Author Topic: Overheard at Work  (Read 6408167 times)

marielle

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 823
  • Age: 24
  • Location: South Carolina
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18850 on: October 06, 2017, 12:53:44 PM »
One of my colleagues strongly believes that it is less expensive to run his A/C the whole day while he's at work, than to turn it off when he leaves, then back on again.

Because, he says, it uses more energy to start the cooling process over again and cool the room, than to maintain a given (cold) room temperature. I'm pretty sure that's ignoring very basic principles of thermodynamics. Appreciate if any of you have a concise, yet authoritative site on the topic.

"The EPA says it's better to shut off the air conditioner if you will be away for more than a few hours."
https://www.acdoctor.com/blog/turn-off-ac-or-leave-it-on/

* Assuming you live in a non-ridiculously hot area. I live in the desert and if I turn off the a/c while I'm at work then my fridge has to work overtime because of the heat. I end up with a ridiculously high bill because of the fridge and any food in the door goes bad (I hide dairy in the back corner to this day). For me, just cooling the place is cheaper although I do have different temps for when I'm home vs not home.

No fucking way this is true.  It doesn't even make sense.  You just had a malfunctioning fridge that couldn't keep cold enough, or the efficiency difference between your fridge and AC unit was so disparate that no one should have been using that fridge (ie it was clearly malfunctioning). 

I also call bullshit on anyone saying it takes 3 days to recool their house or anything else.  It takes less energy to turn the AC or heater off/down while you are away and only run it while you are home, absolutely no exceptions.   You can make the argument that you are more comfortable for some short period by keeping a constant temperature rather than turning the unit off then back on and waiting for it to reach your ideal temperature, but leaving it on uses more total energy absolutely no exceptions ever.  That's just the laws of thermodynamics.
It could be true if it was severely malfunctioning. In that case the solution should have been a fridge replacement but the AC was used instead. Possibly the coils were severely dust laden, a good cleaning would fix it, that's my guess for poor heat transfer. Maybe the guy had empirical evidence, but holy CRAP! What kind of electric bills would show much difference? Is the guy saying he can notice changes in his bill, which is lower, when the AC is on? HOLY Heatwave Batman, how large are the electric bills when AC causes them to appear smaller? This requires more electricity to be used in running the pump then in the actual heat transfer, its ridiculous.

Although extremely silly, never underestimate the ability of people to need a face punch. Instead of fixing problems, like dirty coils that need a good vacuum or replacement, some people will turn up the AC to have their whole house operate as a fridge.

OP - Clean your fridge coils. If that doesn't work, get a new fridge, yours is broken.

In addition, if your fridge is older than 8 years (that's the number I heard a number of years ago, so it may be a higher number now that more effect fridges are out) it is like running a 1,000 watt space heater inside your home for 4 hours per day!!

I found this hard to believe so I did some research.

A 2004-2008 energy star efficient refrigerator uses about 1400 watts a day.

A CEE Tier 3 (after 2010) refrigerator uses 1160 watts a day.

Not an insignificant difference, no. It saves you $15 in electricity over the course of a year. But the technology isn't growing THAT quickly.

https://michaelbluejay.com/electricity/refrigerators.html

Roe

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 137
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18851 on: October 06, 2017, 12:54:07 PM »
Talking at work about saving for retirement. It was a great talk, everyone talking about how they save, and how important it is. Awesome!

Until one of the guys mentions that he has been saving every month for years, but the bank is making changes and he will have to move all of his savings.

All 600$.
Beans&rice, my love!

RidetheRain

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 305
  • Age: 25
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18852 on: October 06, 2017, 12:54:28 PM »
One of my colleagues strongly believes that it is less expensive to run his A/C the whole day while he's at work, than to turn it off when he leaves, then back on again.

Because, he says, it uses more energy to start the cooling process over again and cool the room, than to maintain a given (cold) room temperature. I'm pretty sure that's ignoring very basic principles of thermodynamics. Appreciate if any of you have a concise, yet authoritative site on the topic.

"The EPA says it's better to shut off the air conditioner if you will be away for more than a few hours."
https://www.acdoctor.com/blog/turn-off-ac-or-leave-it-on/

* Assuming you live in a non-ridiculously hot area. I live in the desert and if I turn off the a/c while I'm at work then my fridge has to work overtime because of the heat. I end up with a ridiculously high bill because of the fridge and any food in the door goes bad (I hide dairy in the back corner to this day). For me, just cooling the place is cheaper although I do have different temps for when I'm home vs not home.

No fucking way this is true.  It doesn't even make sense.  You just had a malfunctioning fridge that couldn't keep cold enough, or the efficiency difference between your fridge and AC unit was so disparate that no one should have been using that fridge (ie it was clearly malfunctioning). 

I also call bullshit on anyone saying it takes 3 days to recool their house or anything else.  It takes less energy to turn the AC or heater off/down while you are away and only run it while you are home, absolutely no exceptions.   You can make the argument that you are more comfortable for some short period by keeping a constant temperature rather than turning the unit off then back on and waiting for it to reach your ideal temperature, but leaving it on uses more total energy absolutely no exceptions ever.  That's just the laws of thermodynamics.
It could be true if it was severely malfunctioning. In that case the solution should have been a fridge replacement but the AC was used instead. Possibly the coils were severely dust laden, a good cleaning would fix it, that's my guess for poor heat transfer. Maybe the guy had empirical evidence, but holy CRAP! What kind of electric bills would show much difference? Is the guy saying he can notice changes in his bill, which is lower, when the AC is on? HOLY Heatwave Batman, how large are the electric bills when AC causes them to appear smaller? This requires more electricity to be used in running the pump then in the actual heat transfer, its ridiculous.

Although extremely silly, never underestimate the ability of people to need a face punch. Instead of fixing problems, like dirty coils that need a good vacuum or replacement, some people will turn up the AC to have their whole house operate as a fridge.

OP - Clean your fridge coils. If that doesn't work, get a new fridge, yours is broken.

In addition, if your fridge is older than 8 years (that's the number I heard a number of years ago, so it may be a higher number now that more effect fridges are out) it is like running a 1,000 watt space heater inside your home for 4 hours per day!!

Since this popped up again, I'll give you all the end of the story which is horrible.

Basically, I was renting my fridge (1yr apartment so renting made sense) and I called them to come and take a look at it. Coils were clean, everything working just fine. The repair guy recommended blackout curtains for my kitchen window. That helped a little, but really the problem was the 95+ degree temps in the apartment which the seal on the fridge door couldn't handle. I could have paid more money for a fancier fridge, but I wasn't convinced that would help.

Later, a corner of the roof fell in while I was living there because of poor maintenance on the apartment building (I was top floor) so there was virtually no insulation and cracks and crevices all over. Additionally, I had some really shitty neighbors that were illegally growing weed in the next apartment and venting into our shared wall. Frankly, I'm surprised they didn't start a fire. I moved out.
See my journal

MrMoogle

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 971
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Huntsville, AL
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18853 on: October 06, 2017, 01:47:24 PM »
Talking at work about saving for retirement. It was a great talk, everyone talking about how they save, and how important it is. Awesome!

Until one of the guys mentions that he has been saving every month for years, but the bank is making changes and he will have to move all of his savings.

All 600$.
You're supposed to save 10% each month, not $10!

BDWW

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 310
  • Location: MT
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18854 on: October 06, 2017, 02:09:29 PM »
One of my colleagues strongly believes that it is less expensive to run his A/C the whole day while he's at work, than to turn it off when he leaves, then back on again.

Because, he says, it uses more energy to start the cooling process over again and cool the room, than to maintain a given (cold) room temperature. I'm pretty sure that's ignoring very basic principles of thermodynamics. Appreciate if any of you have a concise, yet authoritative site on the topic.

"The EPA says it's better to shut off the air conditioner if you will be away for more than a few hours."
https://www.acdoctor.com/blog/turn-off-ac-or-leave-it-on/

* Assuming you live in a non-ridiculously hot area. I live in the desert and if I turn off the a/c while I'm at work then my fridge has to work overtime because of the heat. I end up with a ridiculously high bill because of the fridge and any food in the door goes bad (I hide dairy in the back corner to this day). For me, just cooling the place is cheaper although I do have different temps for when I'm home vs not home.

No fucking way this is true.  It doesn't even make sense.  You just had a malfunctioning fridge that couldn't keep cold enough, or the efficiency difference between your fridge and AC unit was so disparate that no one should have been using that fridge (ie it was clearly malfunctioning). 

I also call bullshit on anyone saying it takes 3 days to recool their house or anything else.  It takes less energy to turn the AC or heater off/down while you are away and only run it while you are home, absolutely no exceptions.   You can make the argument that you are more comfortable for some short period by keeping a constant temperature rather than turning the unit off then back on and waiting for it to reach your ideal temperature, but leaving it on uses more total energy absolutely no exceptions ever.  That's just the laws of thermodynamics.
It could be true if it was severely malfunctioning. In that case the solution should have been a fridge replacement but the AC was used instead. Possibly the coils were severely dust laden, a good cleaning would fix it, that's my guess for poor heat transfer. Maybe the guy had empirical evidence, but holy CRAP! What kind of electric bills would show much difference? Is the guy saying he can notice changes in his bill, which is lower, when the AC is on? HOLY Heatwave Batman, how large are the electric bills when AC causes them to appear smaller? This requires more electricity to be used in running the pump then in the actual heat transfer, its ridiculous.

Although extremely silly, never underestimate the ability of people to need a face punch. Instead of fixing problems, like dirty coils that need a good vacuum or replacement, some people will turn up the AC to have their whole house operate as a fridge.

OP - Clean your fridge coils. If that doesn't work, get a new fridge, yours is broken.

In addition, if your fridge is older than 8 years (that's the number I heard a number of years ago, so it may be a higher number now that more effect fridges are out) it is like running a 1,000 watt space heater inside your home for 4 hours per day!!

That was probably true a number of years ago when everyone had old inefficient fridges, however efficiency improvements have been at a point of diminishing returns for probably the last couple decades at least. So it's not likely a new fridge will be that much more efficient than one built in the last 15 years or so.

In fact it will probably be worse if you opt for one of the new "french door" designs that seem so popular nowadays.

ketchup

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2860
  • Age: 26
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18855 on: October 06, 2017, 02:22:06 PM »
One of my colleagues strongly believes that it is less expensive to run his A/C the whole day while he's at work, than to turn it off when he leaves, then back on again.

Because, he says, it uses more energy to start the cooling process over again and cool the room, than to maintain a given (cold) room temperature. I'm pretty sure that's ignoring very basic principles of thermodynamics. Appreciate if any of you have a concise, yet authoritative site on the topic.

"The EPA says it's better to shut off the air conditioner if you will be away for more than a few hours."
https://www.acdoctor.com/blog/turn-off-ac-or-leave-it-on/

* Assuming you live in a non-ridiculously hot area. I live in the desert and if I turn off the a/c while I'm at work then my fridge has to work overtime because of the heat. I end up with a ridiculously high bill because of the fridge and any food in the door goes bad (I hide dairy in the back corner to this day). For me, just cooling the place is cheaper although I do have different temps for when I'm home vs not home.

No fucking way this is true.  It doesn't even make sense.  You just had a malfunctioning fridge that couldn't keep cold enough, or the efficiency difference between your fridge and AC unit was so disparate that no one should have been using that fridge (ie it was clearly malfunctioning). 

I also call bullshit on anyone saying it takes 3 days to recool their house or anything else.  It takes less energy to turn the AC or heater off/down while you are away and only run it while you are home, absolutely no exceptions.   You can make the argument that you are more comfortable for some short period by keeping a constant temperature rather than turning the unit off then back on and waiting for it to reach your ideal temperature, but leaving it on uses more total energy absolutely no exceptions ever.  That's just the laws of thermodynamics.
It could be true if it was severely malfunctioning. In that case the solution should have been a fridge replacement but the AC was used instead. Possibly the coils were severely dust laden, a good cleaning would fix it, that's my guess for poor heat transfer. Maybe the guy had empirical evidence, but holy CRAP! What kind of electric bills would show much difference? Is the guy saying he can notice changes in his bill, which is lower, when the AC is on? HOLY Heatwave Batman, how large are the electric bills when AC causes them to appear smaller? This requires more electricity to be used in running the pump then in the actual heat transfer, its ridiculous.

Although extremely silly, never underestimate the ability of people to need a face punch. Instead of fixing problems, like dirty coils that need a good vacuum or replacement, some people will turn up the AC to have their whole house operate as a fridge.

OP - Clean your fridge coils. If that doesn't work, get a new fridge, yours is broken.

In addition, if your fridge is older than 8 years (that's the number I heard a number of years ago, so it may be a higher number now that more effect fridges are out) it is like running a 1,000 watt space heater inside your home for 4 hours per day!!

That was probably true a number of years ago when everyone had old inefficient fridges, however efficiency improvements have been at a point of diminishing returns for probably the last couple decades at least. So it's not likely a new fridge will be that much more efficient than one built in the last 15 years or so.

In fact it will probably be worse if you opt for one of the new "french door" designs that seem so popular nowadays.
The rule of thumb I saw a while back is that functional 2001 and newer fridges are not cost-effective to replace for energy saving purposes.  Seeing as my fridge was made in 2001, I like this rule.

Imma

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 442
  • Location: Europe
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18856 on: October 06, 2017, 02:49:19 PM »
A bike lane is basically as if you would build a street like this:
I assume you were trying to link to this image?
http://siggis-seiten.de/a/Prinzi1.jpg

I get what you are trying to say, but that's not really how bike lanes are supposed to be designed. In the Netherlands, markings on all roads are mandatory, but separate bike lanes are preferred. It's just that towns' planning departments lack the money to build separate lanes everywhere. Many lanes are separated by a ditch from the main road and at junctions there are supposed to be traffic lights.

What I personally hate about painted on bike lanes is that most streets in this town are centuries old. They are too narrow for modern use, but they can't be made wider without demolishing homes. These streets are not really wide enough to accomodate two buses or trucks coming from opposite directions, so the drivers obviously sway to the right to avoid the collision with the other vehicle. I have steered my bike onto the pavement or into people's front yards many times to avoid this situation. The problem with drivers of large vehicles is also that they can see you when you're in front of them, but they drive much faster than you, and when they pass by you, you end up in their blind spot. They're supposed to have extra mirrors to prevent that from happening, but in my experience, bus drivers forget about your existence the second they can't see you directly in front of you anymore. I think bike / bus accidents are the most common type to happen in my town.

RidetheRain

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 305
  • Age: 25
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18857 on: October 06, 2017, 02:57:22 PM »
Yesterday a kind coworker told me "if you pay yourself first and save one hour of each day's paycheck, by the time you're my age [54], you could have $500k!"

I smiled because she had really good advice and knew what she was talking about. Of course I didn't tell her by the time I'm her age I'll have three times that amount (hopefully) and be long retired!

I think that's quite lovely advice, and could be a very apt image for making the concept of regular saving real to people whose minds work that way. I wouldn't hesitate to offer advice like that to my young co-workers, taking the risk that some of them may already be socking away 70% of their income.

My Dad used to say Monday is for you, Tuesday's for the roads, Wednesday's for home, and the rest is for fun.

He's not a mustache kinda guy, but it's a nice way of (slightly inaccurately) thinking about your money. He usually said it as a way to get through a case of the Mondays. "The roads" was his euphemism for the government.
See my journal

Rollin

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1136
  • Location: West-Central Florida - USA
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18858 on: October 06, 2017, 04:00:08 PM »
Bringing back some orange foam, from maybe not even this thread.  There was discussion about leaving your car running while pumping gas...  Over the weekend I got some gas, and a police officer did the same, but kept his car running while he got his.  So I'm guessing it's at least legal to do.

