Overheard at Work

[kayvent]

Aren't Woden and Odin one and the same?

Yes they are.  ....  Odin is a very old god.

But he does marvelously well for his age.

Have you seen any ice giants recently ?

Global warming may be coming into play on that issue . . .

We're presently still in an ice age though.

Not for much longer if my Jeep has anything to say about it.

Ice ages have to end eventually.

[nobodyspecial]

Aren't Woden and Odin one and the same?

Yes they are.  ....  Odin is a very old god.

But he does marvelously well for his age.

Have you seen any ice giants recently ?

Global warming may be coming into play on that issue . . .

We're presently still in an ice age though.

Not for much longer if my Jeep has anything to say about it.

Ice ages have to end eventually.

Typical Odin worshipper propaganda

Support PETA - Support Fenir

[gaja]

Aren't Woden and Odin one and the same?

Yes they are.  ....  Odin is a very old god.

But he does marvelously well for his age.

Have you seen any ice giants recently ?

Global warming may be coming into play on that issue . . .

We're presently still in an ice age though.

Not for much longer if my Jeep has anything to say about it.

Ice ages have to end eventually.

Typical Odin worshipper propaganda

Support PETA - Support Fenir

Like it makes any difference what an old cripple does. I doubt he has ever killed a single ice giant himself. Thor is the real hero, despite everything Odin has done to slow him down in his work.

[BTDretire]

Aren't Woden and Odin one and the same?

Yes they are.  There are about 170 variations of this name. Standardized spelling is a fairly new concept.  Odin is a very old god.

Hmm, is Odin 6000 years old or 13,700,000,000 years old?  /s

[nobodyspecial]

Aren't Woden and Odin one and the same?

Yes they are.  There are about 170 variations of this name. Standardized spelling is a fairly new concept.  Odin is a very old god.

Hmm, is Odin 6000 years old or 13,700,000,000 years old?  /s

I think that as a God you only as old as you feel.
In spite of the unreasonable body image expectations that Marvel comics place on them, being a Norse deity is one area where we are battling ageism.
 

[BTDretire]

Got a good one from my wife's work.

Co-worker A needs to buy a birthday gift for his girlfriend so he enlists co-worker B (female) to help. They come to the decision that a designer purse, original MSRP of $3,000 is appropriate. But holy shit, it's 50% off what a great deal! Only $1,500!. Boom, bought it!

Such a great deal in fact that Co-worker B just HAD to buy one for herself, I mean you're just an idiot if you pass up a bargain like that!

For context, they both have incomes in the $70-80K range.,

  My daughter (25yrs old) invited a friend from out of town to visit her and go to a theme park. The recent hurricane was approaching and my daughter confided that she hoped that they would close so she wouldn't need to buy a ticket. Well, the weather was bad, so they went to the mall shopping. My daughters friend, a waitress at a breakfast restaurant, was buying many assorted items. Then she saw a 'purse', it was
"on sale" marked down from $600 to $450!!! She loved the 'purse', but didn't have enough money. What to do? She backtracked and returned several of the items she had purchased. That didn't work, they put too much as a credit on her debit card.
She went back to the store and the sales person, ask if she new about their credit card
that she could get. Eureka! So she got the card and bought the $450 purse that she loved. After she got the purse, she said, "now we can go into Gucci and they won't look at us funny. (might have said Neiman Marcus)
My daughter is doing pretty well as Mustachian, she saw a $50 key chain she liked but didn't buy it.

[LeRainDrop]

Eureka! So she got the card and bought the $450 purse that she loved. After she got the purse, she said, "now we can go into Gucci and they won't look at us funny. (might have said Neiman Marcus)

Haha!  That is kinda true, though.  During one year of my life, I went into the Coach store on a few occasions.  When I was wearing my summer flip-flops, shorts, and t-shirt, I was ignored or looked down on.  But when I wore my business clothes and my Coach purse, then they were all over me.  I still had the same high income/net worth either way, but my appearance did make a difference in how I was treated at those types of stores.  Pretty ridiculous.  I also remember walking into an Ann Taylor that was practically empty of people, and I was in total casual wear, so was completely ignored, even though it was a rare time that I actually wanted help.  Then I started trying on multiple full suits and outfits, and I couldn't pry the snotty lady away from me.

[esq]

Got a good one from my wife's work.

Co-worker A needs to buy a birthday gift for his girlfriend so he enlists co-worker B (female) to help. They come to the decision that a designer purse, original MSRP of $3,000 is appropriate. But holy shit, it's 50% off what a great deal! Only $1,500!. Boom, bought it!

Such a great deal in fact that Co-worker B just HAD to buy one for herself, I mean you're just an idiot if you pass up a bargain like that!

For context, they both have incomes in the $70-80K range.,

  My daughter (25yrs old) invited a friend from out of town to visit her and go to a theme park. The recent hurricane was approaching and my daughter confided that she hoped that they would close so she wouldn't need to buy a ticket. Well, the weather was bad, so they went to the mall shopping. My daughters friend, a waitress at a breakfast restaurant, was buying many assorted items. Then she saw a 'purse', it was
"on sale" marked down from $600 to $450!!! She loved the 'purse', but didn't have enough money. What to do? She backtracked and returned several of the items she had purchased. That didn't work, they put too much as a credit on her debit card.
She went back to the store and the sales person, ask if she new about their credit card
that she could get. Eureka! So she got the card and bought the $450 purse that she loved. After she got the purse, she said, "now we can go into Gucci and they won't look at us funny. (might have said Neiman Marcus)
My daughter is doing pretty well as Mustachian, she saw a $50 key chain she liked but didn't buy it.

Some people have such lofty goals.

