Bad With Money 2018: When I die, bury me in the blockchain.

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask/Tell > Business, Finance, and Careers > Bad With Money 2018: When I die, bury me in the blockchain.

«‹›676 »

Elysium: Aug 21, 2003; It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.

canyoneer posted:

Don't wanna pay this 70 cent fee per deposit, better hold thousands of the money in my own personal accounts. It's my fi-douche-iary duty

What kind of bank charges a fee when you have *too much* money in an account? "Well gee, we don't want your money sitting in our bank earning us interest, let's encourage you to not do that by adding a fee for deposits if you put too much money in our bank."

# ? Jul 7, 2017 20:05

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 16, 2024 00:45

Subjunctive: Sep 12, 2006; ✨sparkle and shine✨

If there's preferential pricing for small businesses, I could see there being a limit to keep large ones from using those products.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 20:06

Higgy: Jul 6, 2005; Grimey Drawer

monster on a stick posted:

http://ogc.osd.mil/doha/industrial/11-00110.h1.pdf

Get something to drink, this is going to be a long one.

holy moley that's some puuuure strain yesss

# ? Jul 7, 2017 20:48

therobit: Aug 19, 2008; I've been tryin' to speak with you for a long time

It is common to have preferential treatment for small nonprofit and charity groups, but once they reach a certain size it is reasonable to expect them to pay the same fees as any other group nor business. Your local small church congregation would get a free account (which may actually cost the bank more to service than the revenue from the account) but a megachurch would have much higher balances and transaction volume, and can also afford to pay for thier services.

Free bank accounts were rare prior to the 1990s, and when they became widespread on the consumer side they came at the expense of people who rack up overdraft fees.

Free bank accounts for businesses usually come with transaction limitations that are fairly low after which you pay a fee for transactions.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 20:49

mojo1701a: Oct 9, 2008; Oh, yeah. Loud and clear. Emphasis on LOUD!
~ David Lee Roth

The best part is the emphasis on the "applicant did not contact bank to inquire about fees." I can't wrap my head around being so scared of "fees" without finding out exactly how bad the damage would be.

Edit:

therobit posted:

It is common to have preferential treatment for small nonprofit and charity groups, but once they reach a certain size it is reasonable to expect them to pay the same fees as any other group nor business. Your local small church congregation would get a free account (which may actually cost the bank more to service than the revenue from the account) but a megachurch would have much higher balances and transaction volume, and can also afford to pay for thier services.

Free bank accounts were rare prior to the 1990s, and when they became widespread on the consumer side they came at the expense of people who rack up overdraft fees.

Free bank accounts for businesses usually come with transaction limitations that are fairly low after which you pay a fee for transactions.

Even then, there are a number of bank accounts that'll waive those fees if you keep above a certain balance.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 20:53

therobit: Aug 19, 2008; I've been tryin' to speak with you for a long time

mojo1701a posted:

The best part is the emphasis on the "applicant did not contact bank to inquire about fees." I can't wrap my head around being so scared of "fees" without finding out exactly how bad the damage would be.

Edit:

Even then, there are a number of bank accounts that'll waive those fees if you keep above a certain balance.

For consumers, yes, but for businesses it is pretty hard to get out of paying fees on any significant transaction volume. Not necessarily high fees, hut you will pay for services and businesses that are larger than a couple of people usually understand this.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 20:59

Hyrax Attack!: Jan 13, 2009; We demand to be taken seriously

mojo1701a posted:

The best part is the emphasis on the "applicant did not contact bank to inquire about fees." I can't wrap my head around being so scared of "fees" without finding out exactly how bad the damage would be.

Haha yeah, worse case scenario it would be something like $20 a month. I wonder what percentage of professional downfalls involved "he then decided to co-mingle the funds." A friend's dad got disbarred for that, it seems common.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 21:33

OneTruePecos: Oct 24, 2010

mojo1701a posted:

The best part is the emphasis on the "applicant did not contact bank to inquire about fees." I can't wrap my head around being so scared of "fees" without finding out exactly how bad the damage would be.

The fees are a post hoc rationalization for having looted the golf club's bank account to get his personal checking account above water. It's the weakest reed imaginable to hold up embezzlement as something else.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 21:35

BigDave: Jul 14, 2009; Taste the High Country

OneTruePecos posted:

The fees are a post hoc rationalization for having looted the golf club's bank account to get his personal checking account above water. It's the weakest reed imaginable to hold up embezzlement as something else.

I didn't steal the car, I just hotwired it and drove it home so it wouldn't get a parking ticket!

# ? Jul 7, 2017 21:48

BEHOLD: MY CAPE: Jan 11, 2004

BigDave posted:

I didn't steal the car, I just hotwired it and drove it home so it wouldn't get a parking ticket!