I went in for coffee before work (before I FIRED) and read a book for an hour. A police car was outside running when I arrived - - and when I left. I was not happy and called the local PD and asked if this was policy. No answer.
I love being outside.

Rollin

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1136
  • Location: West-Central Florida - USA
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18859 on: October 06, 2017, 04:04:04 PM »
^^Surely vehicle weight and miles driven are correlated with petrol ("gas") used. So tax petrol and use it to maintain roads.

... for now. But with the advent of electric cars, this will no longer be the case:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/26/treasury-tax-electric-cars-vat-fuel-duty
I know that in some countries, governments are considering taxing car use for road improvement by requiring recording devices in every car, that report the distance driven each month.

Fair enough, but it's still the case NOW and American petrol is known for being ridiculously cheap so they could easily jack up the tax on that for the time being.

No.  You guys are just used to paying very high taxes so when you see someone who isn't you mistake it for cheap rather than your prices as expensive.

All we gotta do is add on the billions and billions and billions in subsidies (who pays for these? We do!) and you can see that gas ain't cheap. However, it appears as though it is.
I love being outside.

Rollin

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1136
  • Location: West-Central Florida - USA
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18860 on: October 06, 2017, 04:42:59 PM »
One of my colleagues strongly believes that it is less expensive to run his A/C the whole day while he's at work, than to turn it off when he leaves, then back on again.

Because, he says, it uses more energy to start the cooling process over again and cool the room, than to maintain a given (cold) room temperature. I'm pretty sure that's ignoring very basic principles of thermodynamics. Appreciate if any of you have a concise, yet authoritative site on the topic.

"The EPA says it's better to shut off the air conditioner if you will be away for more than a few hours."
https://www.acdoctor.com/blog/turn-off-ac-or-leave-it-on/

* Assuming you live in a non-ridiculously hot area. I live in the desert and if I turn off the a/c while I'm at work then my fridge has to work overtime because of the heat. I end up with a ridiculously high bill because of the fridge and any food in the door goes bad (I hide dairy in the back corner to this day). For me, just cooling the place is cheaper although I do have different temps for when I'm home vs not home.

No fucking way this is true.  It doesn't even make sense.  You just had a malfunctioning fridge that couldn't keep cold enough, or the efficiency difference between your fridge and AC unit was so disparate that no one should have been using that fridge (ie it was clearly malfunctioning). 

I also call bullshit on anyone saying it takes 3 days to recool their house or anything else.  It takes less energy to turn the AC or heater off/down while you are away and only run it while you are home, absolutely no exceptions.   You can make the argument that you are more comfortable for some short period by keeping a constant temperature rather than turning the unit off then back on and waiting for it to reach your ideal temperature, but leaving it on uses more total energy absolutely no exceptions ever.  That's just the laws of thermodynamics.
It could be true if it was severely malfunctioning. In that case the solution should have been a fridge replacement but the AC was used instead. Possibly the coils were severely dust laden, a good cleaning would fix it, that's my guess for poor heat transfer. Maybe the guy had empirical evidence, but holy CRAP! What kind of electric bills would show much difference? Is the guy saying he can notice changes in his bill, which is lower, when the AC is on? HOLY Heatwave Batman, how large are the electric bills when AC causes them to appear smaller? This requires more electricity to be used in running the pump then in the actual heat transfer, its ridiculous.

Although extremely silly, never underestimate the ability of people to need a face punch. Instead of fixing problems, like dirty coils that need a good vacuum or replacement, some people will turn up the AC to have their whole house operate as a fridge.

OP - Clean your fridge coils. If that doesn't work, get a new fridge, yours is broken.

In addition, if your fridge is older than 8 years (that's the number I heard a number of years ago, so it may be a higher number now that more effect fridges are out) it is like running a 1,000 watt space heater inside your home for 4 hours per day!!

That was probably true a number of years ago when everyone had old inefficient fridges, however efficiency improvements have been at a point of diminishing returns for probably the last couple decades at least. So it's not likely a new fridge will be that much more efficient than one built in the last 15 years or so.

In fact it will probably be worse if you opt for one of the new "french door" designs that seem so popular nowadays.
The rule of thumb I saw a while back is that functional 2001 and newer fridges are not cost-effective to replace for energy saving purposes.  Seeing as my fridge was made in 2001, I like this rule.

Looking at the data it tells me (besides you being correct) I was correct at one time, but long ago. Its an affliction I have, not knowing how many years pass and adding correctly :)
I love being outside.

Playing with Fire UK

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2056
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18861 on: October 07, 2017, 12:35:13 AM »
Bringing back some orange foam, from maybe not even this thread.  There was discussion about leaving your car running while pumping gas...  Over the weekend I got some gas, and a police officer did the same, but kept his car running while he got his.  So I'm guessing it's at least legal to do.

I went in for coffee before work (before I FIRED) and read a book for an hour. A police car was outside running when I arrived - - and when I left. I was not happy and called the local PD and asked if this was policy. No answer.

Yep, one police officer doing something is no guarantee that it is legal. Also, a bunch of police officers absolutely convinced that something is legal is no guarantee that it is legal.

LennStar

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 911
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18862 on: October 07, 2017, 01:34:34 AM »
Bringing back some orange foam, from maybe not even this thread.  There was discussion about leaving your car running while pumping gas...  Over the weekend I got some gas, and a police officer did the same, but kept his car running while he got his.  So I'm guessing it's at least legal to do.

I went in for coffee before work (before I FIRED) and read a book for an hour. A police car was outside running when I arrived - - and when I left. I was not happy and called the local PD and asked if this was policy. No answer.

Of course I can only speak for Germany, don't know such details about other countries laws.
But here it is illegal to have the engine run unneccessarily (not that this is ever enforced). Because of noise, the law is older then smog or environment thinking.
But police cars are different - they have to be ready to go as fast as possible at every time, because somthing could happen, like an attempt to murder.
They CAN have the engine running but are also not required. I guess that boils down to common sense here. Not that police officers are better at that then other people...

For a similar reason the Red Cross used to have one emergency vehicle running all the time because without (because of all the energy taking stuff in the back, something on this line) it took 20-25 seconds to be ready to start driving, which could literally be the difference between life and death.

I don't know if they are still doing this, I think with the modern batteries and design it's no longer necessary. 
« Last Edit: October 07, 2017, 01:38:31 AM by LennStar »

Rollin

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1136
  • Location: West-Central Florida - USA
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18863 on: October 07, 2017, 01:33:47 PM »
Bringing back some orange foam, from maybe not even this thread.  There was discussion about leaving your car running while pumping gas...  Over the weekend I got some gas, and a police officer did the same, but kept his car running while he got his.  So I'm guessing it's at least legal to do.

I went in for coffee before work (before I FIRED) and read a book for an hour. A police car was outside running when I arrived - - and when I left. I was not happy and called the local PD and asked if this was policy. No answer.

Of course I can only speak for Germany, don't know such details about other countries laws.
But here it is illegal to have the engine run unneccessarily (not that this is ever enforced). Because of noise, the law is older then smog or environment thinking.
But police cars are different - they have to be ready to go as fast as possible at every time, because somthing could happen, like an attempt to murder.
They CAN have the engine running but are also not required. I guess that boils down to common sense here. Not that police officers are better at that then other people...

For a similar reason the Red Cross used to have one emergency vehicle running all the time because without (because of all the energy taking stuff in the back, something on this line) it took 20-25 seconds to be ready to start driving, which could literally be the difference between life and death.

I don't know if they are still doing this, I think with the modern batteries and design it's no longer necessary.

If he was that much on the ready he'd not been sitting in the back of a coffee shop, on his laptop, sipping on a coffee - he'd be in the car.

Our emergency responders have their vehicle off, but usually plugged in (keeping everything charged and I might guess heating the oil or coolant) and ready to roll.
I love being outside.