[ender]

Eureka! So she got the card and bought the $450 purse that she loved. After she got the purse, she said, "now we can go into Gucci and they won't look at us funny. (might have said Neiman Marcus)

Haha!  That is kinda true, though.  During one year of my life, I went into the Coach store on a few occasions.  When I was wearing my summer flip-flops, shorts, and t-shirt, I was ignored or looked down on.  But when I wore my business clothes and my Coach purse, then they were all over me.  I still had the same high income/net worth either way, but my appearance did make a difference in how I was treated at those types of stores.  Pretty ridiculous.  I also remember walking into an Ann Taylor that was practically empty of people, and I was in total casual wear, so was completely ignored, even though it was a rare time that I actually wanted help.  Then I started trying on multiple full suits and outfits, and I couldn't pry the snotty lady away from me.

If you are a younger man, the same thing happens at car dealerships.

Wear shorts and a t-shirt and go look at cars and you won't be taken seriously at all. Put on khakis and a polo (or nicer)? Big difference.

[Metric Mouse]

Eureka! So she got the card and bought the $450 purse that she loved. After she got the purse, she said, "now we can go into Gucci and they won't look at us funny. (might have said Neiman Marcus)

Haha!  That is kinda true, though.  During one year of my life, I went into the Coach store on a few occasions.  When I was wearing my summer flip-flops, shorts, and t-shirt, I was ignored or looked down on.  But when I wore my business clothes and my Coach purse, then they were all over me.  I still had the same high income/net worth either way, but my appearance did make a difference in how I was treated at those types of stores.  Pretty ridiculous.  I also remember walking into an Ann Taylor that was practically empty of people, and I was in total casual wear, so was completely ignored, even though it was a rare time that I actually wanted help.  Then I started trying on multiple full suits and outfits, and I couldn't pry the snotty lady away from me.

If you are a younger man, the same thing happens at car dealerships.

Wear shorts and a t-shirt and go look at cars and you won't be taken seriously at all. Put on khakis and a polo (or nicer)? Big difference.

Not sure why I would feel the need to be taken seriously at a car dealership. I certainly don't take them seriously.

[Metric Mouse]

Eureka! So she got the card and bought the $450 purse that she loved. After she got the purse, she said, "now we can go into Gucci and they won't look at us funny. (might have said Neiman Marcus)

Haha!  That is kinda true, though.  During one year of my life, I went into the Coach store on a few occasions.  When I was wearing my summer flip-flops, shorts, and t-shirt, I was ignored or looked down on.  But when I wore my business clothes and my Coach purse, then they were all over me.  I still had the same high income/net worth either way, but my appearance did make a difference in how I was treated at those types of stores.  Pretty ridiculous.  I also remember walking into an Ann Taylor that was practically empty of people, and I was in total casual wear, so was completely ignored, even though it was a rare time that I actually wanted help.  Then I started trying on multiple full suits and outfits, and I couldn't pry the snotty lady away from me.

If you are a younger man, the same thing happens at car dealerships.

Wear shorts and a t-shirt and go look at cars and you won't be taken seriously at all. Put on khakis and a polo (or nicer)? Big difference.

Not sure why I would feel the need to be taken seriously at a car dealership. I certainly don't take them seriously.

Having recently been car shopping it would have been nice to be taken less seriously. Just answer my questions with the minimum information, let me sit in a car or two, and let me go about my day!

"Let's not worry about what the car costs. Tell me what you want to pay (per month) and I'll see what I can do."

 - Come to think of it, maybe car salespeople do just jerk everyone's chain for shits and giggles, and I lack the sense of humor to fully appreciate it...

[ender]

"Let's not worry about what the car costs. Tell me what you want to pay (per month) and I'll see what I can do."

 - Come to think of it, maybe car salespeople do just jerk everyone's chain for shits and giggles, and I lack the sense of humor to fully appreciate it...

Next time I car shop, I'm going to just email them "I am willing to buy this car today for $X, pending a test drive and confirmation on price. Let me know if this is agreeable" or something.

[firelight]

"Let's not worry about what the car costs. Tell me what you want to pay (per month) and I'll see what I can do."

 - Come to think of it, maybe car salespeople do just jerk everyone's chain for shits and giggles, and I lack the sense of humor to fully appreciate it...

Next time I car shop, I'm going to just email them "I am willing to buy this car today for $X, pending a test drive and confirmation on price. Let me know if this is agreeable" or something.

My husband did this with our last car. He said he is willing to pay $X if they'll give him a particular model/trim within two days, pending test drive and confirmation. He got the lowest price possible within the nearest 200 miles.

[LeRainDrop]

"Let's not worry about what the car costs. Tell me what you want to pay (per month) and I'll see what I can do."

 - Come to think of it, maybe car salespeople do just jerk everyone's chain for shits and giggles, and I lack the sense of humor to fully appreciate it...

Next time I car shop, I'm going to just email them "I am willing to buy this car today for $X, pending a test drive and confirmation on price. Let me know if this is agreeable" or something.

My husband did this with our last car. He said he is willing to pay $X if they'll give him a particular model/trim within two days, pending test drive and confirmation. He got the lowest price possible within the nearest 200 miles.

Yeah, that's pretty much how I bought my car, too.  I emailed all of the [Make] dealerships within a couple hundred miles with the precise details of what I wanted to purchase and asked them to place their bid on all costs for out-the-door, so that I'd have an apples-to-apples comparison.  The lowest bidder won.  The dealership where I had test driven the car was not the lowest bidder and kept trying to scare me that there was no way that the lowest bidder would actually close the deal for that price, that it was just not possible, and they would pull some bait-and-switch when I went to get the car.  Nope, the lowest bidder was honest, firmed up all details by email, and closed the deal precisely as agreed upon.  According to TrueCar, I got a "great price" -- far below sticker price, factory invoice, average price paid, and even below dealer cost (there was a dealer incentive that month).