It isn't even that, the fees issue was a bald faced lie concocted as a cover story upon cursory review of the guy's checking account.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 22:07

Haifisch: Nov 13, 2010; Objection! I object! That was... objectionable!; Taco Defender

quote:

Applicant admitted only one bankruptcy filing in 1997 and one wage garnishment in 1997 in her 2000 Standard Form 86. Even though she certified that her statements on the form were "true, complete and correct" and was advised that a knowing and willful false statement on the form could be punished under Section 1001 of Title 18, United States Code), she admitted no other financial problems. (Item 6) In January 1997 she had completed a Questionnaire for National Security Position (Standard From 86) where she admitted only having issued one bad check in 1990 and having filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy in 1995. (Item 10) Applicant failed to reveal a history of arrests for worthless checks (13 times between 1987-1997) and an arrest in 1987 for shoplifting. While she denies falsifying her security forms as she claims not to remember her many arrests and also claims that she decided that the older arrests were not relevant, these inconsistent reasons undermine her credibility. (Items 2, 4)

In December 2000 Applicant was interviewed by the Defense Security Service (DSS) and explained her finances further. On her Personal Financial Statement she reported to DSS her monthly net income was over $5,000 and her monthly expenses were only $1,836, as she paid no rent; she showed debts where she paid $2,000 monthly with a $1,000 monthly remainder. (Item 7) In February 2001 she reported to DSS that she had chosen a money management company to help her with managing all outstanding debts and planned to enter a contract with them within 30 days; however, she provided no subsequent evidence that she had done so. She explained to DSS that she had so many past arrests for insufficient funds checks that she could not possibly confirm, deny, or recall every such event or incident. (Item 8)

Her debts to 43 creditors total approximately $24,300. Of the many debts listed in the SOR, she denies only 1.bbb, 1.jjj., and 1.kkk. She has filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy four times: in April 1993 for debts of $13,980 where she was scheduled to pay $53.81 weekly; in April 1996 she had unsecured debts of $19,170 and scheduled payments of $48.50 weekly; February 1997 for unsecured debts of $19,200 with scheduled payments of $96.92; and in June 1998 she had unsecured debts of $20,716 with scheduled payments of $43.38. Her debts have never been discharged as she failed to make payments according to the plans and the cases were each dismissed. While she still claims an intent to pay these debts, she has offered no specific plan to do so. (Items 11, 12, 13, 14) Several of her debts are for luxuries, not just necessities for her children, such as video rentals (1.bb. and 1.ee); a judgment against her for $400 for a car stereo system (1.aaa.), $248 for cell phone service (1.ccc.), and a 1998 telephone debt of over $1,000 (1.ggg.). Also, several of her non-sufficient funds checks were for luxuries such as a florist, cosmetics, car stereo and a necklace rental which were expenses she could have controlled.

Applicant admitted that in her "younger years" she lived "carelessly" as she had nothing to work towards. Now in mitigation she offers that she goes to work every day and is a good mother to her children; she is the president of her church choir and studies at night. Applicant claims both to be unable to pay her debts and to now be able to handle her current accounts very well, but she provided no updated budget nor did she document any of the debts she had paid (even though she says she has paid her student loan and that it is no longer in a default status). She claims her intent is to pay credit cards first and hospital bills last. (Items 2, 4)

# ? Jul 7, 2017 22:12

EAT FASTER!!!!!!: Sep 21, 2002; Legendary.

All of this stuff - decades of it. Holy poo poo.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 22:39

Shame Boy: Mar 2, 2010

OneTruePecos posted:

The fees are a post hoc rationalization for having looted the golf club's bank account to get his personal checking account above water. It's the weakest reed imaginable to hold up embezzlement as something else.

He even basically says "well ok I did actually take the money to pay off personal poo poo but I was gonna pay it back so it's not stealing!!!" later on

# ? Jul 7, 2017 22:59

Hyrax Attack!: Jan 13, 2009; We demand to be taken seriously

http://ogc.osd.mil/doha/industrial/09-03490.h1.pdf

quote:

Applicant failed to mitigate the Government�s security concerns under Guideline E, Personal Conduct and Guideline M, Use of Information Technology Systems. Applicant�s eligibility for a security clearance is denied.

quote:

Since December 2005, when Applicant was 17 years old, he has engaged in basic computer hacking attacks.

quote:

During 2005, Applicant also engaged in �social engineering� attacks. He understands that term to mean manipulating people to get personal information that you want and gaining unauthorized access to information by using computers, personal information, and services. One social engineering attack was against an unknowing neighbor. Using his computer skills he gained access to her personal email account. He accomplished this by intercepting electronic data from the wireless network containing her email address.

Armed with her email account information, Applicant then visited the internet service provider�s (ISP) website and attempted to login to view her account. When he could not guess the neighbor�s password, he executed the �forgot password� function and wrote down the basic security challenge questions. In an attempt to learn the neighbor�s maiden name (to answer the security challenge question), Applicant called the neighbor and fraudulently represented that he was planning a high school reunion for her grandparents.

During the conversation he learned the neighbor�s maiden name. He then again went to the ISP website and attempted to gain access to the neighbor�s email account. Once more, he was denied access even though he could answer the challenge question. Undeterred, Applicant continued this social engineering attack by calling the ISP�s customer service center and fraudulently representing to them that he was the neighbor�s husband and he demanded access to the account. He was given access after giving the service representative the correct challenge question answer.

With access to the neighbor�s account, Applicant was able to view her email at will. He viewed her personal emails, address book, and accessed her monthly billing statements for her phone and internet use. Additionally, he changed the welcome header on her email account by stating that she had been hacked. He also sent out a false mass email to her friends and family describing a personal situation. On another occasion he hacked into the neighbor�s computer hard drive and imbedded an inappropriate picture into her start up folder. The result of his action caused the picture to load anytime she started her computer. He attempted to access her email account about two weeks later, but was denied access because the password was changed.

Applicant then went to the neighbor�s house in person offering his services as a computer technician who could run a diagnostic test on her computer and troubleshoot any problems she was experiencing. She declined his services. At that time, Applicant did not tell her that he had hacked her system, nor has he ever disclosed that information to her because he feared the legal repercussions that could follow. Applicant admitted to these actions.

Also in 2005, Applicant hacked into a state Department of Transportation electronic road sign. The road sign is used to warn approaching motorists of upcoming hazards and display messages on the sign such as �warning road work ahead�. Applicant was able to access the message codes on the sign by calling the sign�s manufacturer and falsely representing that he was a construction worker who needed the codes. He was provided this information and used it to access the sign�s computer. He then changed the sign�s message on several occasions. One of the messages he put on the sign was �police ahead� to warn motorists of police cars using radar for speed enforcement. He put this message up several times. He also put joke messages on the sign. He admitted to these actions. He did this because it was challenging and he thought it was amusing to change the sign.

I dunno why they didn't give this guy clearance. :iiam:

# ? Jul 7, 2017 23:26

monster on a stick: Apr 29, 2013

Haifisch posted:

necklace rental

At least it wasn't rent-to-own.

I'm not going to bother quoting all of this one: http://ogc.osd.mil/doha/industrial/11-03581.h1.pdf. It's pro-click especially the saga with "Mr. A" but a highlight:

quote:

In September 2008, Applicant purchased a new $30,637 car for his 17-year-old daughter with $557 monthly payments. At the time, he was a full-time student with no income, but anticipated he would be receiving $400,000 from the sale of his home within six months. He said he had to buy the car because his former wife had lost the two vehicles she had been awarded five months earlier in the divorce decree. He made nine monthly payments on the vehicle. As reported in his November 2010 CBR, the account was delinquent and closed in November 2009. As of November 2011, the account was listed as charged off and in collection. His former wife told him the lender repossessed the vehicle, the lender denied they had repossessed it, and then it turned up in an auction in a different state where it sold for $2,000 to $3,000.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 23:28

AreWeDrunkYet: Jul 8, 2006

Hyrax Attack! posted:

http://ogc.osd.mil/doha/industrial/09-03490.h1.pdf

I dunno why they didn't give this guy clearance.

Is there some missing information there, because it sounds like he was never caught for any of this and just went ahead and told the clearance investigators anyway.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 23:32

curufinor: Apr 4, 2016; by Smythe

if you lie in any way shape or form on a clearance investigation they will ream your butt
ream it

it will never feel the same

# ? Jul 7, 2017 23:37

Hyrax Attack!: Jan 13, 2009; We demand to be taken seriously

AreWeDrunkYet posted:

Is there some missing information there, because it sounds like he was never caught for any of this and just went ahead and told the clearance investigators anyway.

Yeah, doesn't sound like he was caught. I hope there was some procedure for authorities to get in contact with the neighbor to let her know that this jackass decided to try to ruin her life and get into her house for the heck of it.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 23:39

monster on a stick: Apr 29, 2013

Hyrax Attack! posted:

Yeah, doesn't sound like he was caught. I hope there was some procedure for authorities to get in contact with the neighbor to let her know that this jackass decided to try to ruin her life and get into her house for the heck of it.

The report says the guy still hasn't told his neighbor about his hacking attempt because he fears legal consequences. The plus side is that he'll be hosed on getting clearance for a long time because the feds want to see a record of upstanding behavior (which may include fessing up to the neighbor and paying the consequences, and the report hints at that) and that you behave for a while after your hosed-up behavior - this person is only 22 and it's pretty easy for a jaded investigator to hear someone say "well, I did that when I was an immature 17 year old, now I am a mature 22 year old" and :rolleyes:

# ? Jul 7, 2017 23:53

Haifisch: Nov 13, 2010; Objection! I object! That was... objectionable!; Taco Defender

AreWeDrunkYet posted:

Is there some missing information there, because it sounds like he was never caught for any of this and just went ahead and told the clearance investigators anyway.

