These Are The Surprising Cars More People Get Rid Of In The First Year (Wait, How Many Are BMW's?)4/30/2021 BY CHRIS MATYSZCZYK It's easy to look at data and reach all sorts of conclusions. Such as that the rich are hard to satisfy, for example. Absurdly Driven looks at the world of business with a skeptical eye and a firmly rooted tongue in cheek. How long do you keep your cars? At least a couple of years? More? Or are you the sort that likes to change their cars like their iPhones, every year. Just so you can look good in the neighborhood? I only pry because some bright minds thought they'd examine which new cars change hands within the first year of ownership. The possibly nerdish types at iSeeCars.com say they pored over 46 million car sales -- models from 2014-17 -- in order to create their list. Before I pored over it, I tried to imagine what the answers would be. In my wishful world, I hoped it would be Subarus and Toyota Priuses, as both make my top lip curl at the painful visual assault they provide. Instead, it seems that the car most often disposed of in its first year of ownership is the Mercedes C-Class. A hearty 12.4 percent are no longer with their original owners before their first year is up. Close behind is the BMW 3-Series. There are, indeed, three BMW's in the Top 10. The X1 and X3 ride along in 6th and 7th place. Land Rover owners aren't good at the commitment thing, either. The Land Rover Discovery Sport and the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque come 3rd and 4th. In the latter case, perhaps the owners are just tired of how long it takes to say the name. Bizarrely, eight out of the Top 10 are fancy cars. Of the more populist vehicles, only the Nissan Versa Note and the Nissan Versa creep into the Top 10. iSeeCars CEO Phong Ly offered a dark portent as to why German luxury cars seem to have difficult relationships with their owners: Despite the popularity of these vehicles, they generally have below-average reliability ratings from Consumer Reports, which could contribute to why owners get rid of them so quickly. He added that so-called car-punching may be a factor. This doesn't involve bellicose practices with your ultimate driving machine. Instead, it's the practice of incentivizing dealers to buy new cars and employing them as loaners, thereby boosting new car sales figures. Ly said that his calculations tried to take account of this slippery behavior. I, though, want to believe in the purity and goodness of car dealers. So I looked more deeply into the numbers to see where the most disgruntled new car buyers live and which cars they really can't live with. I can hear you assuming most must live in the cradle of dissatisfaction, New York. But no. It seems that 33.7 percent of Atlanta residents gave up their Mercedes C-Class in their first year, something 25.7 percent of Phoenix-residing owners did too. As for the BMW X3, well, 18.3 percent of Seattle-Tacoma owners bid them goodbye before their second birthday. (The cars', not the owners'.) I have no interest in besmirching these fine car brands. They all seem perfectly elevated cars to me. It's far more entertaining to besmirch the people who buy them. I want to believe, therefore, that the people of Atlanta are extremely hard to please. Perhaps it's something to do with the struggles of the local sports teams. Perhaps there's an additional pressure in Atlanta to be one step ahead of the crowd. I also want to believe that many of these cars are swiftly given back by people who received them for Christmas, just like in the ads, with a big red bow tied around them. They took one look and said: You had to tell the whole neighborhood? I can't deal with this. Then they swap these cars for something a little more discreet. Like an e-Golf. This article originally appeared in Inc. The opinions expressed here by Bergen Review Media columnists are their own, not those of Bergenreview.com Remy Blumenfeld Contributor It's maddening, but sometimes Forbes readers dismiss the wisdom of a life coach. You tend to pay more attention to the life lessons delivered by billionaires. The problem is that while most life coaches are not very rich, most billionaires are not tremendously happy. So you can imagine my delight when, about 30 minutes into his most recent "Ask Me Anything" on Reddit, Bill Gates, the world's second-richest man, was asked two very personal questions. “Are you happy?” and “Through it all, what makes you happy?” His answers were not only wise, but surprisingly affordable. As a life coach, I don't believe in the idea of happiness--I'd have preferred it if he'd been asked about balance, fulfillment or gratitude. Still, to the first question Bill Gates, 63, responded: “Yes! When I was in my 30s, I didn’t think people in their 60s were very smart or had much fun. Now I have had a counter-revelation. Ask me in 20 years and I will tell you how smart 80-year-olds are.” To the second question, Gates said, “Some recently said that when your children are doing well it really is very special, and as a parent, I completely agree. “Sometimes following through on commitments to yourself, like doing more exercise, also improves your happiness.” Unlike me, Gates—as far as I know—is not a qualified coach. However, as I am not a billionaire, I thought it would be great if the two of us combined our experience. So, here are Bill Gates’ 5 secrets to happiness, universalized in a relatable way by me. 1. Ditch your 20-year-old self and talk to your future self There is no surer way to gain a fresh perspective on any thorny problem than to speak to yourself in 20 years. Your future self is very wise. They know what will bring you peace, ease, and joy. As Bill Gates admits, most of us at 40, 60, even 80, remain in a dialogue with our 20-year-old. This is not a life-affirming dialogue, because at 50, your 20-year-old self thinks you are old and past it. Your 70-year-old self, on the other hand, will tell your 50-year-old person, correctly, that you will never be so young, powerful, vital or fit again. Yourself in 20 years is wise. They know not to sweat the small stuff. They know what will bring you joy. When you have 15 quiet minutes alone, do this easy future-self visualization. A word of advice: If you are at an age where you do not feel, realistically, that you will be alive in 20 years from now, but still want to access a wisdom that eludes you, try imagining speaking to yourself from beyond the grave. What would your long-dead self tell you to do or say right now? 2. Follow through on your commitments Nothing gives you a greater sense of your power than when you do what you've said you'll do. Empowerment coaches call this “manifesting.” Gates probably calls this “making things happen on purpose” or “being your word.” None of us are in control of every outcome, but we can each be absolutely in control of doing what we've said we'll do. And this makes us feel powerfully alive. It draws others towards us. To be your word, it may mean reducing what you commit to, but if you do not follow through on commitments, not only will others stop trusting you, but you will stop believing in yourself. And how joyful is a life where you can't count on yourself? 3. Give to others He didn't include this in what he said, but charitable giving is so much a part of who Gates is that it would be wrong for me to leave this out. As of December 31, 2017, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation had an endowment of $50.7 billion. Giving makes us feel good, is beneficial for our health and evokes gratitude. Remember, “it is not happiness that makes us grateful, but gratefulness that makes us happy,” according to TED talking monk, David Steindl-Rast. 4. Do more exercise As a tennis player, Gates will know firsthand that exercise is good for improving his mood. And it has been proven that exercise helps chronic depression by increasing serotonin, which helps your brain regulate mood, sleep, and appetite. Exercise increases the level of your endorphins, which are natural mood lifters. It also limits the effect of stress on your brain and helps get your sleep patterns back to normal. Exercise gives you a focused activity that can help you feel a sense of accomplishment. 5. Put love first Gates' observation that “when your children are doing well it is really very special,” makes perfect sense. One of the five greatest and most common regrets of the dying is “that I did not spend more time with the people who I loved.” Paired with regret most common among men, “that I wish I hadn't spent so much time at the office,” and suddenly the “work-life balance” takes on a whole new urgency. I know you’re probably thinking: “This is all very well, but a few hundred million dollars sure would help me to feel happier.” Perhaps. But as Gates’ answers would suggest, when you can count on yourself and others can too, when you feel good about yourself physically and emotionally and prioritize those you love, you could well end up a whole lot more fulfilled than an unfit, selfish, lonely billionaire. Contributor: Remy Blumenfeld A tangle of recommendations — some not even helpful — is contributing to pandemic fatigue. A clutter of unhelpful pandemic rules is wearing people down. One-way systems in stores, outdoor mask mandates, ceaselessly cleaning groceries and packages — should these things be our top priorities for limiting the spread of Covid-19? Harvard’s Joseph Allen is an associate professor of exposure assessment science and one of the world’s experts on why some indoor spaces are worse than others for spreading viruses. Like other experts, he agrees that poorly ventilated indoor sites are the prime spreading ground for SARS-CoV-2. So the longer people spend in any indoor space with other people, the greater the risk they pose to themselves and others. I asked him: Wouldn’t it be better if we did away with the one-way system so that people could dispatch with their grocery shopping quickly, without having to endure long waits behind price-comparers or other slowpokes? The answer is yes. Eliminating those annoying arrows would probably make shopping safer as well as less stressful. Businesses are, of course, free to impose their own rules, but it’s unlikely many would knowingly make shopping less safe. The fault lies with the public health community for being too shy in talking about which rules don’t help, leaving us with a tangle of rules and recommendations — and pandemic fatigue. State rules have an even bigger effect on our lives and are often thrown at people with no transparency. My state of Rhode Island has recently become one of the worst five states for per-capita infections, despite getting praise from Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, at the end of the summer for our strict rules and good compliance. With cases already climbing in late November, Governor Gina Raimondo held a press conference where she scolded citizens for not following the rules. Soon afterwards, a talk radio host voiced what I was thinking. Who are these people filling up the hospitals? Where do they live? What kind of work do they do? Do we have any idea how they got the virus? And which rules, exactly, were they breaking? As risk communication consultant Peter Sandman has said early in the pandemic, a public health policy that people don’t follow is a failed policy. That means even a really solid, science-based set of rules can fail if it’s not communicated with a clear rationale. In Massachusetts, governor Charlie Baker has focused his latest round of rules on outdoor mask wearing — something that many experts have said is unlikely to help since the virus is extremely unlikely to be transmitted over distances outside. The British Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies has deemed outdoor mask wearing of negligible benefit. Baker’s ruling prompted Harvard epidemiologist Julia Marcus to suggest in Boston.com that he’s playing pandemic theater. “Arbitrary public health rules are a way to break the public’s trust, which is essential to keeping people engaged in public health efforts,” she told a reporter for the site. “I think a mandate like this — that people know is arbitrary — is going to do more to reduce trust than it will to reduce infections.”