[theadvicist]

I posted in the family thread about my inlaws, but they are constantly being scammed by people who must be trustworthy because they are religious.  They lost 100k+ to a ponzi scheme that was marketed as investing in christian companies, they are in 'life leadership' which is a shitty MLM that mostly targets religious people.

I'm sure that these scams also target the non-religious, but there is a significant subset that specifically seeks out the very religious.  I think religious people in general (for better and for worse) have a lower threshold for who they will trust.  It makes sense, you have a tight knit community that is supposedly based on being a good person.  Infiltrate that and you suddenly have a ton of people to scam.  It doesn't make those people dumb or sheep, just trusting, which isn't a bad trait in many situations but when it comes to money suspicion can be a very good thing.

It actually kind of makes (sick) sense to target religious people - the very basis of faith is that you believe something that cannot be proven.

I'm not saying that in a laughing at people way, it's just the truth. Religious people do have a lower threshold for believing in things / people than people who have decided to reject religion based on the existence of God being unproven.

[shelivesthedream]

I posted in the family thread about my inlaws, but they are constantly being scammed by people who must be trustworthy because they are religious.  They lost 100k+ to a ponzi scheme that was marketed as investing in christian companies, they are in 'life leadership' which is a shitty MLM that mostly targets religious people.

I'm sure that these scams also target the non-religious, but there is a significant subset that specifically seeks out the very religious.  I think religious people in general (for better and for worse) have a lower threshold for who they will trust.  It makes sense, you have a tight knit community that is supposedly based on being a good person.  Infiltrate that and you suddenly have a ton of people to scam.  It doesn't make those people dumb or sheep, just trusting, which isn't a bad trait in many situations but when it comes to money suspicion can be a very good thing.

It actually kind of makes (sick) sense to target religious people - the very basis of faith is that you believe something that cannot be proven.

I'm not saying that in a laughing at people way, it's just the truth. Religious people do have a lower threshold for believing in things / people than people who have decided to reject religion based on the existence of God being unproven.

I don't want to get at you personally, but I wish there were a rule that before anyone could criticise Christianity, they had to read the whole New Testament (ideally the whole Bible) and some of Augustine, Aquinas, and a few other early church theologians from the great councils. Lots of Christians are stupid, yes, but so are lots of atheists. That doesn't make Christianity stupid any more than it makes atheism stupid. And you can be wrong without being stupid.

And the "targeting religious people" thing is true IF you are a member of their faith community - that is what might get them to fall for it, not just the fact of their being religious But being a member of any close-knit community, be it a bowling league or a parent-and-baby group, makes it more likely that other people in that group will trust you on things unrelated to that group, like MLM sales or fake investment schemes. It's not just a church thing.

If anyone wants to carry on having this conversation, please set up another thread in Off Topic and PM me the link. I'll gladly talk to you about it and listen to your views. Otherwise, can we please leave this topic alone on this thread for now?

[GuitarStv]

discernible
I posted in the family thread about my inlaws, but they are constantly being scammed by people who must be trustworthy because they are religious.  They lost 100k+ to a ponzi scheme that was marketed as investing in christian companies, they are in 'life leadership' which is a shitty MLM that mostly targets religious people.
discernible
I'm sure that these scams also target the non-religious, but there is a significant subset that specifically seeks out the very religious.  I think religious people in general (for better and for worse) have a lower threshold for who they will trust.  It makes sense, you have a tight knit community that is supposedly based on being a good person.  Infiltrate that and you suddenly have a ton of people to scam.  It doesn't make those people dumb or sheep, just trusting, which isn't a bad trait in many situations but when it comes to money suspicion can be a very good thing.

It actually kind of makes (sick) sense to target religious people - the very basis of faith is that you believe something that cannot be proven.

I'm not saying that in a laughing at people way, it's just the truth. Religious people do have a lower threshold for believing in things / people than people who have decided to reject religion based on the existence of God being unproven.

I don't want to get at you personally, but I wish there were a rule that before anyone could criticise Christianity, they had to read the whole New Testament (ideally the whole Bible) and some of Augustine, Aquinas, and a few other early church theologians from the great councils. Lots of Christians are stupid, yes, but so are lots of atheists. That doesn't make Christianity stupid any more than it makes atheism stupid. And you can be wrong without being stupid.

And the "targeting religious people" thing is true IF you are a member of their faith community - that is what might get them to fall for it, not just the fact of their being religious But being a member of any close-knit community, be it a bowling league or a parent-and-baby group, makes it more likely that other people in that group will trust you on things unrdiscernibleelated to that group, like MLM sales or fake investment schemes. It's not just a church thing.

If anyone wants to carry on having this conversation, please set up another thread in Off Topic and PM me the link. I'll gladly talk to you about it and listen to your views. Otherwise, can we please leave this topic alone on this thread for now?

You've misread theadvicist's post.

He wasn't saying that people of faith (Christian or otherwise) are stupid or incapable of reason . . . just that they are likely to have faith in things (this is the basis of religious belief).  Faith is an acceptance of an idea without evidence to support the idea.

[shelivesthedream]

discernible
I posted in the family thread about my inlaws, but they are constantly being scammed by people who must be trustworthy because they are religious.  They lost 100k+ to a ponzi scheme that was marketed as investing in christian companies, they are in 'life leadership' which is a shitty MLM that mostly targets religious people.
discernible
I'm sure that these scams also target the non-religious, but there is a significant subset that specifically seeks out the very religious.  I think religious people in general (for better and for worse) have a lower threshold for who they will trust.  It makes sense, you have a tight knit community that is supposedly based on being a good person.  Infiltrate that and you suddenly have a ton of people to scam.  It doesn't make those people dumb or sheep, just trusting, which isn't a bad trait in many situations but when it comes to money suspicion can be a very good thing.

It actually kind of makes (sick) sense to target religious people - the very basis of faith is that you believe something that cannot be proven.

