinction is. The warrant requirement will be the same. It'll just be the data will happen to be recorded in a much easier place for law enforcement to go with or without a warrant. They'll essentially just be much more attractive to law enforcement. I mean, anyone that collects a lot of information becomes an attraction to law enforcement to take that information. And as we've advocated in recent months, delete your logs to the companies that do collect data because you can't surrender information to the government that you don't have in the first place. So Kathleen points out that this is really good information since there are a lot of users who know the plug-and-play functionality of computers who only know the plug-and-play functionality of computers in the internet. And many have no idea how search engines, website servers, and data actually intertwine in the process. And this is something that we have to fight every day at EFF because as Ernie alluded to, a lot of these senators don't understand how the internet works and so they're getting bamboozled, misled by lobbyists in Congress. And of course, the big ISPs have a lot more money for lobbying than the little guys like EFF. So we do what we can to get the information out there. And so that's why we've been sort of pushing out a lot of informative blog posts explaining that you may be tracked a lot online now, but you will be tracked everywhere. And so there's a big difference between being tracked some places and the company that you are paying, whatever, 30, 40, 50, 100 dollars a month, deciding to also track you so they can get a little money on the side selling your data, selling what you browse, what apps you use, what you're searching for, what websites you go to. It can be where you bank, what your political inclinations are. Think about when you look at a news website, they can know what sort of news websites you go to. Depending on whether the news websites using encryption, they can know exactly what you're reading to then try and target you with ads. And who knows beyond targeting of ads what they would do that information, right? These are profit-making entities that their job is to figure out how to maximize the value of the information they have in their hands. The law has prevented them from ever entering that market in the first place. And for some reason, like I said, Senator Flacon and the senators are pushing this repeal, feel that it's somehow unfair that you as a consumer who have no choice, when you use a communication provider, you have no choice but to tell them where you're going to go, right? You have no choice to tell them what website you're going to visit, no matter how sensitive that is to you, to you don't want the world to know, and that somehow it is unfair that the company you've already paid, you've already compensated through your subscription, doesn't have the power to double tip, right? To make it a little extra money on information that's not theirs, it's yours. So I'm guessing that we've got some more people joining us now who maybe didn't see it in the beginning. So just to reiterate, I'm Jeremy Galula. I'm a senior staff technologist at EFF. And Ernesto Falcone, I'm the legislative council at EFF. And so if you're just joining us and you've been hearing about all these terrible things that your ISP could do if these rules get repealed, I want to reiterate that we can stop this. We can keep Congress from pushing this through. We can kill it and protect our privacy protections.  And right there on the page, there is a link that you can click, you fill in your address, and it will automatically figure out who your representative, who your senators are, you call them. And in particular, we need to target Republican representatives, Republican senators, because it's become a partisan issue. I don't understand why. I don't think privacy should be a partisan issue, that's the way the votes are shaking out. And so if you care about this and you live in a red state, a purple state, you have a Republican senator representative, call them and let them know. And just, you know, I think if they hear from enough of their constituents that this is something that you care about, that we care about, I think we can stop it. I think we've got a good chance. Yeah, I really want to emphasize this. In a previous life, I actually worked in Congress, and I will say definitively when people speak out, when people organize, when people take the time to pick up the phone and make that phone call, it matters. I feel like I'm on an NPR pledge drive. Yeah, but it really matters. And I'll say this, I think because they're used to most people not taking the time to reach out, right? Because that's kind of the gauge that a lot of lawmakers think about the politics. They think, well, if no one cared enough and only they cared, then I can assume that either people just didn't care enough or they're supportive of where I was going. And, you know, for those of you that live in a state that has a senator that's pushing this, disabuse them of that notion. Yeah, definitely. Tell them that you care and that, you know, you're going to hold them responsible at the ballot box when it comes time to it. So Kathleen asks, is the repeal effort bipartisan? And we've sort of alluded to, explicitly or no, it is a Republican-led process for, again, I don't understand why it doesn't seem like it'd be a Republican issue. Maybe it's because that's just who the big ISP lobbies figured they could target and convince. I do know that one of the Republicans, the Marsha Blackburn, in the House, who's leading this on the House side, Marsha Blackburn from Tennessee, you know, companies like Verizon are definitely in her top 10 contributors campaigns. And so, there's that. As of right now, the only sponsors and cosponsors of the bills in the House and Senate are Republicans. We don't know if any Democrats will vote for it until they actually hold the votes very soon in the United States Senate. But it seems, at this moment, it seems likely it'll shake down to whether three Republican senators decide to vote no to kill it, presuming at this point that Democrats are as, kind of, has been the pattern right now in the United States Senate.  Do not repeal these rules. We need to keep them. And a Republican senator saying, no, it's going to kill innovation, which doesn't make any sense. Or that it's, you know, unfair to the broadband companies as if they need, you know, special help. I mean, one thing that the cable companies and telephone companies are very good at in D.C., having seen it personally as a staffer and having fought against it in consumer advocacy is they look at what the rhetoric is of the political party and then they try to contort what they want to change into that rhetoric, right? So they're going to make an argument that this is somehow a free market decision or this is somehow this pro-free market to get rid of, you know, people's privacy protections. I, you know, fundamentally disagree with the idea that if consumers themselves are not the ones to decide that they can share their information or not, right? I mean, if it's a compelling product. It should be your choice, yeah. I mean, if it's a compelling product that the ISP wants to offer you in exchange for your information, you have the power under the rules that they're trying to repeal to agree. And that seems exactly what a free market is about, right? On the other side, as a consumer, whether or not you're going to give that away, what they want, what the cable companies want to change it to is they take your information and then you really have no power to say no. Yeah, I mean, the only innovation it's going to kill is the innovation to use your data without your permission. So, Matthew asks, with this, will we be able to FOIA politicians browsing history? Unfortunately, I think the answer is no. This doesn't give the government anything and, of course, you can only FOIA things. And for those who don't know, FOIA is Freedom of Information Act. So this is how you get government records if they haven't been released. And so, sadly, no, this wouldn't help us in that department. Certainly, it would be interesting that ISPs might start collecting or would have, perhaps, politicians browsing history. And then, you know, if an ISP gets hacked, who knows what's going to leak? If I were a politician, I would be thinking about that and thinking, you know, maybe this isn't my best interest not to repeal these rules. But it's not going to affect FOIA in any way. Yeah, and I think that's kind of the tragedy in all this. As politicians have to kind of feel the personal ramifications of the terrible decision they're engaging in right now. And that shouldn't be the case. You should understand kind of the fundamentals of what we're talking about here. So we've got another question from Jose. Will EFF create TLS everywhere? So this is alluding to just to explain, because not everybody knows what TLS stands for. So to start, EFF has this browser plugin called HTTPS Everywhere which you install it and anytime a website supports an encrypted connection, you can use it. It automatically takes advantage of it. But not every website supports encryption. That's up to the website. There's lots to do, but not all do. So TLS is basically stands for Transport Layer Security. It's the acronym for encryption that websites use. So I guess what Jose is asking is will we make it so that all websites can be encrypted? And in some sense we've already done that. So we've partnered with Mozilla, with Akamai, with a few others to create a certificate authority called Let's Encrypt. So this is basically what it comes down to is anyone who runs a website can get the encryption up and running on their server for free, automatically with basically like you type in two things at the command line of your server. So in some sense we've done that. But of course what we can't do is force a website to use encryption. That comes back to the website. And certainly if every website was using encryption that would eliminate a lot of the snooping that an ISP could do. But to be clear it wouldn't eliminate all of it. So the ISP would still be able to tell which websites you're going to. They wouldn't be able to see what you're viewing on the website. But if you went to EFF.org or facebook.com they could see, oh Jeremy went to EFF.org. They just wouldn't be able to tell was I, you know, looking at the blog on EFF.org or renewing my membership or what. Well and sometimes just knowing the website itself where you're going. Oh that tells you plenty. You pretty much know most of what a person says. If I'm going to nytimes.com versus foxnews.com I think that tells you a little bit probably about a certain political inclination one way or another.  If you're looking up the nearest gun show if you're looking up where a Planned Parenthood is all of the kind of things that are political in nature when we engage in it this is now going to be cataloged in a way that has never happened before. Yeah and to be clear, you know, we're not saying that this stuff doesn't already happen to some extent. There's plenty of third-party tracking and EFF fights it. Like we do we do everything we can. It's more just like the power of our ability to actually help people in the first place. Yeah so we can help like individuals fight third-party tracking online. We can help you fight the tracking by the Googles and the Facebooks of the world. Once ISPs get the ability to jump in, we can't create a TLS everywhere. We've done what we can. We're going to continue pushing encryption. But ISPs are in a unique position of power and that's why we need these rules. You know, we won't stop even if we lose here. We're not going to stop but that's why we're worried I think is the biggest thing. We can't, I mean I've definitely seen people say, you know, if you're relying on rules in the government to protect you, forget it. And to some extent that's true. But there's only so much we can do from a technical perspective to protect you from your ISP. I mean we could try to get everyone to use Tor and VPNs. But that's a much harder lift than say, you know, install Privacy Badger as your browser extension. You know, it'll really be a shame if only the technically savvy get Privacy. Like that's what I don't want to happen. And I'm worried that's what will happen. Well, and also just kind of to connect to that while these companies push the limits of the law on a regular basis, they also take into the account liability. Right? They look at the law and they say, you know if we do this and we're caught we're going to owe a lot of money and it's going to be very damaging to our profits. So for the most part any responsible company just doesn't do it in the first place. There is a lot of power, you know, this is kind of like the corporate lawyers, you know, they look at the law and they look at the rules and they make, they give advice to the company where they can push the envelope. And the moment they're violating the law and they're caught, you know, by investigating work that we can do at EFF or journalists or other folks out there on the internet you know, there are penalties and ramifications that we can invoke to discipline that activity. But if they pass SJRES 34 the rule to pass the repeal of the FCC's broadband privacy rules they will have been given an extraordinary gift to be able to go to court and say, Congress has spoken the FCC cannot discipline our privacy invasive practices and we will fight that fight in court but we will be fighting it at a disadvantage. So can't the FCC just write new rules if these ones get overturned by Congress? Like can we just lobby the FCC again and maybe try to convince them to write new rules? So the fundamental issue here that I think the Senator Flake of Arizona who's the primary author of this bill has not given enough credit to is the damage he's doing with the Congressional Review Act as a process. Why is it damaging? So a Congressional Review Act if it's enacted in the law and it's a it's a very rare procedure. I mean it's almost never been successful for the 30 plus some years that it's existed it essentially allows a Senator to look at a regulation or rule that was enacted towards the end of the last administration bypass the Senate filibuster and utilize kind of what's called an expedited schedule makes it really fast. I mean we've been finding this fight for close to a month which is super fast for Congress. Wait so did Congress thoroughly debate this? I mean have there been hearings about this where they actually got testimony about the about the CRA about repealing the privacy rules? Way back in the day they there was probably a lot of debate. I mean this is an old rule and this is what we're talking about like the but about this particular but not about the CRA. I'm not asking about repealing the privacy rules. No. You said they're rushing it through so they haven't even heard that hearings or had testimony. Yeah and then I think that's the worst part about all this is there is this enormous rush. I mean we're talking about four weeks since introduction that they're going to try and make this law without any sort of consultation of legal experts who have all the information. I mean this may have extraordinary ramifications for consumer privacy. You know if you go to our blog you'll see the legal analysis I've written out kind of explaining when you pass a repeal under Congressional Review Act you are also telling the federal agency that they can't create rules that are quote-unquote substantially similar. What does that mean? Right does that mean that the FCC then in the future if they change their mind and Congress is like oh you know what we were wrong to repeal this FCC please update the rules. Will the FCC be unable to do that because the new rules will look substantially similar you know in terms of legal terms. And if they are they're prohibited. They're prohibited and so the FCC won't be able to write new rules. No I mean that's what it comes down to. Fundamentally and the big challenge for us is say the FCC in the future right this is like a common sense one. What if the next FCC says the ISP is not allowed to look at your browsing history which is essentially a piece of the current rules that exist now. The cable and telephone industry and their lawyers will go straight to court and they'll challenge the FCC and say Congress said that's a substantially similar rule to what we just repealed therefore the FCC can no longer do that. If you look at the privacy rules that exist that are taking effect now that were updated last year they encompass a lot of our activity that potentially Congress is now taking off the table. When you say our activity what do you mean? Just our activity online the things that we do. Browsing history app usage your MAC address IP addresses inserting tracking cookies into your traffic but also things that you would normally associate with just having an account like you know name billing address. Social security numbers I mean all that stuff is just going to lose its protection. Yeah I mean and that's that's it's one of those things where you know the FCC did the right thing you know once in a while the government actually does the right thing and this is one of those where they said all of these