Hula Hoop

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 189
  • Location: Europe
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18864 on: October 08, 2017, 03:38:28 PM »
My colleague tells me she lives paycheck to paycheck.  She's 50 something and renting a small place in an expensive area of town.  She worries that she'll never be able to retire.  However:

-when my older baby was born and I was cloth diapering her, she told me "when my son was a baby I only used Pampers brand disposable diapers on him as I only want the BEST for my son."
-I buy clothes for my kids either second hand or on sale at the end of the season a year in advance once size bigger.  I once mentioned this and she said "I'd never do that for my son as I only buy the best current season clothes for him and never on sale."
-she says she really admires the fact that we were able to buy an apartment.  However, we bought a place in a lower income area that she would never consider.  She rents in one of the priciest areas of town and looks down her nose at areas like where we live. 
-she is also afraid to buy a place (despite crazy low interest rates and house prices here) as she says that she's afraid of having to pay a mortgage every month.  I pointed out that she has to pay rent every month but she doesn't seem to get the analogy.
-she owns a car that she drives maybe once a month as you really don't need a car to live in this city.  She says that she'd never get rid of it as how would she get to IKEA or to visit her sister who lives a bit further out of the city.  I told her about car sharing but she dismissed that as "too difficult".

SwordGuy

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3404
  • Location: Fayetteville, NC
    • Flipping Fayetteville
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18865 on: October 08, 2017, 04:51:10 PM »
My colleague tells me she lives paycheck to paycheck.  She's 50 something and renting a small place in an expensive area of town.  She worries that she'll never be able to retire.  However:

-when my older baby was born and I was cloth diapering her, she told me "when my son was a baby I only used Pampers brand disposable diapers on him as I only want the BEST for my son."
-I buy clothes for my kids either second hand or on sale at the end of the season a year in advance once size bigger.  I once mentioned this and she said "I'd never do that for my son as I only buy the best current season clothes for him and never on sale."
-she says she really admires the fact that we were able to buy an apartment.  However, we bought a place in a lower income area that she would never consider.  She rents in one of the priciest areas of town and looks down her nose at areas like where we live. 
-she is also afraid to buy a place (despite crazy low interest rates and house prices here) as she says that she's afraid of having to pay a mortgage every month.  I pointed out that she has to pay rent every month but she doesn't seem to get the analogy.
-she owns a car that she drives maybe once a month as you really don't need a car to live in this city.  She says that she'd never get rid of it as how would she get to IKEA or to visit her sister who lives a bit further out of the city.  I told her about car sharing but she dismissed that as "too difficult".

I know people exactly like this.

And the fact that they are struggling is someone else's fault.  Always.

Primm

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1277
  • Age: 48
  • Location: Australia
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18866 on: October 08, 2017, 05:41:07 PM »
Leaving work on my bike, I get many genuine "be careful!" warnings.  This is coming from people who do absolutely zero physical activity and probably haven't been on a bike since they were 12.  I almost want to tell them "be careful of getting heart disease!" as they climb into their SUVs.

Being on a roadway is a dangerous activity. Doesn't matter if you're walking, biking or driving. Few people walk on the road. Drivers are frequently protected by cars. I'd say biking is the most dangerous things you can do on a road. You're hard to see sometimes, some cyclers feel entitled to do things that increase their risk (like riding two abreast), and you're likely to have very serious injuries if you do get into an accident. Only thing worse you could do is be a motorcyclist, which is only really adding speed to the already dangerous cycling activity. Of course, if you have dedicated cycle lanes, that assessment changes. In this country, cyclists are on the main carriage way, with all the other traffic for the most part. There are cycle lanes at some intersections, but that's about it.

Actually riding 2 abreast decreases risk. It makes people on bikes more visible to other road users, and it decreases the time necessary to overtake them (think passing a vehicle the length of a car vs. passing a road train). That's why it's not only legal, but actually recommended by road safety experts.

JAYSLOL

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 642
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18867 on: October 08, 2017, 05:42:54 PM »
Bringing back some orange foam, from maybe not even this thread.  There was discussion about leaving your car running while pumping gas...  Over the weekend I got some gas, and a police officer did the same, but kept his car running while he got his.  So I'm guessing it's at least legal to do.

I went in for coffee before work (before I FIRED) and read a book for an hour. A police car was outside running when I arrived - - and when I left. I was not happy and called the local PD and asked if this was policy. No answer.

I see this a lot around my area with emergency vehicles, tow trucks, service vehicles etc.  I'm not advocating that there isn't a better solution, but a lot of the reason is they are running a lot of accessories off the car/truck like their radios, dash cameras and computers that they can't turn off and can't afford to get a call and have a dead battery when away from the station
« Last Edit: October 08, 2017, 07:35:25 PM by JAYSLOL »

firelight

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1046
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18868 on: October 08, 2017, 06:44:11 PM »
My colleague tells me she lives paycheck to paycheck.  She's 50 something and renting a small place in an expensive area of town.  She worries that she'll never be able to retire.  However:

-when my older baby was born and I was cloth diapering her, she told me "when my son was a baby I only used Pampers brand disposable diapers on him as I only want the BEST for my son."
-I buy clothes for my kids either second hand or on sale at the end of the season a year in advance once size bigger.  I once mentioned this and she said "I'd never do that for my son as I only buy the best current season clothes for him and never on sale."
-she says she really admires the fact that we were able to buy an apartment.  However, we bought a place in a lower income area that she would never consider.  She rents in one of the priciest areas of town and looks down her nose at areas like where we live. 
-she is also afraid to buy a place (despite crazy low interest rates and house prices here) as she says that she's afraid of having to pay a mortgage every month.  I pointed out that she has to pay rent every month but she doesn't seem to get the analogy.
-she owns a car that she drives maybe once a month as you really don't need a car to live in this city.  She says that she'd never get rid of it as how would she get to IKEA or to visit her sister who lives a bit further out of the city.  I told her about car sharing but she dismissed that as "too difficult".

I know people exactly like this.

And the fact that they are struggling is someone else's fault.  Always.
OMG! This! My sil does this - we do cloth diapers + occasionally pampers. She looks down on our choices because we don't get seventh generation or babyganics diapers. She is a stay at home mom with $30k student loans and God knows how much credit card loans. I'm sick and tired of the comparisons.

AnnaGrowsAMustache

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 306
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18869 on: October 08, 2017, 11:07:22 PM »
Leaving work on my bike, I get many genuine "be careful!" warnings.  This is coming from people who do absolutely zero physical activity and probably haven't been on a bike since they were 12.  I almost want to tell them "be careful of getting heart disease!" as they climb into their SUVs.

Being on a roadway is a dangerous activity. Doesn't matter if you're walking, biking or driving. Few people walk on the road. Drivers are frequently protected by cars. I'd say biking is the most dangerous things you can do on a road. You're hard to see sometimes, some cyclers feel entitled to do things that increase their risk (like riding two abreast), and you're likely to have very serious injuries if you do get into an accident. Only thing worse you could do is be a motorcyclist, which is only really adding speed to the already dangerous cycling activity. Of course, if you have dedicated cycle lanes, that assessment changes. In this country, cyclists are on the main carriage way, with all the other traffic for the most part. There are cycle lanes at some intersections, but that's about it.

Actually riding 2 abreast decreases risk. It makes people on bikes more visible to other road users, and it decreases the time necessary to overtake them (think passing a vehicle the length of a car vs. passing a road train). That's why it's not only legal, but actually recommended by road safety experts.

They can't be overtaken safely on some of the hill roads here. They just get killed. Or, if there are more reasonable people behind them, you just get a long train of cars tooting. They're certainly visible though. I'll give them that!

LennStar

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 911
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18870 on: October 09, 2017, 01:48:25 AM »
Leaving work on my bike, I get many genuine "be careful!" warnings.  This is coming from people who do absolutely zero physical activity and probably haven't been on a bike since they were 12.  I almost want to tell them "be careful of getting heart disease!" as they climb into their SUVs.

Being on a roadway is a dangerous activity. Doesn't matter if you're walking, biking or driving. Few people walk on the road. Drivers are frequently protected by cars. I'd say biking is the most dangerous things you can do on a road. You're hard to see sometimes, some cyclers feel entitled to do things that increase their risk (like riding two abreast), and you're likely to have very serious injuries if you do get into an accident. Only thing worse you could do is be a motorcyclist, which is only really adding speed to the already dangerous cycling activity. Of course, if you have dedicated cycle lanes, that assessment changes. In this country, cyclists are on the main carriage way, with all the other traffic for the most part. There are cycle lanes at some intersections, but that's about it.

Actually riding 2 abreast decreases risk. It makes people on bikes more visible to other road users, and it decreases the time necessary to overtake them (think passing a vehicle the length of a car vs. passing a road train). That's why it's not only legal, but actually recommended by road safety experts.

They can't be overtaken safely on some of the hill roads here. They just get killed. Or, if there are more reasonable people behind them, you just get a long train of cars tooting. They're certainly visible though. I'll give them that!

See, if car drivers are reasonable then it is perfectly safe.
Of course, a lot of them aren't. But that isn't the fault of the cyclists.

AnnaGrowsAMustache

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 306
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18871 on: October 09, 2017, 03:08:02 AM »
Leaving work on my bike, I get many genuine "be careful!" warnings.  This is coming from people who do absolutely zero physical activity and probably haven't been on a bike since they were 12.  I almost want to tell them "be careful of getting heart disease!" as they climb into their SUVs.

Being on a roadway is a dangerous activity. Doesn't matter if you're walking, biking or driving. Few people walk on the road. Drivers are frequently protected by cars. I'd say biking is the most dangerous things you can do on a road. You're hard to see sometimes, some cyclers feel entitled to do things that increase their risk (like riding two abreast), and you're likely to have very serious injuries if you do get into an accident. Only thing worse you could do is be a motorcyclist, which is only really adding speed to the already dangerous cycling activity. Of course, if you have dedicated cycle lanes, that assessment changes. In this country, cyclists are on the main carriage way, with all the other traffic for the most part. There are cycle lanes at some intersections, but that's about it.

Actually riding 2 abreast decreases risk. It makes people on bikes more visible to other road users, and it decreases the time necessary to overtake them (think passing a vehicle the length of a car vs. passing a road train). That's why it's not only legal, but actually recommended by road safety experts.

They can't be overtaken safely on some of the hill roads here. They just get killed. Or, if there are more reasonable people behind them, you just get a long train of cars tooting. They're certainly visible though. I'll give them that!

See, if car drivers are reasonable then it is perfectly safe.
Of course, a lot of them aren't. But that isn't the fault of the cyclists.

Agreed. But a lot of drivers aren't reasonable. And then the cyclist is dead or badly injured. Is it worth that just to be right regarding fault? If cyclists were interested in their own safety they would assume all drivers are unreasonable and refrain from riding two abreast where they can't be overtaken. I mean, I have the right to cross the road at a crossing, but I'm still going to look both ways before I do! Because I'm the one that's going to bear the consequences.

UKMustache

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 156
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18872 on: October 09, 2017, 04:00:06 AM »
Agreed. But a lot of drivers aren't reasonable. And then the cyclist is dead or badly injured. Is it worth that just to be right regarding fault? If cyclists were interested in their own safety they would assume all drivers are unreasonable and refrain from riding two abreast where they can't be overtaken. I mean, I have the right to cross the road at a crossing, but I'm still going to look both ways before I do! Because I'm the one that's going to bear the consequences.

You're one step removed from blaming rape victims for wearing skirts, I suggest you reconsider your victim blaming perspective.

If cyclists choose to ride side by side (and there are a number of reasons this might be appropriate) then they should be able to do so freely and without judgement. 

runbikerun

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 116
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18873 on: October 09, 2017, 04:31:31 AM »
Riding two abreast is a safer option: it discourages unsafe overtaking by requiring drivers to use the next lane over instead of squeezing the riders by staying in the same lane, as well as halving the length of the group. It's genuinely the safer option for group rides.

Hula Hoop

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 189
  • Location: Europe
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18874 on: October 09, 2017, 05:42:40 AM »
My colleague tells me she lives paycheck to paycheck.  She's 50 something and renting a small place in an expensive area of town.  She worries that she'll never be able to retire.  However:

-when my older baby was born and I was cloth diapering her, she told me "when my son was a baby I only used Pampers brand disposable diapers on him as I only want the BEST for my son."
-I buy clothes for my kids either second hand or on sale at the end of the season a year in advance once size bigger.  I once mentioned this and she said "I'd never do that for my son as I only buy the best current season clothes for him and never on sale."
-she says she really admires the fact that we were able to buy an apartment.  However, we bought a place in a lower income area that she would never consider.  She rents in one of the priciest areas of town and looks down her nose at areas like where we live. 
-she is also afraid to buy a place (despite crazy low interest rates and house prices here) as she says that she's afraid of having to pay a mortgage every month.  I pointed out that she has to pay rent every month but she doesn't seem to get the analogy.
-she owns a car that she drives maybe once a month as you really don't need a car to live in this city.  She says that she'd never get rid of it as how would she get to IKEA or to visit her sister who lives a bit further out of the city.  I told her about car sharing but she dismissed that as "too difficult".

I know people exactly like this.

And the fact that they are struggling is someone else's fault.  Always.
OMG! This! My sil does this - we do cloth diapers + occasionally pampers. She looks down on our choices because we don't get seventh generation or babyganics diapers. She is a stay at home mom with $30k student loans and God knows how much credit card loans. I'm sick and tired of the comparisons.

Whoah a SAHM with $30K in student loans?  I know MMM is all about this but how do people make these irrational choices?  My ex boss' wife met him in a US top ten private law school.  She quit her job as soon as she got pregnant to stay home with the kids and had him pay back both her and his law school loans.  If I'd wanted to be a stay at home parent there is no way I would have gone to law school.

Anyway I forgot the best quote from my colleague.  She told a few of us that she is "allergic to cotton".  We pointed out that she was wearing a cotton T-shirt.  She said "oh I'm allergic to cheap cotton.  This shirt is from [crazy expensive boutique X] so it's good quality and I don't get allergies from it."  As someone who actually has allergies that I've been hospitalized for all I could do was look at my other colleagues and shake my head.

chaskavitch

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 190
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Fort Collins, CO
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18875 on: October 09, 2017, 06:08:51 AM »
My colleague tells me she lives paycheck to paycheck.  She's 50 something and renting a small place in an expensive area of town.  She worries that she'll never be able to retire.  However:

-when my older baby was born and I was cloth diapering her, she told me "when my son was a baby I only used Pampers brand disposable diapers on him as I only want the BEST for my son."
-I buy clothes for my kids either second hand or on sale at the end of the season a year in advance once size bigger.  I once mentioned this and she said "I'd never do that for my son as I only buy the best current season clothes for him and never on sale."
-she says she really admires the fact that we were able to buy an apartment.  However, we bought a place in a lower income area that she would never consider.  She rents in one of the priciest areas of town and looks down her nose at areas like where we live. 
-she is also afraid to buy a place (despite crazy low interest rates and house prices here) as she says that she's afraid of having to pay a mortgage every month.  I pointed out that she has to pay rent every month but she doesn't seem to get the analogy.
-she owns a car that she drives maybe once a month as you really don't need a car to live in this city.  She says that she'd never get rid of it as how would she get to IKEA or to visit her sister who lives a bit further out of the city.  I told her about car sharing but she dismissed that as "too difficult".

I know people exactly like this.

And the fact that they are struggling is someone else's fault.  Always.
OMG! This! My sil does this - we do cloth diapers + occasionally pampers. She looks down on our choices because we don't get seventh generation or babyganics diapers. She is a stay at home mom with $30k student loans and God knows how much credit card loans. I'm sick and tired of the comparisons.