Harvard’s William Hanage, who studies infectious disease dynamics, told me that people don’t need more rules. They need more information about how the virus is transmitted so they can take steps to avoid it. “When you phrase things in terms of rules, it leads people to try to come up with ways to get around those rules,” he says. Rules can become a form of misinformation. The rules in many states seem to suggest that walking outside is dangerous and eating in a restaurant is safe, but Hanage says the truth is the other way around. Baker has justified his outdoor mask mandate by saying it sends a message. The message I heard was that that the rules are not chosen for our health and welfare but to make our political leaders look like they are doing something. Rules should only be decreed along with evidence for their benefit, argued statistician and risk communication expert David Spiegelhalter in a piece for The Guardian: “Too often, the message is shaped by communication professionals working to ensure the greatest number of people ‘get the message’ rather than thinking about how to present the evidence so the greatest number of people can understand it, trust it, and then decide for themselves.” I hear from diverse readers who want to do the right thing, but need to know where to focus their efforts. A farmer in Florida recently wrote to me about the pandemic fatigue that’s affecting him and his neighbors. “What happens here is that we get worn out, beaten down and overloaded such that no matter how well-intentioned we are we are prone to latch onto something wrong.” “So I think people here get it that it's serious … they like their neighbors and don't want them dead,” he wrote. But they’re wondering how much effort to put into disinfecting groceries and kitchen counters — something that some media outlets recommended in the spring, as well as wearing gloves at the gas station, disinfecting credit cards and letting packages sit outside for a few days before opening them. Harvard disease expert Hanage says that the science to date points to the primary risk coming from what he calls the three C’s — close contact, closed spaces and crowds. He says in Japan, where they’ve had few Covid-19 deaths, people are advised to avoid these — not just to wear masks in these situations but to limit them or avoid them altogether. One place where the informational clutter can get sorted out is the CDC. In an encouraging trend, the agency is starting to make recommendations by explaining why they’re likely to improve public health. The agency cited good reasons people should avoid traveling for the holidays, including many combinations of those three C’s. They’ve just issued new guidelines recommending masks when people are indoors outside their homes or cannot stay more than six feet away from other people. And they’ve just shortened the quarantine period for people exposed to the virus from 14 days to 10, or seven if you get a test at the end. Again, the rationale was explained — some cases can incubate for two full weeks, but most people develop symptoms sooner. A shorter quarantine period can still cut down on transmission and will get better compliance. It would be wonderful if the CDC could also start telling us which rules and recommendations are unlikely to work, so we can all concentrate on the ones that will. There’s some denial out there, but there’s also enormous curiosity and willingness to help. It’s a resource we can’t afford to keep squandering. This article was originally posted by Faye Flam. A Bloomberg Opinion columnist. The opinions expressed here by Bergen Review Media columnists are their own, not those of Bergenreview.com. Article by Ali Finney After workout spaces closed their doors in mid March, it didn’t take us long to realize that the gym is wherever you can lay your mat.
