|
Devian666 posted:Looks like some serious just world fallacy going on here. In addition being brought up poor does actually change the way people think. The effect on their decisions is all short term thinking, rather than having a long tern view. It doesn't lead to the best financial decisions.
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 00:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 22:22 |
|
|
Dik Hz posted:I think people are pointing out that the whole avoidance/burying his head in the sand thing is the character flaw. Not the lack of financial literacy. That is a character flaw in a large proportion of the population. I don't think it's the moral issue it's being made out to be. A fine arts degree doesn't really teach you how to deal with overwhelming levels of debt. We wouldn't have a thread if people didn't stick their head in the sand about their finances.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 00:54
|
|
|
Devian666 posted:Why are people even getting degrees when they end up in low paying low skill jobs?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 01:03
|
|
|
berzerker posted:There's more to life than money. I don't think we need to do this debate for the hundredth time. It's simple: more to life than money, but at some point the amount of money you are making is so little that it makes it not worth the value you enjoy from it. It's like a Laffer (sp?) curve I guess.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 01:07
|
|
|
As the wise man Kanye West once said, "Money isn't everything, but not having it is."
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 01:14
|
|
|
Devian666 posted:Why are people even getting degrees when they end up in low paying low skill jobs? Obviously people who go to college do not imagine themselves working at unskilled low paying jobs when they graduate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 01:44
|
|
|
Guinness posted:As the wise man Kanye West once said, "Money isn't everything, but not having it is." Money isn't everything, but having more if it than most people can absolve you of most material and practical problems in a way that is unprecedented in all of human history
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 01:46
|
|
|
berzerker posted:There's more to life than money. In the facebook discussion associated with the article I linked one guy said that getting a degree was the worst decision of his life. It seems there's more to life than getting degrees as well. BEHOLD: MY CAPE posted:Obviously people who go to college do not imagine themselves working at unskilled low paying jobs when they graduate. Their parents and teachers say they need a degree to get decent pay, so it's a reasonable conclusion to make.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 01:58
|
|
|
Friend told me today about his brother in law, who went from the US to England for a master's degree in Viking and Medieval Studies. No PhD, and no plans for one, but a gazillion dollars in student debt for it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 06:36
|
|
|
canyoneer posted:Friend told me today about his brother in law, who went from the US to England for a master's degree in Viking and Medieval Studies. No PhD, and no plans for one, but a gazillion dollars in student debt for it. If he's smart he'll go into business making really accurate weapons/garments/games whatever and get lots of BWM nerds to drop a ton of cash on him
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 08:32
|
|
|
pig slut lisa posted:
 Mary update After a dozen or so posts, Mary stopped blogging and has in fact wiped her blog entirely. Her GoFundMe also got pulled after never netting more than $50. I only thought to check on her progress because Facebook served up a post by her announcing that she has signed up for Digit, which appears to be an algorithm that pulls small amounts of cash from your checking account every so often to force you to save. Oh, and you can withdraw from it at anytime. I would be very curious to know how many people use this without raiding the account every few months.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 09:01
|
|
|
pig slut lisa posted:
I just saw an ad for Digit. It has a "no overdraft guarantee" - which I interpreted as them calculating their withdrawals so that you won't overdraft your account because they've been moving bits to savings. But no, it is a guarantee that THEY will not overdraft your account. If you're so close to overdrafting that you're worried that $5-50 bucks a month will push you over the edge...
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 10:02
|
|
|
At least they'll pay for the fee if they overdraft you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 12:26
|
|
|
Devian666 posted:Looks like some serious just world fallacy going on here In any case, I already addressed financial ignorance previously, as paraphrased by Dik Hz, Dik Hz posted:I think people are pointing out that the whole avoidance/burying his head in the sand thing is the character flaw. Not the lack of financial literacy. Devian666 posted:“When society, family and teachers say you need a degree [that is not fine arts]”
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 13:39
|
|
|
But you can't put a price on dreams! Someone will buy my paintings for five figures. I just know it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 14:19
|
|
|
What if you do get a fine arts degree but have your degree paid for in full by financial aid because of your family's low income bracket? GWM or BWM?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 15:07
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:What if you do get a fine arts degree but have your degree paid for in full by financial aid because of your family's low income bracket? GWM or BWM? BWM because they should have forged transcripts and invested the money in an index fund. They'd still be unemployable, but they'd have earned 10% on average.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 15:13
|
|
|
Nice article in the New York Times about a woman with $450,000 in student loans. Her "unremarkable" decisions include starting and stopping two graduate programs, finishing another, and then never making a payment in 20 years. I almost feel like she's GWM in that her life has been financed by the federal government for decades. She just needs to keep it going a bit longer. This makes me wonder: is there anything preventing someone from just enrolling in degree after degree and never paying anything back, amassing a million in loans?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
^^^^^^ yes, there is a lifetime cap on most federal loan programs, and grad plus loans do a credit check. You can get more depending on what kind of school you're in (medical, law school) but eventually the well dries up.DrSunshine posted:What if you do get a fine arts degree but have your degree paid for in full by financial aid because of your family's low income bracket? GWM or BWM? Gwm if grants/scholarships. Bwm if loans. Several friends of mine from law school had a bfa (painting, ceramics, dance). Gave them something cool to talk about with recruiters, all are successful lawyers now. Obviously anecdotal, but hey, works for some. Hot Dog Day #91 fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Nov 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
John Smith posted:It is not a fallacy when the world *is* just in disciplining him. Ignorance is *not* a legitimate defence when we are talking about the spawn of Satan here, the actual holy grail of a degree in fine arts. Lol. Okay okay, calm down Ayn Rand, this much excitement isn't good for you. Have a cigarette and just enjoy the stories hey?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 17:14
|
|
|
My girlfriend does digit and it worked exactly like that-- signed up, forgot, received email a while back, and saw she had $1k in the account. Promptly used it for vacation, but she has the financial freedom to do that so it's not BWM or anything.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 17:32
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:^^^^^^ yes, there is a lifetime cap on most federal loan programs, and grad plus loans do a credit check. You can get more depending on what kind of school you're in (medical, law school) but eventually the well dries up.. The article points out that the woman got fresh loans to pursue a PhD in Education when she already had $250k in loans that she had never made a payment for in the previous decade. So it appears that the "credit check" can't be too rigorous. If she hadn't left the PhD right away, it sounds like she might still be taking on new loans.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
Insurance fraud is bad with money. https://np.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/3tzh8n/fl_wifes_niece_staged_an_accident_blamed_other/ quote:[FL] Wife's niece staged an accident, blamed other (innocent) driver, lied in court under oath, pretended to be hurt, made fake insurance claims and filed a fake lawsuit (self.legaladvice)
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
quote:My wife thinks nothing should happen to her niece because the dashcam video was not disclosed until after she testified under oath, so the court entrapped her into committing a crime she would have not committed otherwise "Yeah, but she wouldn't have broken the law if she knew she'd be caught!"
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
canyoneer posted:Insurance fraud is bad with money.  quote:Apparently she caused the accident because she wanted money for a spring break trip which her parents were not going to pay for because they wanted her to save herself. Now that is some loving thread content. That wasn't just a single "oopsie" that got a little out of hand, that was some severely malicious intent to defraud and deceive. And of course it was in Florida.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
Providing this isn't STDH, the dashcam video could be an issue. This isn't Perry Mason - I don't think you can dramatically reveal evidence without having disclosed the existence of that evidence with the other side's attorney. Granted, it could be they did include that evidence and her attorney sucks and didn't look at it or didn't have the expertise to identify the telltale signs of insurance fraud.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 22:21
|
|
|
I don't think the defense has a duty to disclose ahead of time in a civil case, do they?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 22:24
|
|
|
I'm actually concerned for the reddit guy actually. His wife seems to be able to pull some extravagant mental gymnastics about responsibility.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 22:33
|
|
|
Krispy Kareem posted:Providing this isn't STDH, the dashcam video could be an issue. This isn't Perry Mason - I don't think you can dramatically reveal evidence without having disclosed the existence of that evidence with the other side's attorney. She was a witness in the guy she set up's trial. The defense doesn't have to disclose any evidence to her.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 22:41
|
|
|
the talent deficit posted:She was a witness in the guy she set up's trial. The defense doesn't have to disclose any evidence to her. quote:She filed a lawsuit against the other driver.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 22:47
|
|
|
She'd already perjured herself at that point.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
Krispy Kareem posted:Providing this isn't STDH, the dashcam video could be an issue. This isn't Perry Mason - I don't think you can dramatically reveal evidence without having disclosed the existence of that evidence with the other side's attorney.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 22:56
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:I don't think the defense has a duty to disclose ahead of time in a civil case, do they? If discovery was requested, they certainly do. It's pretty much malpractice to take a case to trial without having done Amy discovery. Most courts I've practiced in required disclosure of all trial exhibits a free weeks ahead of time. It would also be malpractice to not review those exhibits. Both sides should be well apprised of the theories and evidence of their opponents.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
Guinness posted:And of course it was in Florida.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 23:23
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:If discovery was requested, they certainly do. Not if the evidence is used to impeach testimony. (Per the insurance attorney in the Reddit thread and the two non-insurance attorneys I asked this morning, at least. None practice in Florida, though.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 00:08
|
|
|
Thesaurus posted:Nice article in the New York Times about a woman with $450,000 in student loans. Her "unremarkable" decisions include starting and stopping two graduate programs, finishing another, and then never making a payment in 20 years.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 00:21
|
|
|
Cicero posted:I don't get it, how has she not had her paychecks garnished? If they're private loans, they'd have to sue her and get a judgment against her first, but it begs the question why they haven't. Subjunctive posted:Not if the evidence is used to impeach testimony. In what scenarios would this happen? Does that mean that one side would intentionally withhold evidence to disprove someone's testimony? 1. That's allowed? 2. Wouldn't it be harder to get that evidence admitted later? Why do it that way? BonerGhost fucked around with this message at 00:36 on Dec 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 00:34
|
|
|
Cicero posted:I don't get it, how has she not had her paychecks garnished?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 00:36
|
|
|
NancyPants posted:Why do it that way? To nail the rear end in a top hat that broke the law and tried to sue me under false pretenses.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 00:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 22:22 |
|
|
Inverse Icarus posted:To nail the rear end in a top hat that broke the law and tried to sue me under false pretenses. A good strategy is let the criminal accumulate as many crimes as possible so as to remove any doubt when she is prosecuted. Trying to use the non-disclosed dashcam as a defense for perjury isn't going to work out, unless she wants to really piss off the next judge she deals with. From one of the comments. quote:Insurance attorney here - but in different area (work comp). I am not your lawyer, this is not legal advice, blah blah blah legal disclaimers. Devian666 fucked around with this message at 01:07 on Dec 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 01:01
|
|