I'm not saying that in a laughing at people way, it's just the truth. Religious people do have a lower threshold for believing in things / people than people who have decided to reject religion based on the existence of God being unproven.

I don't want to get at you personally, but I wish there were a rule that before anyone could criticise Christianity, they had to read the whole New Testament (ideally the whole Bible) and some of Augustine, Aquinas, and a few other early church theologians from the great councils. Lots of Christians are stupid, yes, but so are lots of atheists. That doesn't make Christianity stupid any more than it makes atheism stupid. And you can be wrong without being stupid.

And the "targeting religious people" thing is true IF you are a member of their faith community - that is what might get them to fall for it, not just the fact of their being religious But being a member of any close-knit community, be it a bowling league or a parent-and-baby group, makes it more likely that other people in that group will trust you on things unrdiscernibleelated to that group, like MLM sales or fake investment schemes. It's not just a church thing.

If anyone wants to carry on having this conversation, please set up another thread in Off Topic and PM me the link. I'll gladly talk to you about it and listen to your views. Otherwise, can we please leave this topic alone on this thread for now?

You've misread theadvicist's post.

He wasn't saying that people of faith (Christian or otherwise) are stupid or incapable of reason . . . just that they are likely to have faith in things (this is the basis of religious belief).  Faith is an acceptance of an idea without evidence to support the idea.

OK, maybe I shouldn't have quote theadvicist's post - it just happened to be the last one in the thread. I didn't mean it as a specific reply to what they said.

[frugalnacho]

You've misread theadvicist's post.

He wasn't saying that people of faith (Christian or otherwise) are stupid or incapable of reason . . . just that they are likely to have faith in things (this is the basis of religious belief). Faith is an acceptance of an idea without evidence to support the idea.

The very definition of faith. 

I've read the entire bible, does that qualify me to bad mouth Christianity?

[Gin1984]

You've misread theadvicist's post.

He wasn't saying that people of faith (Christian or otherwise) are stupid or incapable of reason . . . just that they are likely to have faith in things (this is the basis of religious belief). Faith is an acceptance of an idea without evidence to support the idea.

The very definition of faith. 

I've read the entire bible, does that qualify me to bad mouth Christianity?

Me too.  I've read the bible, multiple Christian scholars, portions of the non-canon gospels and was an alter server for 4 years.  Does that mean I can criticize?   

[kayvent]

You've misread theadvicist's post.

He wasn't saying that people of faith (Christian or otherwise) are stupid or incapable of reason . . . just that they are likely to have faith in things (this is the basis of religious belief). Faith is an acceptance of an idea without evidence to support the idea.

The very definition of faith. 

I've read the entire bible, does that qualify me to bad mouth Christianity?

Me too.  I've read the bible, multiple Christian scholars, portions of the non-canon gospels and was an alter server for 4 years.  Does that mean I can criticize?

The fact your read plural non-canon gospels and bring it up may disqualify you. They're another religion's text and except for one, each written far after the canonical gospels. It is like saying you've read all about the Five K's and (either jokingly or seriously) asking if that means you can criticize Islam.

[frugalnacho]

You've misread theadvicist's post.

He wasn't saying that people of faith (Christian or otherwise) are stupid or incapable of reason . . . just that they are likely to have faith in things (this is the basis of religious belief). Faith is an acceptance of an idea without evidence to support the idea.

The very definition of faith. 

I've read the entire bible, does that qualify me to bad mouth Christianity?

Me too.  I've read the bible, multiple Christian scholars, portions of the non-canon gospels and was an alter server for 4 years.  Does that mean I can criticize?

The fact your read plural non-canon gospels and bring it up may disqualify you. They're another religion's text and except for one, each written far after the canonical gospels. It is like saying you've read all about the Five K's and (either jokingly or seriously) asking if that means you can criticize Islam.

Why would that disqualify her?  Wouldn't a better analogy be that she read the entire quran in addition to reading about the five ks, and that extra reading disqualified her from criticizing islam?

Am I also disqualified because i've read books completely unrelated to the bible?

[kayvent]

You've misread theadvicist's post.

He wasn't saying that people of faith (Christian or otherwise) are stupid or incapable of reason . . . just that they are likely to have faith in things (this is the basis of religious belief). Faith is an acceptance of an idea without evidence to support the idea.

The very definition of faith. 

I've read the entire bible, does that qualify me to bad mouth Christianity?

Me too.  I've read the bible, multiple Christian scholars, portions of the non-canon gospels and was an alter server for 4 years.  Does that mean I can criticize?

The fact your read plural non-canon gospels and bring it up may disqualify you. They're another religion's text and except for one, each written far after the canonical gospels. It is like saying you've read all about the Five K's and (either jokingly or seriously) asking if that means you can criticize Islam.

Why would that disqualify her?  Wouldn't a better analogy be that she read the entire quran in addition to reading about the five ks, and that extra reading disqualified her from criticizing islam?

Am I also disqualified because i've read books completely unrelated to the bible?

My apologies for the misunderstanding. I was not saying that reading non-canon gospels is disqualifying (I've read three), what I am saying is that mentioning that as evidence of knowledge in Christianity is potentially disqualifying.

I'll expand the analogy: If Donald Trump came out and said he could criticize Islam because he's read the Qu'ran, numerous ahadith, and knows all about the Five K's, we'd laugh at him. The Five K's are a Sihk thing. The fact he brought it up means he either knows very little about Islam or just randomly pops up unrelated points while talking. Similarly, someone who will list the non-canonical gospels in the middle of Christian-y stuff should be looked at with suspicion on the qualifications they list. (The fact they list it is evidence that their discernment and knowledge of the topic is not as large as the rest of the list would suggest.)