According to the media analytics company Comscore, March 2020 saw a 147 percent increase from the prior year in consumption of on-demand fitness videos on streaming apps, subscription platforms, and cable. Then in June, YouTube announced that since March 15, daily views of videos with “home workout” in the title saw a 515 percent uptick. And Well+Good’s own YouTube fitness videos likewise surged in popularity, generating 350 percent more views in 2020 than in 2019. With this newfound appreciation for sweating it out at home, we’ll see a major flip-flop of the fitness industry in 2021: In BC times (before COVID-19, that is), Americans largely associated exercise with a trip to the gym or a fitness studio. But into next year, digital workouts will become the norm, with fitness brands embracing an “omnichannel” approach that gives users access to IRL sessions, live-streaming classes, and on-demand libraries. “The businesses that will survive will be those that can adapt to this trend via hybrid memberships inclusive of both in-person and virtual offerings. Ninety-one percent of group fitness businesses are offering or planning to offer virtual services in 2020,” says Josh McCarter, CEO of the fitness booking platform Mindbody. This shift will spark innovation on all fronts next year. First, brands are finding ways to reach more people. “This pandemic has forced us, and many other brands, to reimagine our business model and rethink how we engage with our clients,” says Joey Gonzalez, CEO of Barry’s, which launched online classes in April and is set to launch Barry’s At Home platform—with features like social sharing components, on-demand workouts, and new modalities—in 2021. Tone House (“the hardest workout in NYC”) launched its digital platform in May and will deploy a 12-week online program for beginners at the first of the year. “The digital expansion has reduced three barriers to entry: price, proximity, and fear,” says Elvira Yambot, Tone House’s chief operating officer. All these digital upgrades are expected to help drive 30 percent year-over-year growth, leading the online fitness market to be worth an estimated $30 billion in 2026. In addition to developing new digital offerings, apps and fitness-streaming platforms are striving to increase financial accessibility. Top trainers are creating videos for YouTube (see: Well+Good’s own Trainer of the Month Club), while Nike Training Club recently committed to making its app totally free. Orangetheory At-Home, likewise, offers free workouts for both members and non-members on YouTube, the brand’s website, and its app. Next year will also see new solutions to some of the long-held gripes about digital fitness products thanks to investments from companies like Apple, Samsung, Google, Facebook, and Amazon. For instance, those concerned about over- or under-training without a trainer present can check out a 2021 feature Apple Fitness+ is imminently launching that will serve up workout recommendations based on the intensity of their last session. Tonal—the strength-training behemoth backed by Amazon—will introduce Smart Flex to solve the same issue: This hardware feature dynamically adjusts the machine’s weights while you’re lifting (down to the millisecond) to ensure you’re getting your best workout possible. And Nike, which has a longstanding partnership with the Apple Watch, aims to keep motivation up when you’re sweating solo by offering training programs, guided runs, and on-demand classes from star trainers like Shalane Flanagan within the Nike Run or Training Clubs App that show up on your watch face. The final piece of the fitness puzzle for 2021 is finding ways to replicate the energy and community of a live workout class virtually. Peloton has long led the charge in creating digital togetherness and connection for its 3.6 million subscribers (early in the pandemic, head instructor and vice president of programming Robin Arzon led a live-streamed workout for enough people to fill Madison Square Garden) and it’s rolling out new features in an effort to stay in front as other players invest in the space. During the tail-end of 2020, for instance, the brand experimented with a beta version of a feature called “Sessions” that allows those who join a class within five minutes of each other to compete on the leaderboard the same way they would in a live class. “We always knew our community was really special,” says Jen Cotter, Peloton chief content officer. “But I will say it was a humbling human responsibility to be at Peloton at a time where you could sense our community needed each other in a different way.” Other ways digital brands are looking to foster community among their users include a new workout party feature from Obé (wherein you can invite up to seven friends to sweat with you) and upcoming launches from Mirror that allow you to go on a “Sweat Date” with a friend or participate in head-to-head challenges with other users during a live class. These opportunities for digital connection are all the more valuable when it’s not possible to gather in person, says Peloton instructor Ally Love. “Having people in real time, live on the leaderboard, is an acknowledgement of unity. Hopping on [for a class], especially when you are feeling low, and realizing that you’re not alone, not only helps boost the spirit, but helps us all stand in our power,” she says. “We show up for ourselves and, for each other. Now that’s a real community!” These personalized touches and connections with trainers are the stuff that business is built upon. “No matter how you choose to sweat in 2021, the fitness fundamentals will stay the same—a great workout with a connected group of people led by an inspiring instructor is what brings you back every day,” says Brynn Putnam, Mirror founder. By leveraging community, utilizing new technology, and providing studio-like experiences to users, every drop of sweat is proving to be liquid gold for brands and those elevating their heart rates alike. Article by Samantha Leal The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on all aspects of our health cannot be understated.