He was probably operating under "they only care about you being honest! :downs:

" logic.

quote:

In April 1997 Applicant filed Chapter 7 bankruptcy in State #1 for secured and unsecured liabilities of over $500,000, but reaffirmed her first and second home mortgages. Debts of over $300,000 were discharged in August 1997. (3) After she sold her home, she no longer had the mortgages. (Items 6, 16)

In August 1999 Applicant completed a Security Clearance Application (SF 86). In the SF 86 she did reveal that she had filed for bankruptcy in August 1997 under Chapter 7 due to a failed business. She explained on the SF 86 that during that time she did have items that were 180 days past due, but she claimed they were all included in the bankruptcy. She also indicated that she had "some sales tax" that has not been paid but stated that she know of no "lein" that been filed against her property. (Item 5)

In May 2000 Applicant was interviewed by the Defense Security Service (DSS) and explained her finances further. She stated she had sold a property in State #2 in July 1999 and was building a house in State #1, where she expected to move in June 2000. In 1994 she created her own business with a work colleague where they each invested $40,000; and in 1995 she started her own branch of the business, but in January 1996 "things started falling apart. . . ." She then closed both business in August 1996, but opened another business in March 1997 with the same equipment. Several of her creditors sued her and things "continued to go downhill." (Item 6) Her bankruptcy filing shows zero income for 1996; $3,500 income for 1995; and $27,000 income for 1994. (Item 16) She had leased her equipment to another proprietor who is making the payments on the equipment debt, so she did not list that $40,000 balance on her Personal Financial Statement. She remains responsible for that debt. In May 2000 she reported to DSS her monthly net income was close to $4,000 and her monthly expenses were only $855, as she paid no rent; she showed debts of $125,000 for a mortgage where she paid $875 monthly and a credit card where she owed $1,300 and made $100 monthly payments. (Items 6, 16)

Applicant failed to reveal a history of Tax Liens from the last 7 years in answer to SF 86 Question 36. [SOR 2.a.] In her Answer to the SOR she denied that she had omitted any Federal (4) tax liens from her SF, but she admitted that she had sales tax liens that she thought had been included in her bankruptcy filing. They were not included. She admitted she was indebted to State #2 for over $6,000 for city sales tax obligations from 1993-1995 and that a lien was filed on this debt in 1996 and 1997. Also, she was indebted to State #2 for county sales tax obligations of over $6,000 from the 1993-1995 period and a lien was filed in 1996 and in 1997. Further, she was indebted to State #2 for state sales tax obligations of over $6,000 from the 1993-1995 period for which a lien had been filed in 1996 and again in 1997. As of May 2000 none of these debts had been satisfied. At a second DSS interview in May 2000, she acknowledged that the tax liens were still in effect; she pledged to try to resolve them, but there is no evidence that she did so. (Her back surgery in May 2000 month she had explained would delay her efforts to contact state officials.) (Items 7, 8, 9)

Applicant claimed to be unaware that the liens had been re-filed in October 1997 until interviewed by DSS in May 2000. She declared she did contact the state revenue department in May or June 2000 to set up a payment plan and again in March 2001 had contacted an attorney to negotiate a "settlement" for these taxes, but claimed she had not been in a position to pay these back taxes. (Answer) (There is no evidence provided that a settlement was ever negotiated.) While Applicant claimed in June 2001 to have a "payment plan" in place, the records she provided document that the state department of revenue issued a Writ of Garnishment to her employer in April 2001 for $12,000 due. Thus, only through the writ has she made bi-weekly payments of $503.85 to the state department of revenue through payroll deduction. While she claims to have paid over $2,000 as of June 2001, Applicant expects the debt will not be resolved for two years. (Exhibit A)

Applicant failed (5) to reveal a history of Public Record Civil Court Actions from the last 7 years in answer to SF Question 40. In her Answer to the SOR she denied that she had purposely omitted these actions as she thought they had been included and resolved in her bankruptcy filing. [SOR 2.b.(1)-(6)] (Items 4, 10-15) The bankruptcy filings noted three of the following creditors (Businesses #1, #2, and #6 under a listing of all suits), but does not list the other three law suits.

In 1987 Business #1 noted a judgement of over $80,000. (Item 10)

After Applicant defaulted on an open-ended credit agreement of over $10,000, in 1987 Business #2 filed a complaint which was dismissed because of Appellant's bankruptcy filing. (Item 11)

In 1994 Business #3 filed against Appellant and demanded judgement of over $800 because of services purchased on credit; it was dismissed in 1995. (Item 15)

In 1996 Business #4 filed against her to recover possession of a tract of land and for damages of $650 per month from December 1996; a Writ of Possession issued in June 1997. (Item 13)

In 1997 Business #5 obtained a judgment of over $11,000 against Applicant for a loan for equipment on a promissory note; a default judgment was granted in January 1997. (Item 14)

In 1997 Business #6 obtained a judgment of over $80,000 against Applicant for a loan for equipment on a promissory note of $130,000 signed in 1994; judgment of over $80,000 was granted in January 1998. (Item 12)

Recently, Applicant and her son have moved into a new home and purchased a car; however she did not provide details of the financing. (Exhibit A, Item 10) In March 2001 Applicant's income was approximately $3,000 per month; however, she provided no updated budget. (Item 4)

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:21

Haifisch: Nov 13, 2010; Objection! I object! That was... objectionable!; Taco Defender

quote:

Applicant is a 38 year old male employed by a defense contractor, and he is seeking to obtain a security clearance. He was previously granted a SECRET security clearance in February 1982.