[TheGrimSqueaker]

It's not altogether unusual to hear of church elders using the trust placed in them to secretly rip people off.  Two very recent examples in my life:

• I'm an attorney and represented a contractor/architect who did a shit ton of work for a church that was planning to expand.  Pastor kept promising he would pay for the work.  Pastor never did pay and was lying to his congregation to get them to give him more money for it, meanwhile falsely badmouthing the architect/contractor.
• There's an attorney I work with who told me some other folks in her church group recently discovered that their elder who handled accounting had been skimming a huge amount of the donations for himself.  He got fired and has to pay restitution, but I think the church has agreed not to pursue criminal charges.

For the record, geographyteacher is not setting out to defraud anyone.  He honestly believes he knows best and that he's helping these people.  I did not set out to call him a criminal or a crooked church elder, just an arrogant fool.  (Did I mention he leases his car and has explained to me how it's the cheapest option?)

The trouble is that money is changing hands and it's only a matter of time before someone gets hurt. If his shenanigans ever cross the line to the point where he's breaking the law, ignorance isn't going to be a defense.

I'm generally skeptical of people who use their religion as "evidence" that they're a good person, because it's a classic setup for what I call the high ranking insider play.

In the high ranking insider play, a person uses the fact he or she has credibility and social capital within a shared community to obtain the trust of a person in that community, to prey upon that person, and then to use the credibility and social capital to avoid what would otherwise be the predictable consequences of abusing someone. The status in question might be real, or fake. It's an old con technique that is still around because it still works.

"Trust me, I'm a good <religion name>" is the same as "Trust me, I'm a cop", "Trust me, I'm a doctor", "Trust me, I'm a teacher", "Trust me, I'm a Presidential candidate", etc., etc. That's the setup that gives a predator access to the victim. The victim sometimes even consents to something wildly inappropriate, out of trust. Then an exploitation or violation of that trust occurs. Why? Well, the predator might not think he or she is doing anything wrong. Perhaps he or she believes he or she has a special skill, or a higher level of enlightenment, or even magic powers. Maybe there's some deeper emotional truth or political agenda supposedly being served, and maybe the predator genuinely believes the victim likes, needs, or wants what the predator is doing. Heck, the victim might believe it too. It's bullshit of course.

After the exploitation occurs, the next thing you hear from other people in the community is: "S/he couldn't have done that, s/he's a <insert high-trust role here>". That's the other half of the trusted insider play.

There are people in high-trust roles who for whatever reason become corrupted by their own egos and misuse their authority to do things they shouldn't, and there are people who are attracted to high-trust roles because they give them access to victims and insulation from consequences. The fact that high-trust roles exist within a community (such as a religious community) isn't the fault of the community.

The toxicity isn't a feature of the religion, it's a feature of the pattern that's playing out in a religious context. The pattern exists in other contexts that have nothing to do with religion.

[druth]

So...  anybody hear anything at work lately?

[4alpacas]

So...  anybody hear anything at work lately?

Not really.  My coworkers appear to be in a zombie-like trance. 

But my thoughts on religion are outlined below:

[Enigma]

When I did an interview with my current company I asked about the benefits.  To my surprise the 4-5 people sitting at the table had no idea what the benefits were exactly.  It seems HR is separate and physically located in a different state.

Interviewer 1: So now that we completed the (technical) interview, do you have any questions
Me: What type of 401k does the company offer?  How many sick days?  Holidays? Vacation days? Short term disability? Insurance coverage?
Interviewer 2: The Company offers a 401k match
Me: How much?
All of them (with puzzled looks are their faces): We are not sure…  Have to ask HR…

They also missed up my state taxes (taking out for Maryland when they should have taken out for Virginia), didn’t explain I had to opt into short/long term disabilities, and pretty much gave me very little information about my benefits.

[Gin1984]

You've misread theadvicist's post.

He wasn't saying that people of faith (Christian or otherwise) are stupid or incapable of reason . . . just that they are likely to have faith in things (this is the basis of religious belief). Faith is an acceptance of an idea without evidence to support the idea.

The very definition of faith. 

I've read the entire bible, does that qualify me to bad mouth Christianity?

Me too.  I've read the bible, multiple Christian scholars, portions of the non-canon gospels and was an alter server for 4 years.  Does that mean I can criticize?

The fact your read plural non-canon gospels and bring it up may disqualify you. They're another religion's text and except for one, each written far after the canonical gospels. It is like saying you've read all about the Five K's and (either jokingly or seriously) asking if that means you can criticize Islam.

Why would that disqualify her?  Wouldn't a better analogy be that she read the entire quran in addition to reading about the five ks, and that extra reading disqualified her from criticizing islam?

Am I also disqualified because i've read books completely unrelated to the bible?

My apologies for the misunderstanding. I was not saying that reading non-canon gospels is disqualifying (I've read three), what I am saying is that mentioning that as evidence of knowledge in Christianity is potentially disqualifying.

I'll expand the analogy: If Donald Trump came out and said he could criticize Islam because he's read the Qu'ran, numerous ahadith, and knows all about the Five K's, we'd laugh at him. The Five K's are a Sihk thing. The fact he brought it up means he either knows very little about Islam or just randomly pops up unrelated points while talking. Similarly, someone who will list the non-canonical gospels in the middle of Christian-y stuff should be looked at with suspicion on the qualifications they list. (The fact they list it is evidence that their discernment and knowledge of the topic is not as large as the rest of the list would suggest.)

Not really.  The first time I found out about the gospel of Mary was because it was in safe at my Catholic church.  The church scholars have debated these gospels and is part of required reading in many programs within the Catholic church (at least within the Jesuit community which is where I was exposed to the rest).  A better comparison would be someone who had read the Torah and then mentioned Kabbalah which is part of the oral tradition but many sect do not consider it part of Judaism. 
I think you don't like that people are disagreeing with you.

[Greenway52]

So...  anybody hear anything at work lately?