People continue to be infected at record rates and many others are grieving the loss of loved ones and dealing with financial distress—it’s all wearing us down, physically and emotionally. All of this while so many people can’t access their usual health-care services, including therapists, chronic disease specialists, and OB/GYNs. But with limitations come new innovations: The use of telehealth services has grown exponentially, and this new virtual-first approach will lead to care that is centered on the patient, not a health system. “The pandemic really pushed us beyond what we thought was possible with telehealth capabilities, and pushed patients to become more comfortable connecting with health-care providers virtually,” says One Medical regional director and provider Natasha Bhuyan, MD. In 2019,11 percent of Americans used telehealth, according to data from McKinsey & Company. This year, 46 percent of U.S. patients have used telehealth to replace in-person appointments and 76 percent report they’re interested in using digital health services in the future. Changes in regulation early in the pandemic were instrumental in allowing this rapid growth. Pre-pandemic, in order to adhere to the health privacy standards laid out in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), doctors had only a few video platforms to choose from for appointments. But in mid-March, the government eased HIPAA restrictions on telehealth services, allowing practitioners to use any kind of video platform for virtual visits. The federal government also increased funding for telehealth and added 144 new items to the list of telehealth services covered by Medicare and Medicaid. The list of actions being taken at the state and federal level to expand telehealth is long and complicated (and if we listed them all here, we’d be here all day), but the result is clear: More providers are able to offer their services digitally, enabling more people to access the care they need. And bills are currently working their way through Congress to make these changes permanent. Carolyn Witte, CEO and co-founder of Tia, believes that these telehealth expansions will help to make for a health-care system that better integrates virtual and non-virtual services (something she calls “virtual-first,” rather than “virtual-only,” care) long after the pandemic is over, which is good news for patients. “A virtual-first care approach allows Tia to fill local market care gaps quicker and more efficiently, allowing us to provide whole-person physical, mental, and emotional care sooner to communities who need it,” she says. These communities include ones that are historically underserved. “Telehealth has the potential to increase access for certain populations, such as people in rural areas, who would not otherwise have access to doctors or specialists,” says Dr. Bhuyan. “It also allows us the ability to reach groups—like people who are transgender or adolescents seeking sexual health resources—who might not feel safe going into a physical office.” Plus, telehealth is often less expensive for patients. “Telehealth typically costs around $60 to $70 per visit, which is half that of an in-person office visit with a primary care doctor,” says Sachin Nagrani, MD, medical director of the telemedicine platform Heal. Yet, while this time has sparked positive changes, the pandemic also showed just how systemic our health failings are, and how urgently governments and health-care leaders need to address said failings. Black and Latinx communities were hit the hardest by the pandemic, in large part because the social determinants of health (the conditions in which people live and work) have disproportionately affected queer, trans, Black, Indigenous, and people of color (QTBIPOC) for centuries. “There are many things in health care that need to be addressed in order to eliminate the health disparities that minorities face,” says Shakevia Johnson, MD. “Lack of trust is a major issue. Minorities do not feel safe. Minorities do not feel heard. This contributes to the stigma of seeking [and] participating in health care, especially mental health. We need to openly acknowledge that these issues exist and have open dialogues with Black and Latinx communities so we can work together to build safe, trusting relationships.” As we enter 2021, many Americans are joining the fight for health equity; in her Anti-Racism Daily newsletter, for instance, Nicole Cardoza notes that localized health equity task forces are organizing to fight COVID-19 in cities including Boston, New York, Houston, and Michigan. And new resources that are specifically targeted to marginalized groups will help bridge the gap in care. Folx, for one, is a direct-to-consumer health-care platform for trans and queer individuals that launched in late 2020 and will expand with new product offerings in 2021. Another is Exhale, a well-being app that launched in August to address the needs of Black, Indigenous, and women of color (BIWOC) and has plans to grow in the new year. And She Matters, a community focused on supporting Black women’s mental health, will launch an app to help users find culturally competent therapists in 2021. All of these factors together will fuel the lobbying of the government (at all levels) for better access to doctors for all who need it. “The health-care system is amidst a tectonic shift from one-size-fits-all care to people-based care with different care models being built to serve the distinct needs of different populations…who each have unique clinical needs, but also sociocultural and financial needs that impact how different groups access or do not access health care,” says Witte. “With COVID-19 revealing such harrowing differences in outcomes across different populations, the need for people-based care has become even more paramount.” The opinions expressed here by Bergen Review Media columnists are their own, not those of Bergenreview.com. |
AuthorContent gathered & updated by the Bergen Review Media team. Archives
April 2024
Categories
All
|