Whoah a SAHM with $30K in student loans?  I know MMM is all about this but how do people make these irrational choices?  My ex boss' wife met him in a US top ten private law school.  She quit her job as soon as she got pregnant to stay home with the kids and had him pay back both her and his law school loans.  If I'd wanted to be a stay at home parent there is no way I would have gone to law school.

Anyway I forgot the best quote from my colleague.  She told a few of us that she is "allergic to cotton".  We pointed out that she was wearing a cotton T-shirt.  She said "oh I'm allergic to cheap cotton.  This shirt is from [crazy expensive boutique X] so it's good quality and I don't get allergies from it."  As someone who actually has allergies that I've been hospitalized for all I could do was look at my other colleagues and shake my head.

I posit that she was actually going to college for her Mrs. degree, not a law degree. 

Hula Hoop

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 189
  • Location: Europe
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18876 on: October 09, 2017, 06:21:47 AM »
I posit that she was actually going to college for her Mrs. degree, not a law degree.

Yeah I guess that must be it.  This is really depressing to me as a feminist and a mother of two girls.  When I was at law school eons ago I remember some sexist old dinosaurs joking about young women like me just doing our Mrs. degree at law school.  I cringed partly because I find male lawyers hideously unattractive (ha ha - but seriously, I've never dated a lawyer despite being one myself) and partly because I was working my butt off and hated the idea that I would "just get married" and that my career would lead nowhere.  So it's galling to meet women like her (and she's my age - mid 40s) who really did seem to have that kind of old fashioned attitude.

chaskavitch

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 190
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Fort Collins, CO
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18877 on: October 09, 2017, 07:20:12 AM »
I posit that she was actually going to college for her Mrs. degree, not a law degree.

Yeah I guess that must be it.  This is really depressing to me as a feminist and a mother of two girls.  When I was at law school eons ago I remember some sexist old dinosaurs joking about young women like me just doing our Mrs. degree at law school.  I cringed partly because I find male lawyers hideously unattractive (ha ha - but seriously, I've never dated a lawyer despite being one myself) and partly because I was working my butt off and hated the idea that I would "just get married" and that my career would lead nowhere.  So it's galling to meet women like her (and she's my age - mid 40s) who really did seem to have that kind of old fashioned attitude.

I actually heard comments like that from fellow students in undergrad.  It's sad that some people just expect women to do this, even now.  I feel like not only are you selling yourself short, you're saddling yourself/your husband/your parents with useless student loans (that you're doing nothing to help repay), and you're misrepresenting yourself to your future spouse as a person likely to want a career, or at least a job. 

I mean, yes, if you do want to have kids and stay at home, that's fine, it's what you want to do.  If you're going to college because you like to learn but don't want a career, cool (maybe not the smartest financially, but still cool).  Going to college to give yourself choices and a good foundation until you do find someone you love and want to marry, great!  But if you're only going to college to snag a husband with a promising career, it seems kind of shady.

Marley09

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 21
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18878 on: October 09, 2017, 07:25:14 AM »

I posit that she was actually going to college for her Mrs. degree, not a law degree.

+1 LOL.  This is exactly what I was thinking.  The Mrs. degree wasn't secured in undergrad, so law-school was the next option...along with a lot of $$$  owed to the college.

marielle

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 823
  • Age: 24
  • Location: South Carolina
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18879 on: October 09, 2017, 07:38:04 AM »

I posit that she was actually going to college for her Mrs. degree, not a law degree.

+1 LOL.  This is exactly what I was thinking.  The Mrs. degree wasn't secured in undergrad, so law-school was the next option...along with a lot of $$$  owed to the college.

I can't imagine this is very common at all... Please tell me it's not common?

I mean, what sort of plan is it this? What if you don't find a partner? I guess if you think you're really attractive or something...

zolotiyeruki

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2315
  • Location: State: Denial
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18880 on: October 09, 2017, 07:50:35 AM »

I posit that she was actually going to college for her Mrs. degree, not a law degree.

+1 LOL.  This is exactly what I was thinking.  The Mrs. degree wasn't secured in undergrad, so law-school was the next option...along with a lot of $$$  owed to the college.

I can't imagine this is very common at all... Please tell me it's not common?

I mean, what sort of plan is it this? What if you don't find a partner? I guess if you think you're really attractive or something...
Maybe the fallback plan is to actually use the degree and get a job?

marielle

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 823
  • Age: 24
  • Location: South Carolina
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18881 on: October 09, 2017, 07:59:51 AM »

I posit that she was actually going to college for her Mrs. degree, not a law degree.

+1 LOL.  This is exactly what I was thinking.  The Mrs. degree wasn't secured in undergrad, so law-school was the next option...along with a lot of $$$  owed to the college.

I can't imagine this is very common at all... Please tell me it's not common?

I mean, what sort of plan is it this? What if you don't find a partner? I guess if you think you're really attractive or something...
Maybe the fallback plan is to actually use the degree and get a job?

I guess I assumed that the degree sometimes isn't completed or that someone who is just going to school to find a partner isn't ambitious enough to get a job as stressful as a lawyer.

I think, or at least hope, that more commonly the couple just simply agrees together that one person will stay home with the kids despite that person having a degree/career. Many people seem to prefer a SAHP over daycare.

Hula Hoop

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 189
  • Location: Europe
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18882 on: October 09, 2017, 08:00:09 AM »
I doubt people like this admit it to themselves while they are in law school or whatever.  The fact that ex-boss' wife told me she quit her high paying lawyer job as soon as she peed on a stick (or just afterwards) kind of seemed nuts as former boss was always complaining about the millstone of their combined law school loans around his neck.  I had bad morning sickness when she told me this and other health issues but was showing up at work each day anyway and doing my best while ducking to the bathrooms to barf during meetings. 

These kinds of perceptions are just one more cross us working women have to bear.

protostache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 772
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18883 on: October 09, 2017, 08:12:02 AM »
Bringing back some orange foam, from maybe not even this thread.  There was discussion about leaving your car running while pumping gas...  Over the weekend I got some gas, and a police officer did the same, but kept his car running while he got his.  So I'm guessing it's at least legal to do.

I went in for coffee before work (before I FIRED) and read a book for an hour. A police car was outside running when I arrived - - and when I left. I was not happy and called the local PD and asked if this was policy. No answer.

I see this a lot around my area with emergency vehicles, tow trucks, service vehicles etc.  I'm not advocating that there isn't a better solution, but a lot of the reason is they are running a lot of accessories off the car/truck like their radios, dash cameras and computers that they can't turn off and can't afford to get a call and have a dead battery when away from the station

(source: stepdad worked for a small town in the maintenance shed, knew the police pretty well) This is correct. Police radios take a lot of power to operate and they have to be on the whole time, so the engines run while the officer is on duty. This is why plug-in hybrid police cars are such a big deal. The equipment can run off the battery and the engine just has to kick in to recharge as necessary or when high performance is necessary, saving massive amounts of fuel and associated expense.

paddedhat

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2238
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18884 on: October 09, 2017, 08:13:21 AM »
Agreed. But a lot of drivers aren't reasonable. And then the cyclist is dead or badly injured. Is it worth that just to be right regarding fault? If cyclists were interested in their own safety they would assume all drivers are unreasonable and refrain from riding two abreast where they can't be overtaken. I mean, I have the right to cross the road at a crossing, but I'm still going to look both ways before I do! Because I'm the one that's going to bear the consequences.

You're one step removed from blaming rape victims for wearing skirts, I suggest you reconsider your victim blaming perspective.

If cyclists choose to ride side by side (and there are a number of reasons this might be appropriate) then they should be able to do so freely and without judgement.