So I just learned that one of my coworkers lives in a city 100 km from work. She is one of the lowest paid workers in our team and makes about $45,000 (yes, our company pays pretty well). Not only that, she takes a toll highway to work everyday. Ontario doesn't have a lot of toll highways; most of our highways are free. There is another free highway running parallel to the toll one, but the free one has much more traffic. She said that she hates waiting in traffic, so would rather pay to take the toll route.

She spends about $600 per month of toll fees and another $500 per month on gas. That's $13,200 per year or about 30% of her gross salary on transportation. That's not even including her insurance which I can't include as I don't know what her insurance cost is. Thankfully though her car is fully paid for, so at least she doesn't have a car payment.

[JAYSLOL]

Eureka! So she got the card and bought the $450 purse that she loved. After she got the purse, she said, "now we can go into Gucci and they won't look at us funny. (might have said Neiman Marcus)

Haha!  That is kinda true, though.  During one year of my life, I went into the Coach store on a few occasions.  When I was wearing my summer flip-flops, shorts, and t-shirt, I was ignored or looked down on.  But when I wore my business clothes and my Coach purse, then they were all over me.  I still had the same high income/net worth either way, but my appearance did make a difference in how I was treated at those types of stores.  Pretty ridiculous.  I also remember walking into an Ann Taylor that was practically empty of people, and I was in total casual wear, so was completely ignored, even though it was a rare time that I actually wanted help.  Then I started trying on multiple full suits and outfits, and I couldn't pry the snotty lady away from me.

If you are a younger man, the same thing happens at car dealerships.

Wear shorts and a t-shirt and go look at cars and you won't be taken seriously at all. Put on khakis and a polo (or nicer)? Big difference.

Not sure why I would feel the need to be taken seriously at a car dealership. I certainly don't take them seriously.

Having recently been car shopping it would have been nice to be taken less seriously. Just answer my questions with the minimum information, let me sit in a car or two, and let me go about my day!

+1

The car you drive up to the dealer in makes a big difference to the attention you get as well.  I love to drive up in a shitbox and get left alone while i browse though the used section. 

[MgoSam]

Eureka! So she got the card and bought the $450 purse that she loved. After she got the purse, she said, "now we can go into Gucci and they won't look at us funny. (might have said Neiman Marcus)

Haha!  That is kinda true, though.  During one year of my life, I went into the Coach store on a few occasions.  When I was wearing my summer flip-flops, shorts, and t-shirt, I was ignored or looked down on.  But when I wore my business clothes and my Coach purse, then they were all over me.  I still had the same high income/net worth either way, but my appearance did make a difference in how I was treated at those types of stores.  Pretty ridiculous.  I also remember walking into an Ann Taylor that was practically empty of people, and I was in total casual wear, so was completely ignored, even though it was a rare time that I actually wanted help.  Then I started trying on multiple full suits and outfits, and I couldn't pry the snotty lady away from me.

If you are a younger man, the same thing happens at car dealerships.

Wear shorts and a t-shirt and go look at cars and you won't be taken seriously at all. Put on khakis and a polo (or nicer)? Big difference.

Not sure why I would feel the need to be taken seriously at a car dealership. I certainly don't take them seriously.

Having recently been car shopping it would have been nice to be taken less seriously. Just answer my questions with the minimum information, let me sit in a car or two, and let me go about my day!

+1

The car you drive up to the dealer in makes a big difference to the attention you get as well.  I love to drive up in a shitbox and get left alone while i browse though the used section.

I would love to buy a car from a business without getting hassled. Thankfully I live in Minnesota, a state that isn't run by republicans. For being in favor of a "small government" and a "free market" they sure do seem to love protecting the dealership model.

[Goldielocks]

So...  anybody hear anything at work lately?

So I just learned that one of my coworkers lives in a city 100 km from work. She is one of the lowest paid workers in our team and makes about $45,000 (yes, our company pays pretty well). Not only that, she takes a toll highway to work everyday. Ontario doesn't have a lot of toll highways; most of our highways are free. There is another free highway running parallel to the toll one, but the free one has much more traffic. She said that she hates waiting in traffic, so would rather pay to take the toll route.

She spends about $600 per month of toll fees and another $500 per month on gas. That's $13,200 per year or about 30% of her gross salary on transportation. That's not even including her insurance which I can't include as I don't know what her insurance cost is. Thankfully though her car is fully paid for, so at least she doesn't have a car payment.

Hah!  yes!  I came across this at our Regina office,  the receptionist was living with her parents outside of town, about 1.5 hrs / day to commute each way, (without any rush hour) and terrible winter driving conditions (blowing snow across the highway)..  She was starting to look into buying a home -- near her parents, -- because of the very cheap rent.   I started talking to her about just renting a room in a home walking distance to work (and restaurants / parks, etc), and going home on the weekends, that that would be pretty easy to find.   I showed her how she would SAVE money and enjoy life more by doing this.    She did not seem to agree at the time, but was polite.

 5 months later, I discovered that she did just that - well, got a roommate situation downtown, anyway -  by then winter had kicked in, so that helped.

[MgoSam]

So...  anybody hear anything at work lately?

So I just learned that one of my coworkers lives in a city 100 km from work. She is one of the lowest paid workers in our team and makes about $45,000 (yes, our company pays pretty well). Not only that, she takes a toll highway to work everyday. Ontario doesn't have a lot of toll highways; most of our highways are free. There is another free highway running parallel to the toll one, but the free one has much more traffic. She said that she hates waiting in traffic, so would rather pay to take the toll route.

She spends about $600 per month of toll fees and another $500 per month on gas. That's $13,200 per year or about 30% of her gross salary on transportation. That's not even including her insurance which I can't include as I don't know what her insurance cost is. Thankfully though her car is fully paid for, so at least she doesn't have a car payment.

Hah!  yes!  I came across this at our Regina office,  the receptionist was living with her parents outside of town, about 1.5 hrs / day to commute each way, (without any rush hour) and terrible winter driving conditions (blowing snow across the highway)..  She was starting to look into buying a home -- near her parents, -- because of the very cheap rent.   I started talking to her about just renting a room in a home walking distance to work (and restaurants / parks, etc), and going home on the weekends, that that would be pretty easy to find.   I showed her how she would SAVE money and enjoy life more by doing this.    She did not seem to agree at the time, but was polite.

 5 months later, I discovered that she did just that - well, got a roommate situation downtown, anyway -  by then winter had kicked in, so that helped.

Good job, she may not have initially followed your logic, but you may well have planted the seed that led her to listening.

[ender]

+1

The car you drive up to the dealer in makes a big difference to the attention you get as well.  I love to drive up in a shitbox and get left alone while i browse though the used section.

This kind of makes me want to go troll local car dealerships.

Particularly since I bike right by several on my way home from work ;-)

[Dollar Slice]

+1

The car you drive up to the dealer in makes a big difference to the attention you get as well.  I love to drive up in a shitbox and get left alone while i browse though the used section.

This kind of makes me want to go troll local car dealerships.

Particularly since I bike right by several on my way home from work ;-)

There's probably some good research to be done here with exotic combinations. Pull up to the dealership wearing ripped jeans, unshaven, uncombed, and driving a Tesla; wearing a nice suit and riding a BMX bike; etc.

[The Guru]

+1

The car you drive up to the dealer in makes a big difference to the attention you get as well.  I love to drive up in a shitbox and get left alone while i browse though the used section.

This kind of makes me want to go troll local car dealerships.

Particularly since I bike right by several on my way home from work ;-)

There's probably some good research to be done here with exotic combinations. Pull up to the dealership wearing ripped jeans, unshaven, uncombed, and driving a Tesla; wearing a nice suit and riding a BMX bike; etc.

Then after scoping out the most expensive car on the lot, ask the salesman for the trade-in value of the bike ;-)

[merula]

Traveling for work, I took an Uber from the airport. (I would've bused, but this is not a city well-served by transit. The airport bus runs once an hour at its most frequent and I had just missed it.)

So I'm talking to the driver and he tells me about his recent trip to the Dominican Republic, which was supposed to be $800 for the flight (two tickets, it was his birthday gift to his girlfriend) and $1,500 for the hotel. But he flew a budget airline I had never heard of (Dynamic Airlines?) and they cancelled his return trip and didn't give him an up-front refund, so he had to buy new one-way tickets for $1,300. I suggested he call his credit card to work with them about the charges.

Also this year, he went to Istanbul to visit family, and "only" spent $200 for the week going out with friends every night, plus $200 on a suitcase full of gifts.

He likes driving for Uber because it's a good part-time job, even though he doesn't really like driving.

[GuitarStv]

Also this year, he went to Istanbul to visit family, and "only" spent $200 for the week going out with friends every night, plus $200 on a suitcase full of gifts.

Why the quotes around "only"?  200$ a week seems pretty reasonable for living expenses.  That's just over ten grand a year.

[frugalnacho]

Also this year, he went to Istanbul to visit family, and "only" spent $200 for the week going out with friends every night, plus $200 on a suitcase full of gifts.

Why the quotes around "only"?  200$ a week seems pretty reasonable for living expenses.  That's just over ten grand a year.

I took it to mean in addition to actual living expenses.  Like he spent $200/wk on restaurants, bars, strip clubs, etc.  In that case it's just over ten grand in superfluous spending.  It would also be an additional ten grand in (probably) useless souvenirs. 

Side note: Why the fuck does FF auto correct keep correcting souvenirs to sou veneers? wtf is a sou veneer and why would it possibly think that's what I meant?

[BDWW]

Also this year, he went to Istanbul to visit family, and "only" spent $200 for the week going out with friends every night, plus $200 on a suitcase full of gifts.

Why the quotes around "only"?  200$ a week seems pretty reasonable for living expenses.  That's just over ten grand a year.

I took it to mean in addition to actual living expenses.  Like he spent $200/wk on restaurants, bars, strip clubs, etc.  In that case it's just over ten grand in superfluous spending.  It would also be an additional ten grand in (probably) useless souvenirs. 

Side note: Why the fuck does FF auto correct keep correcting souvenirs to sou veneers? wtf is a sou veneer and why would it possibly think that's what I meant?

A cheap covering? Sou means cheap/inexpensive, and a veneer is a thin covering over something(most commonly a wood veneer, aka the top layer of plywood or thin decorative exotic wood over cheap wood.).

[nanu]

Also this year, he went to Istanbul to visit family, and "only" spent $200 for the week going out with friends every night, plus $200 on a suitcase full of gifts.

Why the quotes around "only"?  200$ a week seems pretty reasonable for living expenses.  That's just over ten grand a year.

I took it to mean in addition to actual living expenses.  Like he spent $200/wk on restaurants, bars, strip clubs, etc.  In that case it's just over ten grand in superfluous spending.  It would also be an additional ten grand in (probably) useless souvenirs. 

Side note: Why the fuck does FF auto correct keep correcting souvenirs to sou veneers? wtf is a sou veneer and why would it possibly think that's what I meant?

I took it to mean the same thing, but I don't think that's bad.
Yes, $200 on restaurants and such in a week is bad (for mustachians, not the general population).
But then again, he obviously doesn't visit there all the time, so it seems ok to spend more than normal when he does.
Unless he meant $200/day every day that week? That would be excessive

[Ebrat]

Also this year, he went to Istanbul to visit family, and "only" spent $200 for the week going out with friends every night, plus $200 on a suitcase full of gifts.

Why the quotes around "only"?  200$ a week seems pretty reasonable for living expenses.  That's just over ten grand a year.

