If you can show you have a steady source of income in the other place (i.e. proof of job offer), they should be more than willing to give you the loan.Originally Posted by Illusions
If you can show you have a steady source of income in the other place (i.e. proof of job offer), they should be more than willing to give you the loan.
Hope is the denial of reality
So, let's recap: In Loki's world, someone should be willing to go into debt, uproot their social bindings and take a paycut all in one go.
Which reminds me: What about the people of age 50+? Those have a really hard time finding new jobs.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
Capitalism uber alles! Spouse or significant other not putting in the hours and work to make this partnership profitable? Its time to fire them and find a new one. Family costing you more money than they are profiting you? Time to cut them loose. Children starting to show that they might not be worth the investment? What would you do if a stock wasn't performing like you expected it to? Capitalism, applicable to all life's investments.
...this is a joke of course.
. . .
It's certainly better than the alternative...
Is it? I dare say that you're single as well, without any attachments you couldn't get easily get rid of. Otherwise you wouldn't dismiss such arguments so casually.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
It might entail reasonable unemployment-benefits and help with job-hunting, encouragement and support in exploring new areas of the job market. It might also require those who work with the unemployed to understand that someone who's lost their job may well be having a crisis and that it may take a little while for them to get their bearings again. People going through a crisis, people who are under a lot of pressure in general, can make decisions that, with hindsight, prove to be unwise.
Yes. It's a defense-mechanism. In some people it's broken, and they think "I'll NEVER get a job and die poor and aloneYes, people are overly optimistic. They don't want a radical change in their life as long as they expect their old job to come back to them. And so they lie to themselves about the prospects of that happening. First, it's "I'll get a similar job in a month", which then turns into 3 months, 6 months, a year, 2 years, etc."
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
True. Also the quandary of owning a home with a mortgage, that might be "underwater", or in a tanked seller's market. There are families where one spouse moves where work is, leaving the other spouse at home (in their job) to keep up the mortgage, keep the kids in school. Some make a strategic default decision, if it's in their best financial interest. Talk about negative cycles perpetuating themselves.
Khen is right about the over 50 (or 40) crowd. Employers are reluctant to hire an older worker with a family, especially if they contribute to their health insurance. The employers' solution is to hire temp workers or turn one full-time position into two part-time positions. Yes, productivity numbers are UP, corporate profits are UP, but overall employment is NOT.
Question for Rand: How you can blame individuals for making the same kinds of financial decisions corporations do? ie, if they've paid into UI their entire working lives, and they are getting maybe ~ half of the previous wages monthly (while looking for another job), why would you expect them to take a job flipping burgers or waiting tables just to earn 1/4 of their previous wage? UI stops once they're employed again. That's a flaw in the insurance model, not a flaw in their character or work ethic.
Neither Rand nor Loki can explain how millions can find jobs that simply don't exist. Moving to another state or sector only works for a tiny portion of the population. Both you guys are spouting theories out your ass. Sounds like you expect workers to be "more ethical" than corporations or employers. WTF.
You know, Loki, I am not disagreeing that people should make an effort to get a job, and sometimes aren't w illing to give up enough to get one, it is a bit vague. I don't think you can expect anyone to move, unless they already have a solid job offer over there. And when you have family or property involved, it gets a lot trickier (how hard is it to sell a house these days?). And what is the limit? Should people be expected to move to another country, too, if they have the possibility of getting a job there? I know someone who moved to Singapore to keep his job, but I don't think you can expect anyone to do that.
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
Oakland County, MI (Detroit Free Press) Kevin Kristopik of Bloomfield Township had to change his phone number this morning.
The 15-year-old said he deleted his Twitter account and changed his phone number after receiving an estimated 26,000 text messages from around the world since his number was posted to Justin Bieber's Twitter page Saturday.
"I kind of meddled into his life a little bit," Kevin said. "He decided to take revenge on me."
The comment posted on Bieber's verified account asked followers to call the star at a number with a 248 area code. Kevin confirmed that was his number. Bieber has more than 4.5 million followers.
Kevin said he changed his number this morning. "When I had my phone, it was just going crazy with calls and texts off the wall. It was unusable," he said.
The teen acknowledged he was annoying the star after he tracked down a friend of Bieber's and got the singer's number. Kevin won't say exactly how he did it, but said Bieber's friend was in a music video and he used Google to track that person down.
The Seaholm High School student said Bieber abused his power as a celebrity when he sought revenge.
Although the singer never spoke with the Michigan teen, Kevin's dad, Mike Kristopik, said his son texted Bieber.
He liked Justin Bieber quite a bit, Kevin's dad said. He said he thought it was just a case of a 15-year-old trying to reach a celebrity.
Bieber tried to get Kevin to stop texting him and the way to do that was do just what he did, Mike Kristopik said.
One big question remains: How much will the phone bill be? Mike Kristopik is most worried about the cost of the incoming international texts. As of now, nothing has shown up on the bill, Kevin said.
"If it costs us $2,000 or $10,000, it's out of line," Mike Kristopik said, adding that he understands that his son was invading Bieber's privacy.
Most of the texts Kevin saw said things like "Oh my God, Oh my God, it's Justin Bieber," he said. Others accused the teen of hacking into Twitter.
He said he's upset about the situation, and thinks Bieber could have handled it differently.
His dad said there's a lesson from this all. "I think you learn a big lesson from anything that you put out on the Internet or tweet because it's always a record of your actions," he said.