Love it! You are one of the classic deluded cyclists that this forum is awash in. The poster you irrationally compare to a "rape apologist" is dealing in something that seems to elude your entire group. It's called reality. They did not suggest that they agree with the behavior of any driver who endangers cyclists. They did not say that they engage in, or encourage driving behavior that endangers cyclists. They said that this behavior EXISTS and that YOU can either deal with that fact as a grown up, or risk ending up getting run over by an idiot since, in your righteous mind, you are the victim, and you have rights.

I live right in the middle of 40K+ "plain people" who chose to use horse drawn buggies. About every 4-6 weeks, on average, a buggy full of members is involved in a hideous accident, typically when being struck from behind by an inattentive, irresponsible driver. They know the risks, they accept the result of their risk taking as "God's will", which personally I'm not on board with. OTOH, they also know that all the warnings, speed limits, traffic enforcement, etc... will not make the roads perfectly safe for them. They are not so self deluded as to engage in the asinine group think that seems to prevail in the cycling community.

Once you drop the bullshit, it's pretty simple. You are seen, by many motor vehicle operators as a nuisance who has no rights, and needs to get the fuck out of the way. They are operating a multi-ton vehicle. They do not respect your rights, and don't give a shit about you. In many cases you are a totally unexpected obstacle in their path, and they are irritated, surprised, unprepared, or whatever. The "fact" that you have rights in this case is meaningless. You have a responsibility to protect yourself to the best of your ability. Droning on with the endless "rights" bullshit, displayed by many cyclists here, is counterproductive.

gaja

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 809
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18885 on: October 09, 2017, 08:26:25 AM »
I wonder if the study looked at bike lanes that are demarcated by a line of paint rather than proper bike lanes that have a physical barrier.

It doesn't fit with my experience either.
My guess is that they looked at roads with bike lanes vs roads without.  Roads with bike lanes are probably more congested, hence the reason it needed a bike lane.  If you look at a per mile of road basis, my guess is roads with bike lanes have more wrecks than roads without.

If this is true it's one of those cases of: there's lies, damn lies, and statistics.  I've learned I can take data and come up with any conclusion I want.  Overcoming your biases is really hard, even with hard data in front of you.

According to a road planner I talked to, almost all accidents were cars drive into people happens at zebra crossings. I guess the logical conclusion is to remove all zebra crossings? He also described a study that shoved that all security features in cars lead to more reckless driving, and suggested removing airbags and installing sharp spikes in the center of the steering wheel instead, to encourage careful driving.
Travelling to 71 Northern Latitude in an electric car: http://travelelectric.blogspot.no/

Raenia

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 372
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18886 on: October 09, 2017, 09:08:25 AM »
Would you all mind keeping the bike-safety-or-not stuff to it's own thread?  There's one in this very board: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/antimustachian-wall-of-shame-and-comedy/biking-is-dangerous/

RidetheRain

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 305
  • Age: 25
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18887 on: October 09, 2017, 09:37:01 AM »
Was talking with a colleague in the parking lot this morning after she parked the biggest SUV I've seen yet in a compact parking space. For context, I know she has two 13-14 year old children.

Me: "Wow, that's a big car!" <Hoping to subtly hint that maybe compact parking isn't the place for her.>

Her: "Yeah I know, I know. But I had to drop my kids off at school this morning so I needed the bigger car"

Me: "Gotcha, I hope it's not too out of the way for you"

Her: "No, no just a block from the house."

Now, parenting is difficult and as a non-parent I know I have no right to tell people how to raise their kids so the conversation ended. But Jesus Mary and Joseph! Tell your kids to walk! Or to sit next to each other in the smaller car for the two seconds it will take to drive one freaking block!
See my journal

paddedhat

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2238
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18888 on: October 09, 2017, 09:45:59 AM »
Would you all mind keeping the bike-safety-or-not stuff to it's own thread?  There's one in this very board: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/antimustachian-wall-of-shame-and-comedy/biking-is-dangerous/

Yea, um. That works for me, until somebody starts in with the "Your no better than a rape apologist" bullshit. Then I would mind NOT reply to that grade of garbage.

LennStar

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 911
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18889 on: October 09, 2017, 10:22:01 AM »
According to a road planner I talked to, almost all accidents were cars drive into people happens at zebra crossings. I guess the logical conclusion is to remove all zebra crossings? He also described a study that shoved that all security features in cars lead to more reckless driving, and suggested removing airbags and installing sharp spikes in the center of the steering wheel instead, to encourage careful driving.

Haha, yes, that is the standard story on how to NOT read statistics. Was in a TED video, too.
Like, you know, the mayority of people killed in an airplane accident are sitting inside an airplane does not automatically mean that airplanes are more dangerous then other vehicles.

Quote
Her: "No, no just a block from the house."

You know, when I was 5 years old I walked home all alone about 500m.
Granted it was a very easy way and only one not much used street to cross, but still. It is *not* impossible to walk that distance with school kids, and probably faster then getting them all in and out of the car. (btw. when I was 9 I walked alone 800m even in the dark mornings. As was everyone else, and quite some of them farer.)
Not to mention the "exercise" those children surely need and btw. which could have positive results on their school success.

ixtap

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 758
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18890 on: October 09, 2017, 10:24:48 AM »
According to a road planner I talked to, almost all accidents were cars drive into people happens at zebra crossings. I guess the logical conclusion is to remove all zebra crossings? He also described a study that shoved that all security features in cars lead to more reckless driving, and suggested removing airbags and installing sharp spikes in the center of the steering wheel instead, to encourage careful driving.

Haha, yes, that is the standard story on how to NOT read statistics. Was in a TED video, too.
Like, you know, the mayority of people killed in an airplane accident are sitting inside an airplane does not automatically mean that airplanes are more dangerous then other vehicles.

Quote
Her: "No, no just a block from the house."

You know, when I was 5 years old I walked home all alone about 500m.
Granted it was a very easy way and only one not much used street to cross, but still. It is *not* impossible to walk that distance with school kids, and probably faster then getting them all in and out of the car. (btw. when I was 9 I walked alone 800m even in the dark mornings. As was everyone else, and quite some of them farer.)
Not to mention the "exercise" those children surely need and btw. which could have positive results on their school success.

I walked three blocks, but the neighbor a few doors down drove her (incredibly spoiled) kid. Sometimes she would offer to take me home, but all those videos said not to accept a ride, even if it was someone you knew, so I still walked.

RidetheRain

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 305
  • Age: 25
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18891 on: October 09, 2017, 10:46:16 AM »
According to a road planner I talked to, almost all accidents were cars drive into people happens at zebra crossings. I guess the logical conclusion is to remove all zebra crossings? He also described a study that shoved that all security features in cars lead to more reckless driving, and suggested removing airbags and installing sharp spikes in the center of the steering wheel instead, to encourage careful driving.

Haha, yes, that is the standard story on how to NOT read statistics. Was in a TED video, too.
Like, you know, the mayority of people killed in an airplane accident are sitting inside an airplane does not automatically mean that airplanes are more dangerous then other vehicles.

Quote
Her: "No, no just a block from the house."

You know, when I was 5 years old I walked home all alone about 500m.
Granted it was a very easy way and only one not much used street to cross, but still. It is *not* impossible to walk that distance with school kids, and probably faster then getting them all in and out of the car. (btw. when I was 9 I walked alone 800m even in the dark mornings. As was everyone else, and quite some of them farer.)
Not to mention the "exercise" those children surely need and btw. which could have positive results on their school success.

I walked three blocks, but the neighbor a few doors down drove her (incredibly spoiled) kid. Sometimes she would offer to take me home, but all those videos said not to accept a ride, even if it was someone you knew, so I still walked.

I remember missing the bus at roughly the same age. My mother was a stay at home mom so she could have driven me the 2 miles to school. Instead, she rigged up a system to strap my french horn case safely to my bike and sent me off.
See my journal

financialfreedomsloth

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 173
  • Location: Belgium
    • financial freedom sloth
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18892 on: October 09, 2017, 10:48:41 AM »
My colleague tells me she lives paycheck to paycheck.  She's 50 something and renting a small place in an expensive area of town.  She worries that she'll never be able to retire.  However:

-when my older baby was born and I was cloth diapering her, she told me "when my son was a baby I only used Pampers brand disposable diapers on him as I only want the BEST for my son."
-I buy clothes for my kids either second hand or on sale at the end of the season a year in advance once size bigger.  I once mentioned this and she said "I'd never do that for my son as I only buy the best current season clothes for him and never on sale."
-she says she really admires the fact that we were able to buy an apartment.  However, we bought a place in a lower income area that she would never consider.  She rents in one of the priciest areas of town and looks down her nose at areas like where we live. 
-she is also afraid to buy a place (despite crazy low interest rates and house prices here) as she says that she's afraid of having to pay a mortgage every month.  I pointed out that she has to pay rent every month but she doesn't seem to get the analogy.
-she owns a car that she drives maybe once a month as you really don't need a car to live in this city.  She says that she'd never get rid of it as how would she get to IKEA or to visit her sister who lives a bit further out of the city.  I told her about car sharing but she dismissed that as "too difficult".

I know people exactly like this.

And the fact that they are struggling is someone else's fault.  Always.

She reminds me of a co-wroker I had. The bank I worked at was restructuring and offered all workers older than 58 a kind of pre-pension: they would get 80% of current wage until official retirement age and could stay home. Of course this would also have an impact on their pension (but a small one). Everybody in my department above 58 thought it to be a fantastic deal (most had been working at the bank for 40+ years and could easily absorb the 20% loss in wages).

All except this one guy.

So I aks him why he is not happy about it. Turns out he wants to keep working till 65 as he wants his full pay check and full pension.
'Brussels is an expensive city and I have  high rent to pay' is his first excuse.
I am like, what, you never bought a house? He then says Brussels was always expensive to buy a house.
I reply that is true and it is the reason why I bought a house further from Brussels. I then get the reply he is a true Brusselsman and would never consider living anywhere else ... (Which again raises the question why he never bought a house there in the first place ...).

Across of him another old co-worker sat. When the grumpy guy left he said he was going to take the deal, rent out his very big appartment in Brussels and rent a smaller appartment closer to his son as he no longer needs to life in Brussels when he is not working there. The difference in rent will be bigger than the pay cut he will take so he will actually have more money every month and no longer need to work than he has now by working...

O yeah, the grumpy guy earned more than the happy one ...
http://financialfreedomsloth.com/

achieving financial freedom one lazy step at a time

Hula Hoop

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 189
  • Location: Europe
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18893 on: October 09, 2017, 11:36:18 AM »
I know for a fact that my coworker has a potential down payment for an apartment (unless she spent it all) as she told me how much she inherited when he parents died.  She's in her early 50s and has a very steady pay check - she's been at the same job for 30 years.  She looked at some houses to buy after her last lease ended but they were all in slightly less expensive areas than her preferred area (which is the richest area in town) so she wouldn't consider them.  Also, she seems really intimidated by the process of getting a mortgage as well as scared that she won't be able to make mortgage payments even though she's been paying rent on time for 30 years now.

RidetheRain

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 305
  • Age: 25
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18894 on: October 09, 2017, 11:48:28 AM »
scared that she won't be able to make mortgage payments even though she's been paying rent on time for 30 years now.

You know, I've never really understood that fear. If you miss rent you could get kicked out immediately. If you miss a mortgage payment you have time required by law and a bank that really wants to work with you because banks don't want to own houses. There are some sleazy banks out there, but generally, they will work with you first. Obviously credit gets hit both ways, but wouldn't having a house be better in that scenario?
See my journal

zolotiyeruki

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2315
  • Location: State: Denial
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18895 on: October 09, 2017, 12:25:11 PM »
scared that she won't be able to make mortgage payments even though she's been paying rent on time for 30 years now.

You know, I've never really understood that fear. If you miss rent you could get kicked out immediately. If you miss a mortgage payment you have time required by law and a bank that really wants to work with you because banks don't want to own houses. There are some sleazy banks out there, but generally, they will work with you first. Obviously credit gets hit both ways, but wouldn't having a house be better in that scenario?
Banks REALLY don't want to own houses.  Typically (from what I've seen) you have several months, if not a full year, before you have to worry about foreclosure and eviction.  And being late on a payment doesn't even necessarily mean you'll get a ding on your credit history.  There's been a couple times in the last 5 years where DW or I was late making the monthly payment, but nothing ever showed up on the credit report.

firelight

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1046
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18896 on: October 09, 2017, 10:49:37 PM »
I doubt people like this admit it to themselves while they are in law school or whatever.  The fact that ex-boss' wife told me she quit her high paying lawyer job as soon as she peed on a stick (or just afterwards) kind of seemed nuts as former boss was always complaining about the millstone of their combined law school loans around his neck.  I had bad morning sickness when she told me this and other health issues but was showing up at work each day anyway and doing my best while ducking to the bathrooms to barf during meetings. 

These kinds of perceptions are just one more cross us working women have to bear.
I hate such people too. Two of my co-workers (married to each other) got pregnant. The wife quit the next day to 'take care of baby'. And we are stuck with the husband complaining of loans and debt and target runs and toys.

I'm all for people staying home if they want to. But please don't complain or compare with others. And my sil was training to be a dentist when she got pregnant and became a sahm. The loans were from that period. She claims being a dentist and a mom are mutually exclusive

LennStar

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 911
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18897 on: October 10, 2017, 01:26:08 AM »
I'm all for people staying home if they want to. But please don't complain or compare with others. And my sil was training to be a dentist when she got pregnant and became a sahm. The loans were from that period. She claims being a dentist and a mom are mutually exclusive

Hm... I think I have to tell that my dentist the next time. He and his wife are working together (one left side rooms, one right side rooms), and I think they have 2 children.

AnnaGrowsAMustache

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 306
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18898 on: October 10, 2017, 02:02:23 AM »
Agreed. But a lot of drivers aren't reasonable. And then the cyclist is dead or badly injured. Is it worth that just to be right regarding fault? If cyclists were interested in their own safety they would assume all drivers are unreasonable and refrain from riding two abreast where they can't be overtaken. I mean, I have the right to cross the road at a crossing, but I'm still going to look both ways before I do! Because I'm the one that's going to bear the consequences.

You're one step removed from blaming rape victims for wearing skirts, I suggest you reconsider your victim blaming perspective.

If cyclists choose to ride side by side (and there are a number of reasons this might be appropriate) then they should be able to do so freely and without judgement.

I'm not victim blaming. Absolutely the car is at fault. I'm saying that I run MY life by taking more care when I'M the one that will bear the consequences. That's reality. To go back to your rape victim blaming example (which I think is in quite poor taste, frankly), I should be able to walk around naked without being attacked by some freak. But that's not very bloody likely so I think I'll wear clothing..... If I get hit by a car, I'll be a tad more screwed up than the car driver so I take care crossing the road. Even at a crossing. See how that works?

AnnaGrowsAMustache

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 306
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18899 on: October 10, 2017, 02:10:05 AM »
I doubt people like this admit it to themselves while they are in law school or whatever.  The fact that ex-boss' wife told me she quit her high paying lawyer job as soon as she peed on a stick (or just afterwards) kind of seemed nuts as former boss was always complaining about the millstone of their combined law school loans around his neck.  I had bad morning sickness when she told me this and other health issues but was showing up at work each day anyway and doing my best while ducking to the bathrooms to barf during meetings. 

These kinds of perceptions are just one more cross us working women have to bear.

Um.... feminism, the movement that gave you the ability to BE a professional woman, is about choice. A woman's choice to be a stay at home mum is just as valid as a woman's choice to be a working mum, or to choose not to have children, or any other of the thousand choices we can now make. What's important is that we have the choice. Even 60 years ago, we didn't. Don't judge other women for making a choice that you would not make. Just celebrate the fact that they can make it.

And, yes, menimisn is starting to give men the choice to be a stay at home dad too!