I took it to mean in addition to actual living expenses.  Like he spent $200/wk on restaurants, bars, strip clubs, etc.  In that case it's just over ten grand in superfluous spending.  It would also be an additional ten grand in (probably) useless souvenirs. 

Side note: Why the fuck does FF auto correct keep correcting souvenirs to sou veneers? wtf is a sou veneer and why would it possibly think that's what I meant?

I took it to mean the same thing, but I don't think that's bad.
Yes, $200 on restaurants and such in a week is bad (for mustachians, not the general population).
But then again, he obviously doesn't visit there all the time, so it seems ok to spend more than normal when he does.
Unless he meant $200/day every day that week? That would be excessive

Maybe because the exchange rate is good? I remember being surprised how cheap food and drinks were when I was there last year.

[Ralph2]

The car you drive up to the dealer in makes a big difference to the attention you get as well.  I love to drive up in a shitbox and get left alone while i browse though the used section.

Some years ago my boss turned up at the local Toyota / Mercedes dealer to buy a new merc. He was in older stained slightly ripped overalls driving the dump run ute.

A young salesman quickly walked up and loudly told him to get away from the cars, there is a used dealer down the road who sells stuff to your kind. Up behind the sales guy came the dealer principal who asked what the problem was and proceeded to give the sales guy a serve.
Boss then bought his 5th car from them that year.

Sales guy was then at his 4th or 5th dealership and moved on again soon after.

[nobodyspecial]

The car you drive up to the dealer in makes a big difference to the attention you get as well.  I love to drive up in a shitbox and get left alone while i browse though the used section.

Some years ago my boss turned up at the local Toyota / Mercedes dealer to buy a new merc. He was in older stained slightly ripped overalls driving the dump run ute.

A young salesman quickly walked up and loudly told him to get away from the cars, there is a used dealer down the road who sells stuff to your kind. Up behind the sales guy came the dealer principal who asked what the problem was and proceeded to give the sales guy a serve.
Boss then bought his 5th car from them that year.

Sales guy was then at his 4th or 5th dealership and moved on again soon after.

Same thing happened to my former boss.
Hint to luxury car salesmen in the oil patch in the middle of a boom.
If a guy turns up in rigger boots and a hard hat and his name is the same as the oil company painted on the side of the pickup - it's probably worth being polite.

[druth]

So...  anybody hear anything at work lately?

So I just learned that one of my coworkers lives in a city 100 km from work. She is one of the lowest paid workers in our team and makes about $45,000 (yes, our company pays pretty well). Not only that, she takes a toll highway to work everyday. Ontario doesn't have a lot of toll highways; most of our highways are free. There is another free highway running parallel to the toll one, but the free one has much more traffic. She said that she hates waiting in traffic, so would rather pay to take the toll route.

She spends about $600 per month of toll fees and another $500 per month on gas. That's $13,200 per year or about 30% of her gross salary on transportation. That's not even including her insurance which I can't include as I don't know what her insurance cost is. Thankfully though her car is fully paid for, so at least she doesn't have a car payment.

Not even counting depreciation/insurance/etc. on the car, and just counting that 13,200, I have to wonder if she could get a job in her own town paying $31,800 (salary now - cost of transit).  My guess is yes and she would save about 10 hours of her life per week.  Being a casheir at Aldi in my city pays that much.

[GuitarStv]

So...  anybody hear anything at work lately?

So I just learned that one of my coworkers lives in a city 100 km from work. She is one of the lowest paid workers in our team and makes about $45,000 (yes, our company pays pretty well). Not only that, she takes a toll highway to work everyday. Ontario doesn't have a lot of toll highways; most of our highways are free. There is another free highway running parallel to the toll one, but the free one has much more traffic. She said that she hates waiting in traffic, so would rather pay to take the toll route.

She spends about $600 per month of toll fees and another $500 per month on gas. That's $13,200 per year or about 30% of her gross salary on transportation. That's not even including her insurance which I can't include as I don't know what her insurance cost is. Thankfully though her car is fully paid for, so at least she doesn't have a car payment.

Not even counting depreciation/insurance/etc. on the car, and just counting that 13,200, I have to wonder if she could get a job in her own town paying $31,800 (salary now - cost of transit).  My guess is yes and she would save about 10 hours of her life per week.  Being a casheir at Aldi in my city pays that much.

Taking the 407 instead of the 401 can be the difference between a 40 minute drive and an hour and three quarters . . . each way.  Moving closer to work/getting a different job is a great idea, but if she's set on working where she is . . . I totally get paying for the 407.

[I'm a red panda]

A few areas I've been in are now playing with "congestion pricing" for toll roads- the cost of the toll goes up when traffic is really bad.  It makes the decision a bit more difficult if you don't know what the toll is until you get there.

Most of the places I have to go through with toll roads there isn't a way to avoid them unless you want 1-lane backroads or unpaved country road detours.  If you need to get somewhere, you just have to suck it up and pay.

[I'm a red panda]

Either one of them can be beat if you ride a bike :)

I don't have any local toll roads. If I have a day to drive 4 hours to Chicago or 17 hours to Austin, I'm not riding a bike.

[MrMoogle]

Not overheard from work, but since there's so much foam here anyway, might as well go here.  It's not worth it's own post IMO.

I got a "check" in the mail today for $4250.  If I use it, I only have to pay 42 payments of $160 to cover it.  It even says on there, that's 23% interest.

[Enigma]

Not overheard from work, but since there's so much foam here anyway, might as well go here.  It's not worth it's own post IMO.

I got a "check" in the mail today for $4250.  If I use it, I only have to pay 42 payments of $160 to cover it.  It even says on there, that's 23% interest.

Cash it!  Daddy needs a new pair of shoes, down payment for a new car, and a new wardrobe...  After all it is only $160/month