things that you do on the internet that are private in nature the cable company and telephone company have to have your permission. And I think to be clear you know EFF is often considered a pretty libertarian organization so it's kind of weird for us to be sitting in these chairs saying the government did the right thing especially because we sue the government a lot and and I think the the real kicker for us is if people had actual like compared options if there was competition in ISPs I don't think we'd be saying this I think we'd be saying let let the free market sort it out but the problem is there is no like it doesn't make sense to have 10 different cable companies dig 10 different trenches to lay 10 different cables to go to your house and that's part of why there isn't a lot of competition when it comes to broadband in this country you know the majority of Americans do not have multiple choices you have maybe cable maybe DSL and if you're and maybe and maybe wireless and I would argue wireless with the really restrictive data caps isn't even an option so you get maybe cable maybe DSL so that's two if you're really lucky and you live in a big city that's great that's wonderful like San Francisco is great we have actually like a privacy concerned ISP in San Francisco but my mom lives in you know the middle of nowhere in this country and she has one choice and that's it and if they decide they're going to start selling her data her options are live with it or don't have internet access which is not really a choice and that's why we think we need somebody and in this case it's the FCC to step in and preserve our privacy yeah I absolutely agree the enormous amount of concentration we have in high-speed broadband forces us to have to think about you know clear rules that govern their behavior because you know it's laughable in most parts of this country for someone to tell you well if you don't like your broadband provider just switch to another one if you've taken the time to research what your options are if you want anything above 25 megabits per second which nowadays barely cuts it for most of the kind of cutting edge stuff you and 51% or more of this country have only one choice they're effectively region monopolies you don't have cable companies competing with other cable companies in this country they all have their own cities their own territories so unfortunately we're going to have to wrap up soon so so we have one last quick question and then we're going to remind everyone go to act.eff.org because even if we don't stop this in the senate we can still kill this in the house the question is is there help on your website regarding VPNs for less savvy users so if you go to so we do not recommend specific VPNs that would take a lot of research we haven't had time to do but if you go to ssd.eff.org then then you can find information about you know how to use a VPN what it does for your traffic you probably have to look through the index to find it but ssd.eff.org so unfortunately I have a radio thing to go to so I'm going to have to take off right now I'll go ahead and wrap up and again act.eff.org yeah act.eff.org you know not only that it would be great if you're listening and as you hear this contact your senator and also contact your member of the house you have two senators one representative of the house in the house tell them where you stand on consumer privacy oh we got a colleague of mine joining us here tag team Dave you're in boom alright do it Dave how's it going I'm Dave Moss I am on EFF's activism team and if you joined early on it's my fault that we had some echo for the first couple of minutes I'm going to fill in for Jeremy for the last few minutes of this I know we just posted it again to Twitter and so I don't want to cut it off for people who just joined us but I'll sit here and look smart there you go there you go Dave is smart the the fundamental facts are if you take the time to contact your legislator your member of the house and your two senators that has an impact but don't even stop there get your friends to do it right if you and every single person can get two or three of their friends to take just the five minutes it takes to make that call it will make a difference party lines and the political parties and kind of the rhetoric that surrounds where democrats stand means nothing means nothing compared to the power of the voters voice it's just a fact from my experience having worked in DC for a long time that not enough people at times take the time to pick up that phone and tell them where they stand and I will tell you that the people who rely on your silence are in fact the special interest in this instance the cable and telephone companies are hoping you do not take the time to tell your legislator where you stand so Ernesto can you take us a little bit through the process you might have addressed this before but how thoroughly did congress debate this on this specific repeal not at all there's been no hearings consulting legal experts explaining the ramifications of what they're doing right now and we at EFF have had been working on this for about four weeks because that's about how long they've been since the introduction of this legislation and now already moving to the United States Senate for a vote to the floor that's an absurdly fast process for United States Senate and for congress generally to make law this is stuff we're going to have to live with for a very long time absent a new action by congress in the future and so I think not enough thought has been given to this by the proponents and the author about what we're talking about and we're effectively talking about potentially ending consumer privacy online so Senator Brian Schatz had a pretty good medium post about this issue this morning who are some of the senators who have been really good about defending privacy with this bill so the lead defenders I have to give out to Senator Edward Markey from Massachusetts he has been a very good friend and membership on all our issues on civil liberties and privacy generally and he's leading the charge in this space Senator Blumenthal from Connecticut Senator Schatz from Hawaii Senator Franken from Minnesota has always been a very in essence you can call him a privacy hawk as well has been very good on these issues and you know I think it's unfortunate but it has become a partisan issue because actually protecting people's privacy has regularly been a bipartisan issue at EFF we are able to work with both parties fairly effectively trying to protect people's ability to keep their personal information intact and to themselves I just think right now the cable and telephone industry have been successful in convincing the Republicans that this is somehow a free market change in law and not essentially a grab-back giveaway to them to reverse course on what has been about 20 years of consumer privacy law so I believe we have a call tool up at act.eff.org when people call their senators to talk about this how in depth should they go and explain it do they need to have you know be fully literate on every line of the legislation or you know is it a more simple sort of thing they need to tell you you can make it real simple and happy work there myself I could tell you as long as you say I you know you have to tell them where you are because they need to know if you're a voter and you tell them what you stand on one sentence I support my privacy online I oppose SJ Res 34 which is the bill they're debating right now I do not support repealing the FCC broadband privacy rules you can say any of one of those things and that is more than enough information for the folks who are recording that information to report to the senators where you stand and where their voters stand I mean it will take probably less than 5 minutes so let's do a quick demo real quick ring ring ring you're the staffer good morning senator flake's office hey senator flake my name is dave moss I live in phoenix Arizona I just want to tell you that I'm your constituent and I urge you to oppose the CRA resolution to kill the FCC's privacy rules okay I will record that can I get your address you know 1515 70th street 85254 okay great I will let the senator know and then that's pretty much the end of the conversation and that's all it is so I think we can go ahead and wrap it up there did you have any last thoughts I know the vote is happening pretty soon yeah we'll check our blog we'll report out how the vote goes if it does pass the united states senate and we don't know the outcome right now we know it's pretty close so every call matters every person you get to activate and speak to the legislature legislator right now is helpful depending on the outcome goes if it goes to the house then we need to campaign shifts to the house and we fight the next stage of the fight there and after the house it'll be up to the president if they pass it there as well alright well thank you for joining us today Ernesto and thanks to Jeremy who has gone off to talk to some radio and again with electronic frontier foundation you can take action right now www.cac.eff.org you'll see it's very top of the page there is the button to click that will walk you through the process of calling you're a member of congress anyways thanks for joining us today


Personal finance practice problem using Excel. Life insurance calculation based on child age. Prepare to get financially fit by practicing personal finance. Here we are in our Excel worksheet. If you don't have access to it, that's okay because we'll basically build this from a blank sheet. But if you do have access, three tabs down below example, practice and blank, example and essence dean and answer key. Let's take a look at it now. Information's on the left-hand side. Calculations for the life insurance needed on the right practice tab has some pre-formatted cells. So you can work the practice problem with less Excel formatting. The blank tab just has the information on the left and we'll build it from a blank tab. If you don't have any of this, you could just put the information on the left-hand side and start from there. I would first start if you had a blank sheet by selecting the entire sheet, putting the baseline Excel formatting by right clicking format the cells. I generally start with the currency brackets and then no symbol here and no decimals. I'm not gonna hit okay, but just close it out and then put the information on the left-hand side adjusting any formatting as needed, such as the percentages down below, make a skinny C column and then we're ready to go. So the information on the left says we got a married couple with two children ages three and nine. One spouse is not working, taking care of the home. Support needed per year, we're gonna say is 15,000 and we're gonna use these returns down below the return inflation and return after inflation for part of our calculation. So here we wanna focus in on how many years, for example, we might be thinking that somebody needs insurance. Again, you can get into a lot more depth in terms of different ways that you can calculate the need for the life insurance, but when children are involved, we might use that as kind of a baseline and say, okay, well we would need the life insurance if one spouse was to die to support at least the childcare of the children, possibly childcare needs for basically either spouse that would then need to be working and doing the childcare for example. So we might use that as the kind of years as part of our calculation for the total life insurance we might need. So for example, we might do a calculation to something like this or as part of our overall life insurance calculation, insurance needed, and let's put some, let's put some blue or some header formatting. I'm gonna select from D to F1.  And so we're gonna say, let's say, we're gonna start with the years until the youngest child is 18 and colon. Now you could get more complicated than this. You could say, well, if there were two children, it would cost more for the childcare and so on and so forth. But we're gonna say, well, we're gonna try to say until the youngest child is to a point where they might be able to have their own earnings would be the idea that being 18, that number also you can adjust that. You can say 18's kind of low these days. You might say that they might need more support given these current circumstances beyond 18 so you can increase that number or decrease that number. But the general idea would be there's gonna be needed more support up until they can support themselves would be the idea. So we're gonna say starting with 18 in the inner column. So the age kids are out, are on their own, are on their own age. And then the age we're gonna say of youngest child. And we're gonna say that age is three. So we'll say years until youngest child is 18 is gonna be the subtraction of these two. So we're gonna say 18 minus three. And so we got 15 years. I'll put an underline here, hometown, font group, underline. Now, oftentimes when you look at these kind of online tools that we looked at before online life insurance calculators, we often get the question in terms of how many years. So like this one is one of the more basic ones but oftentimes they've got how much money will you need it for burial. So I won't include that right now.  You could think about trying to cover those costs and prepay them for example or something like that. But that might be a component. How many years of income will you need to cover? So this is often kind of like a generic number. One way, there's multiple ways we can think about that. We might just say, I'm just gonna use a generic like seven to 10 years, which is basically kind of like a baseline that people might need life insurance for that amount of years is just kind of a general number. We might then say, well, here's how many years I would have been working until retirement is another way or I might say this is how many years my spouse would work until retirement or I might say, hey look, I want the life insurance to cover how many years the youngest kid is going to be at least on their own, at least to some degree and not need like childcare support for example. And that's the calculation that we're taking a look at here and we came up to the 15, so the 15 years and then how much annual income will your survivors need would be the other kind of calculation. Again, you can base this on many different things. You might say, well, what's my current income? You might try to take a percentage of your current income. You might say, hey, whatever my income is now, I'm gonna then take 70% of it, 60 to 80% of it for example because I won't be around for example and I wanna just be covering the needs of it. That's one way you can do it. You might try to figure out what the childcare costs are that you think are gonna be over and above possibly what would be needed if you had a spouse that was actually taking care of the child to cover working and childcare for example and basically use a calculation such as that or we can get into a whole needs calculation and try to figure out what the current needs calculation would be. So we'll talk about more of those options so that needs-based approach at least in future presentations but here we're gonna use kind of a generic number the 15,000 oftentimes they use 10,000 it's kind of like a generic number I'm gonna put the 15 here. So how much money do you have in the savings? I'm gonna say no monies in the savings at this point so I'll keep it there. Obviously we could get into more detail in terms of how much debt do we have versus the income but we're kind of focusing on the age here and then the children, we're gonna say the children. I've got three and nine here and then you can see their estimate on the calculator so you can use these tools kind of in alignment with each other if you so choose but let's jump back on over to Excel I would typically use those other tools as kind of like a double check to see if you're in the bull park doing best practices with Excel and then go back on over here I'm gonna do some indentation I'm gonna select these three home tab alignment indent I'm gonna double indent this one home tab alignment indent it again and so then I'm gonna say the support needed per year I'm saying is 15 once again we might calculate that based on some percentage of our earnings or we might calculate that on the needs-based approach or based on childcare needs if one spouse wasn't there for example I'm gonna go to the home tab font group and underline it also note that we can use this as part of our calculation and add on top of it things like college and stuff if we wanted to have specific calculations related to college this would cover them up until they're 18 and then we might say I might have a separate college kind of calculation for that if I wanted to do that as well to tack on to it so then the insurance needed we would say would be equal to the 15 times the 15,000 the 225 so I'm gonna go ahead and make this blue and bordered home tab font group border blue so it's a fairly straightforward calculation we could get much more complex but again we're just basically trying to get how can we get to this number a couple different ways we can get to that how many years we would need now notice you also might say well I don't really need 15,000 times 15 what I really need is the lump sum to be paying out the equivalent of 15,000 for that 15 years for example so in other words if I put this in I might have earnings if they were to invest that they might have earnings over 15 years averaging like 6% for example and inflation let's say is 2.5% so we can say okay the return after inflation is about 3.5% so in other words how much would they need in a lump sum insurance if they were to invest it and basically get a real return of 3.5% and for that we can say okay let's try to do and cause you can see that this number by the way is substantially larger than what they've got here not that their calculation is perfect here this is a fairly basic online calculator but we could see their insurance their calculations assuming the rates of return down below and we could try to make a similar assumption and say okay well what if we did a present value present value of annuity annuity calculation annuity I'm gonna put this over here and let's make this a little wider and say this is gonna be negative I'll put a negative instead of an equal probably not the most proper way to do it but it's the easiest way to do it to get a positive number present value brackets and then I'm gonna pick this net or real return of the 3.5% comma and the number of periods I'm gonna say is 15 that we're gonna need comma and then the payment we will have a payment we're gonna say it's gonna be a payment of 15,000 so if there's a payment of 15,000 for that frame how much money would that be? That would be 172,761 so in other words if we had that much in place and they started taking out the 15,000 per year or net equivalent then we would only need 172,761 because of the earnings so let's try to break that down a little bit more I'm gonna go to the home tab, font group, brackets and blue and so let's try to visualize that and see what I'm saying here so I'm gonna put my cursor on the skinny column, home tab and format painter let's put that in column G, making column G skinny and let's try to break this out into a table to see if I can understand what we're saying and say years, increase, that's our gains and the payment and then the balance so let's go ahead and make this our headers we're gonna say this is gonna be font group it's gonna be black and white I'm gonna alignment and center it I'm gonna make the years a little bit smaller and call them H and let's put from zero, one, two I'm gonna select those three cells put my cursor on the fill handle drag down to 15 years center that home tab alignment and center and so then I'm gonna start with my balance over here and say okay what does this mean if I had 172, 761 and then there was an increase I'm gonna say a net increase here of this the real return 172, 761 times the return of the 3.5 and I'm gonna say F4 on the keyboard so I can copy that down and enter we would get a return of 6,047 and then we're gonna have a payment which you could put as a negative negative of the payment which is gonna be 15,000 if I was to die they're gonna have to pay out 15,000 each year that's the idea I'm gonna say F4 on the keyboard so I can copy that down that means the balance then would be the prior balance plus the increase if they were to invest that balance minus the amount they're gonna have to take out I'm gonna say plus because it's a negative number here plus the negative 15 subtracting it out so 172, 761 plus the 6,047 gain minus the 15,000 would bring us to the 163,808 if I was to copy that down I'm just gonna select these three and copy it down then we should have down to zero at the end so that's the idea so if they were to take out that much we should get down to zero and we should be okay at the 172,761 instead of the 225,000 let's try to analyze that a little bit more in depth here I'm gonna make this blue and border gonna go up top and say font group make that blue and border this won't work out exactly but this will give us hopefully a little bit of better understanding of it so I'm gonna hide from column C to column F so I can see this I'm gonna right click and hide not delete but hide I'm gonna make a skinny L column by going to the skinny G column home tab, clipboard, format painter skinny L okay so then I'm gonna do another table here a little bit different it's gonna be years increase and then payment and then the balance and let's put this are black and white header selecting home tab, font group making this black and white I'm gonna make them centered alignment and center we'll make the years a little bit smaller on the years same with the zero, one, two I'm gonna select those three numbers and copy it down to 15 years 15 years and then I'm gonna say home tab alignment and center that so then we've got the balance over here where we're gonna start off once again with the 172.761 now again this won't be exact but you might say what's really happening is we're gonna say that there's a 6% return but then we're going to be paying out we're gonna be paying out 15,000 but there's gonna be inflation on the 15,000 so they're gonna need more than 15,000 to spend the same kind of money due to inflation in terms of purchasing power so if I was to say okay there's an increase I'm gonna say I got this 172.761 times an increase of the 6% return but really the real returns over only 3.5 because there's inflation but I'm gonna say okay in future value terms there's gonna be a 6% return so I'm gonna say okay F4 F4 absolute reference we can copy it down and enter but when I make the payment it's not just 15,000 isn't gonna cover it anymore because there's inflation so I'm gonna need to increase it by 2.5% because of the purchasing power of the dollar went down so I'm gonna say this is gonna be equal to the 15,000 over here or let's do it this way