We're stuck in a bloody snowglobe.
Agreed, again a WTF to being charged for receiving a text (or phone call) which is an unsolicited and uncontrollable event. You should only be charged for sending not receiving. Its like being charged by the Post Office every time somebody shoves a letter through your letter box even if its unsolicited junk mail
I really don't understand the obsession with Bieber anyway. He sounds like crap. But I give him props for showing that little punk that he can't just mess around and get away with it.
I don't see how any parent of a teen doesn't have an unlimited texting plan for their teen, anyway.
We're stuck in a bloody snowglobe.
Either way, receiving texts isn't texting.
Even if you're not on an unlimited plan, they don't charge unless you read it. Still, Americans get robbed on wireless plans, but its not as bad as simply receiving a text.
Last edited by Ominous Gamer; 08-17-2010 at 12:41 PM.
How's that work? My phone automatically displays the context of a text (first line or two) on screen as soon as it arrives, same as a summary clip of an email.
Woohoo. Good man.
Clamping companies are nothing more than cowboys and racketeers. Laws are only just starting to change to regulate them.
Don't you have a cellphone that requires a dataplan?
Dumbphones don't require dataplans, and as such, don't have all the extra bells and whistles that more advanced dataplan requiring phones do.
In Germany there are no clamps. You get a parking ticket and if you're parking really dumb, a towing truck will be called. That's it.Woohoo. Good man.
Clamping companies are nothing more than cowboys and racketeers. Laws are only just starting to change to regulate them.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
"Dataplan" - what do you mean?
Only normal usage of term data that I can think of with phones is generally internet data but I don't know if that's what you mean since what's that got to do with texts? Anyway, yes I do but you can get the phone "sim-free" here unlocked to work on any pay as you go network.
Data and texting plans have been closely tied together for a very long time. You could email my phone, or IM it via AOL, MSN, Yahoo or ICQ, and they all come across as text messages for me. Phones that require extra data plans (paying for a service on top on the default service) usually come with extra features that are absorbed by the data plan, even if the end user sees it as SMS or MMS.
Aside from that, looking into this, not all US carriers act the same, the PAYG government funded phone that Brent has through Safelink does not deduct airtime credit until the message is opened. Tmobile, if I remember correctly used to be the same way (but I've had unlimited texting for years now), but AT&T being the most awesome company out there charges for read/unread, solicited/unsolicited messages.
Over here, most providers have a huge gap in the abilities of PAYG or prepaid phones compared to contract phones.
Last edited by Ominous Gamer; 08-17-2010 at 04:36 PM.
Wait, why does an underage kid have a government provided cell phone?
The whole text thing pisses me off. It is ridiculous to get charged for an incoming text. I even remember getting charged for the ridiculous texts that the phone company itself would send in (advertisements etc). Luckily now it seems that nefarious practice has gone by the wayside.
I still don't have a text plan, mostly because hubby has the iPhone and since we are together most of the time people just text him. I have no real need for it at the moment.
Its for Brandy, but I cover her with my own plan. So Brent uses Brandy's government phone. He gets something like 65-70 minutes a month, but he only uses it when we go out somewhere, so he has a rollover balance of over a thousand minutes now. He does use it to text a bit between Brandy and I, think its .3 units of time for each message sent and read.
Wait, what? There are government phones for kids? WTF
Sounds like an abuse to be charging the taxpayer for a kids mobile
The employee should be fired.Java junkies and people who like to eat at java spots take note: Apparently there is a right way and a wrong way to place your order at Starbucks Coffee.
A college English professor from Manhattan tells the New York Post that she was booted out of a Starbucks on the city's Upper West Side for incorrectly placing an order.
Lynne Rosenthal says three police officers forcibly ejected her from the coffee bar at 86th Street and Columbus Avenue after she got into a dispute with a counterperson.
Rosenthal says she ordered a multigrain bagel but became enraged when the counterperson responded, "Do you want butter or cheese?"
"I just wanted a multigrain bagel," Rosenthal told the Post. "I refused to say, 'without butter or cheese.' When you go to Burger King, you don't have to list the six things you don't want. Linguistically, it's stupid."
Rosenthal said this is not the first time she's bucked the Starbucks system. In the past, she's pointedly ignored the restaurant's coffee sizing system that includes "tall" or "venti" and instead placed orders for "small" or "large."
The bagel incident was the last straw for her.
"I yelled, 'I want my multigrain bagel!' " Rosenthal told the newspaper. "The barista said, 'You're not going to get anything unless you say butter or cheese!' "
A Starbucks employee who witnessed the bagel blow-up blamed Rosenthal.
"She would not answer," the employee told the Post. "It was a reasonable question."
We're stuck in a bloody snowglobe.
Receiving SMS messages is completely free of charge here, even if you are abroad. Receiving calls is free too, but not abroad.
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
Really? I was thinking the customer was being a drama jerk. What's the big deal about ordering a bagel PLAIN--hold the toppings, or saying no thanks to butter or cheese, when asked?
Sounds like an abuse to be charging the taxpayer for a kids mobileI could just as easily give Brent one of my phones and let Brandy drain the government minutes dry. She qualifies either way, no restrictions on which member of the hosuehold uses the phone, only that its 1 phone per address.
Uhm, not really. If there's a subsidy for single-head of household parents to have cell phones (which is news to me) then it's based on her being SINGLE. You're milking the system, abusing a loophole. Way to go?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote