Grift # 1, the “Reverse Mortgage”
This writing was prompted by our vocalized angst at (again) experiencing the smarmy-solicitous style of the handsome- mustachioed, and charmingly mellifluous, Tom Selleck in a personally disturbing television commercial. In the commercial, Selleck, solicitously makes an earnest eye-contact, faux-solicitous pitch to senior citizens on the salutary features of “Reverse Mortgages;” on behalf of the not-so-salutary finance companies.
Seldom, it appears, do the routine daily commercials contain commercial propaganda as intensely as when the mission is to hawk financial “shtick,” to the presumably vulnerable elderly. In dramatic, intra-familial-style pitch, Selleck initially appears and slowly takes a few steps before comfortably settling into a lawn chair (like older people do?) and then with loving and respectful, laser-like eye contact and in mellifluous tones, solicits the targeted elder audience, lauding the purported virtues (but, none of the drawbacks) of the advertised sales merchandise, the “Reverse Mortgage.” “Two things are sure,” he crows, “you love your home and you want to stay in it.” (A notable piece of propagandist cruelty).
Prior to our brief remarks on the notably, undisclosed and obligatory aspects of the vaunted enterprise, plus thematically, a few other categories of elder-hawked “benefits,” we would make clear our present thematic effort, which is to express our displeasure at the arrogant television “snake oil” presentations of “financial benefits” and “a better life,” to the presumably vulnerable, cash-strapped elder. The implicit contextual hubris of such presumption and faux-solicitousness may exceed the hazard of the negative impact of such universally indiscriminate and irresponsible advice.
A reverse mortgage loan, like the traditional mortgage, allows a homeowner to borrow money on the value (“equity”) of his home. The title remains in the homeowner’s name, but he no longer makes monthly mortgage payments. The loan ceases and is repaid when the homeowner dies or, otherwise is no longer resident in the home. Interest and fees are added to the loan and, each month the balance grows. What the smarmy Selleck commercial does not disclose, includes the homeowner’s financial responsibility (on pain of summary foreclosure) for the taxes, levies, and the cost of repairs, the insurance on the realty, consideration of the salient issue as to agreed equity value, the high cost of loan fees and the title closing expenses of the transaction, the intrusive inspections to assure maximum care, and, of course, the monthly decrease in equity value. An undisclosed and potentially tragic feature is the lender’s right of eviction of any non-owning inhabitant, for example, an elderly parent or child living in the home when the title owner dies.
We especially detest the misleading and cynical statements concerning the purported “tax-free” benefits, since the source of the monetary benefit is the homeowner’s property, a previously owned asset and irrefutably distinguishable from income. This shameless and cynical representation as to “tax-free money,” is revealingly, snake-oil salesmanship. The guidance of a capable attorney may be relevantly needed.
Grift # 2, Cash Redemption of Life Insurance
Television commercials that seek to extoll the financially pragmatic wisdom of redeeming life insurance policies, by elderly, possibly, cash-challenged policy owners, need to be considered in a personally applicable and evaluative context. Unless the situation is financially desperate, we would recommend that the elderly policy owner materially consider the following factors. (1) The policy was taken out for the anticipated receipt by the (possibly needy) familial beneficiary and will no longer be of potential assistance or benefit to him, (2) the proceeds of the redemption may be taxable, (3) fees may be due for the transaction and, most disturbingly,(4) The policy for which, premiums may have been paid for decades, during a period when he was younger and the statistical (“actuarial”) possibility that the insurance company will be obligated to pay the death benefit is relatively remote, is redeemed later on in life when the actuarial possibility of the payment of the face value is as a pragmatically greater, results in a significant windfall to the insurance company, and in our view, is an actuarial “grift.” In practical effect, the televised promise of a “windfall” is received by the insurance company, as opposed to the policyholder, and definitively, not by the policy’s intended beneficiary. The televised suggestion that policy redemption makes sense if the policyholder “no longer needs it,” is grossly misleading.
Grift # 3, “Youth Restoring” Pharmacy
Memory: We have consulted various physicians who have informed us that the pharmaceutical products advertised to the elderly as effective memory boosters (with, or without, jellyfish protein) and re-booters of the youthful capabilities of the human brain have not been scientifically proven nor officially sanctioned. Our unprofessional view is that the benefits of mental acuity are derived from the regular use of the brain in useful contemplation, reading, pursuing personal interests, and the regularly understood recognition of one’s good fortune in the continuance of the personal franchise of life.
Physical Appearance: The representation that youthful appearance can be commercially extended to later periods of human life, may deserve the gold medal for the most insidiously profitable marketing grift in the entire panoply of deceit.
The profit-making claim of a youthful, or younger appearance is deceitfully based upon the persuasive neurotic ideation that, (1) Younger is more acceptable, (2) looking young is the exclusive standard of attractiveness, (3) looking younger by the application of the advertised product is a timeless and appropriately universal aspiration. All sorts of merchandise are publically advertised (especially to aging, female members of the television audience) purporting to amend and presumably, improve, their appearance by disguising the normal physical progress of human growth and aging.
Our views in this area of commercial propagandist grift are not in the purported quality and potential effect of the advertised myriad of creams, lotions, washes, oils, nutritional aids, balms, powders, and make-up, cleansers, hair supplements, hairstyles, dyes, miracle diets, tooth whiteners, skin treatments, wrinkle removers, eye shadow, false lashes, support apparel, freezing or surgical cosmetics. We have little knowledge of this purported cosmetic alchemy. We are, however, contextually concerned with the lack of mature perspective on the part of the aging consumer and the tactically, deceitful commercial practitioners of deceptive grift who immensely profit from such immature insecurity.
We cannot, in this context, refrain from an expression of relevant concern, respecting the advertised use of botulism toxin for the removal of forehead and other facial wrinkles. Our readings inform us that this chemical toxin is scientifically rated as among the top three dangerous poisons. In our view, the legal sale, purchase, and most bizarre, the voluntary application of the same for the inane, egotistical removal of a natural wrinkle or two is more than a submission to a scam, but a display of unnaturally hazardous behavior.
We have grappled with understanding the inability of many people who appear to lack mature perspective in their inability to perceive human beauty in its naturally changing and maturing developmental context. There is a nuanced and age-appropriate standard of attractiveness relevant to each stage of human development. Neurotic insecurity and consequent attempts at emulation of idolized youthful appearance, as one matures, is a demonstration of lack of mature perspective and an open invitation to cosmetic grift. We would offer, as an aesthetic illustration, one of our favorite actresses, Ms. Sophia Loren, who is appropriately beautiful in the context of her late feminine maturity, as she was, in the stages of her contextual youth and later maturity.
-p.
plinyblogdotcom 