I've gotta do it with a future value calculation so I'm gonna say this is gonna be equal to I'll say negative future value brackets I'm gonna pick up the rate over here which is the 2.5 and that just it's just inflation I'm gonna say F4 on the keyboard to make it absolute comma the number of periods is going to be I'm just gonna pick up this one right there so it's gonna be one year out comma this is not an annuity so we're not gonna have a payment so we're gonna have two commas and the present value is gonna be this 15,000 here and then I'm gonna say F4 on that one because I'd like to copy it down close up the brackets so the future value we're going to need is the 15,375 to equal the same 15,000 if it was in time period zero due to inflation so then if I double click on this let's actually get rid of the negative sign and make that a negative number like that and this is gonna be equal then the prior balance plus the increase plus the negative payment which is a decrease so 172,761 plus the increase of the 10,366 minus the payment which would have to be 15,375 to be equivalent to the 15,000 that we looked at in year zero dollars so if I was to copy that down I'm gonna select these three and just double click on the fill handle button then it's not exact here because we used a different number on these two but you can see between year 14 and 15 it goes below zero so that last year it's at 18 instead of what we would like it to be at the 21,724 you could adjust the payments for that the full amount for that 2005,25 but that's the general idea, right? You're gonna say okay it's gonna increase by the 10,366 but I'm not gonna pull out the 15,000 anymore because of inflation we had to increase it for the inflation at the 2.5% that would mean they would need to pull out for equivalent purchasing power dollars 15,375 and so now we've got this ending balance in the future value in the future value terms so you can see these numbers are different here because this one is kind of netting out the values here the net real return and this one is showing the actual payments we're trying to see what the actual payments might have to be in future time frames for the same purchasing power okay let's make this one blue and bordered I'm gonna go up top and say home tab font group make that blue and put some borders around it so that is that now the other thing you might look you could obviously do with this if you had a calculation like this you might be saying okay is there a way I can set up my life insurance policy if this is what it looks like so that each year the life insurance policy possibly goes down because you've got less years that you need to cover over that 18 right we had the 18 year time frame once they get to year 18 once the youngest child gets to the year of 18 so you might try to think about a life insurance policy that has the balance that kind of reduces over time for example as the years that you need to cover goes down and you could think about that calculation in more complex ways or kind of like a simple kind of way such as this so I'm gonna then unhide some cells put in my cursor on column B to column H those hidden cells between them right click and unhide there let's do a spell check I'm gonna go down here and say review spell check see if everything's lined up young guest young guest out I've got that twice I don't need it twice there it is


Happy vlogmas, day 19.  Right mom? Toes. Toes. Oh yeah, toes. Toes. Phoenix, nails and spa. Look at all the pretty colors. Ooh, I like this one. It's very festive. I like a little bit of shimmer on the toe. Last one I got, I think was really similar to that. So many options. So many options. This weird black and white thing.  Like those little googly eyes. Which one are you gonna pick? Which one are you gonna pick? I don't know. Eternal debate. Eternal debate. Choices are hard. Too many options. That one's like right in the middle. Like in the middle of these two. Yeah, maybe that's what I should go with. Ooh, yeah. Right in the middle of those two. There you go. Oh, look at how nice those are. You can get one toe, one toe, one toe. Yeah. All right, that's the winner.  What's it called? It's from OPI. It's called, it's called OPI Red. OPI Red. OPI Red? All right, cool. So my color is from Dare to Wear and let's see here. It is called Full Bloom. Look. They're together. To the Port Orange Steakhouse. With my mother. Hello. Time to eat. There's the dad. There's the aunt. But my brother is actually gone. He went to somewhere close to Tampa and is gonna be gone until tomorrow afternoon.  So he's missing in action. So the favorite brother isn't gonna be in this vlog. Sorry guys. Soon. Soon. Soon he will. Actually update on the Wi-Fi situation. That didn't get rectified last night. We still have Wi-Fi, but he did not actually get that device hooked up. We have Wi-Fi. I uploaded a video. But, so he is going to figure that out when he gets back tomorrow. So yeah. But anyway, let me show you all the delicious food. So I am back from dinner and we've been back for a while. Had some good conversations with my parents, which I'm going to keep private because there's something interesting happening in the works.  But since my brother's out of town, he'll actually be back in... I don't know if I said this, but he'll be back in town tomorrow afternoon, like around lunchtime. He went to visit a friend from the military in the Tampa area. So he was gone all day today, and then he'll be back tomorrow, like I said. But tomorrow not too much is on the slate yet. I'm sure that will change. But make sure to stay tuned till tomorrow. You never know what's gonna happen. But I hope you guys enjoyed it taking a look at just a normal vacation day in Florida. And I will talk to you all in the next vlog. Bye guys!