Applicant has seemingly been financially overextended for a number of years, and as a consequence, demonstrated a history of not meeting all of his financial obligations in a timely fashion. Following his marriage in December 1991, he and his wife (now ex-wife, as they were divorced in September 1999) started experiencing financial difficulties due to their mismanagement. They developed too many consumer debts and were soon unable to keep up with their monthly payments.

Exacerbating their financial problems was Applicant's unemployment from August through November 1996 when his employer closed after it was consolidated with another company. When he obtained new employment in November 1996, his hourly salary was reduced from $17.00 to $10.00. He joined his current employer at an hourly salary of $15.00, and currently earns $21.70 per hour. Eventually he stopped making payments on his overdue accounts. As a result, various creditors referred the overdue accounts to collection or simply charged them off.

[snip]

In September 1995, during a "troubled time" in his marriage relationship, Applicant and his wife purchased a vacation home time-share for approximately $9,630.00. At the time of the purchase Applicant was to periodically pay an unspecified amount for the time-share and another unspecified amount to the homeowners association. At some point after the agreement was finalized, Applicant and his wife decided they did not wish to be bound by it and attempted, unsuccessfully, to void the agreement by paying a $750.00 cancellation fee. They felt they had been pressured to enter into the agreement by "unethical high pressure tactics to force a time share sale." Applicant made some payments, not further described, and ceased doing so in about January 1997. His consultations with an attorney purportedly resulted in her advising him to ignore the creditors, but he has offered no evidence, testimonial or documentary, to support his contention that he was merely following legal advice.

Applicant has vowed not to pay either of the two accounts because he considers the sale a "fraudulent time-share sales scam." He claims the debts are not legitimate. His failure to further address those obligations resulted in the accounts being sent to collection. The time-share account was eventually resold to several other collection agencies, and it appears under several different creditors on the credit reports. Applicant is currently indebted to a collection agency (it is not clear which agency has the current interest in the delinquent account), representing the original time-share developer (identified in the SOR in subparagraph 1.d.) in the amount of approximately $10,617.00, for bad debt, as described above. As far as the overdue obligation pertaining to homeowner association dues, as described above, is concerned, Applicant currently owes the creditor (identified in the SOR in subparagraph 1.c.) approximately $257.00.

He's not wrong, but "la la la I can't hear you la la la" isn't the right way to get rid of a timeshare.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 00:44

monster on a stick: Apr 29, 2013

http://ogc.osd.mil/doha/industrial/11-03623.h1.pdf

quote:

It is unclear when Applicant first started having financial problems, but he attributed it to the �downturn in the real estate market and the bad economy.� He purchased a new home for $392,000, and financed the purchase with an 80 percent first mortgage at an interest rate of 7.5 percent, and a 20 percent second mortgage at an interest rate of 11.5 percent, all with no money down. In order to install a swimming pool, he obtained a third mortgage. The total amount financed for the three mortgages was $450,000. Applicant�s monthly payment for the combined mortgages was $3,650.

At some unspecified point, Applicant felt �stuck� because he wanted to be in a position to retire in three and one-half years. However, because the value of the home had decreased to $220,000, he had no equity in the home. Applicant acknowledged that he had the ability to continue making his monthly mortgage payments. He sought professional guidance from two bankruptcy attorneys, and they advised him that he earned too much money to qualify for a Chapter 7 bankruptcy, and that a Chapter 13 bankruptcy would cost him $7,600 per month in mortgage payments over a period of five years. The alternative was what he selected: a strategic default to lower both the principle owed the mortgage lenders and the monthly payments, because simply lowering the monthly payments would not build equity in the house. Accordingly, Applicant stopped making monthly payments on the first two mortgages in July 2010. The first two mortgages were transferred to a mortgage servicing company, and Applicant started working with that company. Applicant�s position is that if the principal for the first two mortgages is not reduced, he will let the property go into foreclosure.

"See, if I don't pay the mortgage, you're going to have to foreclose. Checkmate motherfuckers :smug:

"

http://ogc.osd.mil/doha/industrial/10-01400.h1.pdf

quote:

1.e. The SOR alleges that in about 2006, Applicant used a company credit card,which had been issued by his employer to be used for business only, for personal use on several occasions. The company reminded him that he was not to use the credit card for personal use.

1.f. The SOR alleges that in about 2007, Applicant again used his company credit card for personal use on several occasions, including withdrawing cash from ATMs and then using the money to gamble. Applicant testified that he had used the company credit card when he was not on travel, including withdrawing money from an ATM at a gambling casino, which he was aware was a violation of the company�s policy. Applicant averred that since he would pay off the credit card, it was alright to use the credit card, even if it did violate the company policy. Applicant received a letter of reprimand from the company. The credit card was held by the company and only given to Applicant when he was on travel duty for the company. Applicant was asked why he used the credit card while not on travel, after he had been instructed not to do so, and he replied, �Because I�m stupid, sir.� He thereafter conceded that he purposefully and intentionally disobeyed the rules and regulations of his company. Applicant received a three day suspension for his misuse of the company credit card. Applicant admitted that he has used the company credit card when he was not on travel, even after he received his counseling and suspension. When he was asked why he continued to use the card after the punishment and counseling, he stated, �I don�t know. I�m just stupid.�

Business, Finance, and Careers > Bad With Money: I'm just stupid

EDIT:

quote:

1.g. Applicant completed a security clearance application (SCA) on July 20,2009. Question 13c asked Applicant if in the last 7 years he had been officially reprimanded, suspended or disciplined for misconduct in the workplace? Applicant answered �No.� The SOR alleges that Applicant failed to disclose that information set forth in subparagraphs 1.e. and 1.f., above. Applicant could give no explanation for his incorrect answer. He testified that he should have answered �Yes� to this question. He did not know why he answered �No.�

I can guess why

monster on a stick fucked around with this message at 03:38 on Jul 8, 2017

# ? Jul 8, 2017 03:35

Photex: Apr 6, 2009

While it's not Bad With Money, there are some really hosed up applicants in there.

http://ogc.osd.mil/doha/industrial/96-0525.h1.html

this guy gets convicted of molesting his grand daughter but it's in the countries best interest to give him clearance. :suicide:

# ? Jul 8, 2017 03:47

Haifisch: Nov 13, 2010; Objection! I object! That was... objectionable!; Taco Defender

Photex posted:

While it's not Bad With Money, there are some really hosed up applicants in there.

http://ogc.osd.mil/doha/industrial/96-0525.h1.html

this guy gets convicted of molesting his grand daughter but it's in the countries best interest to give him clearance.

Skimmed that, apparently "he insists he really didn't do it and that his actions were just poor judgment, and it's vague what really happened so nbd" was enough for them. :stare:

quote:

On May 29, 1996, Applicant was interviewed extensively by two other DIS agents pertaining to the allegations. He initially maintained his earlier consistent position and denied ever engaging in the alleged sexual activity with his granddaughter. Upon further questioning, as a bolt of lightning from the sky, in a statement prepared for his signature by DIS, at 7:50AM, Applicant suddenly altered his previously consistent position and stated:(12)

Up to this point I have flatly denied engaging in any activity with my grand daughter which could possibly be conceived by anyone that I had engaged in any inappropriate actions with her. After discussing this issue at length with the [DIS] agents I now admit that there were times that I had touched her in ways that were not appropriate. It is important to know that when I did, it was not done for any sexual gratification. It was only done to show her love and comfort and to reassure her that I loved her. I have not had any sexual drive since the death of my 18 year old son in 1983. During these times when I would have touched her, I can see how she could believe that I was touching her in a sexual manner.

. . . I am not denying that I did touch her in what she believes to be a sexual manner, I just did not do it for sexual pleasure as I have stated above.

I admit that I did exercise poor judgement [sic] when these actions occurred with her, but it is important that these actions were done as a display of love and not for any sexual pleasure. Still I should not have done this. I fully can understand how she and others might possibly look at this as molestation.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 03:57

H110Hawk: Dec 28, 2006

Having a chat with a person next to me on the train and she told me that she wanted to move down near her son's farm in Temecula wine country, buy a pizza oven, and serve pizza on weekends in front of wineries and at the weddings he already hosts at the farm. This was hinging on a company in Colorado which will train you how to make pizza so long as you buy one of their $30,000 wood fired pizza ovens, which she wants to put on a trailer and tow around town bringing pizza to the masses.

I'm no pizza oven expert, but I feel like this is a thing you could get done for $10k. (Also ignoring all of the other business proposition problems here.)

# ? Jul 8, 2017 04:14

Haifisch: Nov 13, 2010; Objection! I object! That was... objectionable!; Taco Defender

On a lighter note:

http://ogc.osd.mil/doha/industrial/01-00010.h1.html posted:

The Department of Energy facility at which Applicant worked as a contractor employee maintains nuclear weapons. The facility had received some unfavorable publicity because some other employees had been using facility computers to run a pornography business. Everyone involved had been fired (Tr at 46). It was clearly company policy, made known to all employees, that access to pornographic material was absolutely disallowed (Tr at 36, 45). There were spot checks made of facility computers to detect and deter such use (Tr at 36, 37).

When called to an official's office after his improper use of the computer had been detected, Applicant initially denied any such use, only to later admit that he had done so (Tr at 39, 144). Mr. X asked Applicant "why did you do that? You knew they were looking," and he replied "he made a mistake and he just didn't think he'd get caught" (Tr ta 42).

There had been department meetings concerning the problem concerning pornography and Applicant knew of the company policy (Tr at 32). He had been at one or more of meetings about the policy (Tr at 37, 38). After one such meeting, Applicant was heard to say he "couldn't believe anybody could go ahead and access that stuff, knowing what could happen to them" (Trat 38). After his termination, Applicant informed Mr. X, his former project lead and direct supervisor, (1) that he had been terminated because his use of computers to access pornography had been detected (Tr at 38).

Applicant's wife first learned of Applicant's work problems on October 31, 1995, the day his pornography use was detected and he was sent home. He told his wife he had been caught with "pornography on his computer" (Tr at 57). His wife was aware that Applicant had viewed pornography in the past, but believed him when he said he had stopped (Tr at 57). Parents and other family members and friends also learned from Applicant why he had been terminated (Tr at 58 - 60). Applicant did not completely stop his viewing of pornography until he "found God" (Tr at 61). Even then, Applicant has had "urges" to view pornography over the past few years and has talked about it with his wife until he had talked it out of his system (Trat 64). The two of them now attend church services frequently and Applicant is active, including developing software for the church office to use (Tr at 63).

Applicant's witness, Dr. Y, a psychiatrist, interviewed and tested Applicant for about three hours and twenty minutes on July 11 and 12, 2001 (Tr at 84 - 86). Applicant had viewed pornography since about 1989 and explained the nature and extent of his involvement with Internet pornography during working hours (Tr at 88 - 100). His misconduct occurred up to seven times a week at home and three to five times a week at work and continued for about nine months, at which time his use was detected (Tr at 117, 131). Applicant was aware of the risk of being caught, but thought he'd "be able to avoid detection, basically"(Tr at 132).

As to the reason for his termination, Applicant told Dr. Y that he had been "unofficially fired, but that the official reason was going to be that his services were no longer required. [Applicant] called the ombudsman . . . and was told this wouldn't affect him if he applied for another job, and it wouldn't be on his record" (Tr at 76). In making his evaluation and reaching his conclusions, Dr. Y relied solely on what Applicant told him, the test results, and his observations of Applicant (Tr at 112). Dr. Y's prognosis was that Applicant's ability to resolve or control his affinity for pornography was "fair to good" (Tr at 115). Dr. Y did not find any evidence of paraphilia or other disorders under the DSM IV (Tr at 79).

H110Hawk posted:

Having a chat with a person next to me on the train and she told me that she wanted to move down near her son's farm in Temecula wine country, buy a pizza oven, and serve pizza on weekends in front of wineries and at the weddings he already hosts at the farm. This was hinging on a company in Colorado which will train you how to make pizza so long as you buy one of their $30,000 wood fired pizza ovens, which she wants to put on a trailer and tow around town bringing pizza to the masses.

I'm no pizza oven expert, but I feel like this is a thing you could get done for $10k. (Also ignoring all of the other business proposition problems here.)

Pizza and wine, a classic combo. :downs:

# ? Jul 8, 2017 04:14

theHUNGERian: Feb 23, 2006

C'mon guys, this is getting really off topic, even for the BWM thread.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 04:15

22 Eargesplitten: Oct 10, 2010

Haifisch posted:

Pizza and wine, a classic combo.

It is, though? There are plenty of successful pizzerias with extensive wine lists. As long as the pizza is good, and it works better with margherita than meat lovers.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 05:08

Hoodwinker: Nov 7, 2005

22 Eargesplitten posted:

It is, though? There are plenty of successful pizzerias with extensive wine lists. As long as the pizza is good, and it works better with margherita than meat lovers.

Wine goes with anything if you drink enough of it.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 05:23

Haifisch: Nov 13, 2010; Objection! I object! That was... objectionable!; Taco Defender

I'm sure sufficiently fancy pizzas go well with wine, but I don't imagine trailer oven pizza would make the cut.

Trailer oven pizza also doesn't strike me as something people would grab on their way into/out of a winery, but I don't really do wineries so what I do I know?

# ? Jul 8, 2017 05:59

monster on a stick: Apr 29, 2013

Haifisch posted:

I'm sure sufficiently fancy pizzas go well with wine, but I don't imagine trailer oven pizza would make the cut.

Trailer oven pizza also doesn't strike me as something people would grab on their way into/out of a winery, but I don't really do wineries so what I do I know?

I know of a lot of small breweries that only serve beer on the premises, but allow you to bring in food, and there's a booming business for food trucks to park in their lot so you can grab a pizza/whatever and enjoy it with your beer. I don't know if they hang out at the local wineries too but it seems like not a bad idea.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 06:26

Krispy Wafer: Jul 26, 2002; I shouted out "Free the exposed 67"
But they stood on my hair and told me I was fat; Grimey Drawer

Yeah, it doesn't sound like a bad idea. Pizza is the fanciest of foods that don't require plates or even places to sit down.

30k for the oven + training seems like a lot, but if that's her largest expenditure then she's doing okay for a restaurant entrepreneur. I mean how much did that Doobie hotdog guy spend on just his oven hood? And hotdogs are no where near as fancy as pizza at a winery.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 13:25

BEHOLD: MY CAPE: Jan 11, 2004

Food trucks at wineries seems like a pretty good idea, to the point that surely someone has already thought of this, and either there are already tons of food trucks at wineries or if there aren't, it's because the owners don't want food trucks there or there are permitting issues that prevent it.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 13:43

Pryor on Fire: May 14, 2013; they don't know all alien abduction experiences can be explained by people thinking saving private ryan was a documentary

Those mobile pizza ovens are fine and do good business at the bars/office parks around here. Iit's 10x better than Domino's anyway. Every dive bar seems to have like three food trucks nearby nowadays, I don't know if it's just a western US thing but we are definitely in that trend.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 13:47

AreWeDrunkYet: Jul 8, 2006

Running a food truck is a difficult, unforgiving job if you actually want to make a living, but then so are all restaurants. The lower startup costs make it less BWM than opening a brick and mortar place, but odds are she will fail, and if she doesn't odds are she will work long hours for not a whole lot of money.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 13:56

Dik Hz: Feb 22, 2004; Fun with Science

Haifisch posted:

I'm sure sufficiently fancy pizzas go well with wine, but I don't imagine trailer oven pizza would make the cut.

Trailer oven pizza also doesn't strike me as something people would grab on their way into/out of a winery, but I don't really do wineries so what I do I know?

Lots of wineries have food trucks these days. A good wood fired pizza would be great if you're hanging out in the countryside with a bottle of wine. But $30k is definitely BWM.

Also, late to the party but:

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask / Tell > Business, Finance, and Careers > Bad With Money: Applicant disagrees and contends that his horse business is a viable, for-profit business.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 14:03

Krispy Wafer: Jul 26, 2002; I shouted out "Free the exposed 67"
But they stood on my hair and told me I was fat; Grimey Drawer

I think we're forgetting she's got at least one captive audience at her son's winery. So no competition as long as she doesn't suck and starts hurting his main business.

That would be a pretty forgiving environment since it probably wouldn't be an everyday grind and she'd have some flexibility in getting the routine down, experimenting with recipes.

All in all this ranks right up with that one girl who just wanted to buy her kid sister an Overwatch gaming rig on the BWM scale.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 15:18

H110Hawk: Dec 28, 2006

Krispy Kareem posted:

I think we're forgetting she's got at least one captive audience at her son's winery. So no competition as long as she doesn't suck and starts hurting his main business.

That would be a pretty forgiving environment since it probably wouldn't be an everyday grind and she'd have some flexibility in getting the routine down, experimenting with recipes.

All in all this ranks right up with that one girl who just wanted to buy her kid sister an Overwatch gaming rig on the BWM scale.

Overall I don't think it's the uncut heroin of BWM, it would be $20k BWM if she buys it from the training place but if she just installed a pizza oven and used it as catering at her son's farm (not winery) where people are already bringing in outside food truck catering, why not? Pizza is cheap to make and wood is reasonably cheap for the oven. She seems to not have thought it completely through yet, but if her kid has any sort of business acumen it shouldn't be that bad. She also is planning on doing this in "2-3 years when I retire."

# ? Jul 8, 2017 15:42

Elysium: Aug 21, 2003; It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.

All I know is there is a wood fired pizza truck that comes to my office twice a month. It's $10 for an 11" pizza (and a soda/water), which is the only size they offer, made fresh and fired in like literally 3 minutes, and it's godamn amazing pizza. They show up for 2 hours, sell ~100 pizzas, and go home. I presume they have a rotating schedule of other offices they visit the rest of the month.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 15:54

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 16, 2024 00:45

Enfys: Feb 17, 2013; The ocean is calling and I must go

H110Hawk posted:

Overall I don't think it's the uncut heroin of BWM, it would be $20k BWM if she buys it from the training place but if she just installed a pizza oven and used it as catering at her son's farm (not winery) where people are already bringing in outside food truck catering, why not? Pizza is cheap to make and wood is reasonably cheap for the oven. She seems to not have thought it completely through yet, but if her kid has any sort of business acumen it shouldn't be that bad. She also is planning on doing this in "2-3 years when I retire."

I know I want to spend my retirement working harder for less money and more hassle.

# ? Jul 8, 2017 17:00

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask/Tell > Business, Finance, and Careers > Bad With Money 2018: When I die, bury me in the blockchain.

«‹›676 »