|
Surely camera-girl's real solution is to murder her parents and pay off her loans with the inheritance?
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 00:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 10:29 |
|
|
cumshitter posted:Trusts are their own legal entities and even after the grantors die they have to be administered by a designated successor trustee. Typically it's a revocable living trust and when the grantor(s) dies you can do a step up in cost basis. That's when you reset the purchase price of stocks to the day of the grantor's death for the purpose of calculating capital gains. "that's quite an act, what do you call it?" "fiduciary duty!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 00:38
|
|
|
I had a friend in college who's parents were insanely controlling and crazy, to the point she told them to gently caress off, spent a year working as a waitress / applying for scholarships, then returned to college (she was smart as hell and lucked into something merit based or she'd have been hosed since her rear end in a top hat parents refused to admit they were no longer supporting her to the tax man) anyways, this broke her parents brains. like legit, they went insane. her parents literally stalked her. she had to get a restraining order. she couldn't register to vote or get a driver's liscence because they'd pay PIs to pull her address and show up. they'd also drive around the area and the dad would just jump out of a car and beat her if he saw her. he managed that once, got arrested, restraining order, the works. the cops seemed to not care as much as they should they showed up at one friend's house because she asked if she could ship some stuff there and they somehow traced it (!?) and were vaguely threatening sadly this was pre-ubiquitous cameraphones so the cops would just shrug and be like "welp parents want to see their daughters and there's no proof  "last i heard, they finally stopped when they tried muscling into a house party that facebook said she might be attending and the house owner marched them to the door at shotgun-point. (they called the cops to complain and got arrested yet again, the most powerful of self owns) cumshitter posted:Trusts are their own legal entities and even after the grantors die they have to be administered by a designated successor trustee. Typically it's a revocable living trust and when the grantor(s) dies you can do a step up in cost basis. That's when you reset the purchase price of stocks to the day of the grantor's death for the purpose of calculating capital gains. you can also draw a salary for administering the trust iirc, and it's a set % iirc 5% or whatever of a huge number is a decent number.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 00:40
|
|
|
LooooooL https://twitter.com/leahgraceee/status/1006642364767666176?s=19
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 00:49
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:yes her parents are absolutely using the camera to police her morality and yes she should go gently caress at his place, what the hell Nah, just cut two holes in a bedsheet and make the boyfriend put it on when he comes over. Then she should call her parents saying she thinks the condo is haunted.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 00:50
|
|
|
The best/worst part is that the cameras in that condo are internet accessible and her parents almost certainly didn’t set up even the most basic of security measures on the cameras. That’s bad, because any weirdo perv can watch. That’s good, because it means if she wants it would be trivial for her to gently caress with camera settings or delete footage.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 00:50
|
|
|
It would be lovely if this were true.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 00:53
|
|
|
or you act like an adult and tell them to gently caress off
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 00:53
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/leahgraceee/status/1006642440114229249?s=20 Lmao it all checks out
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 00:53
|
|
|
another /r/relationships success story
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 00:58
|
|
|
fruit on the bottom posted:https://twitter.com/leahgraceee/status/1006642440114229249?s=20 An investigation into a powerful self own
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 01:07
|
|
|
Should I (27F) tell my boss about my personality disorder?Personal issues (self.relationships)quote:Good afternoon world! Thanks to all who took the time to read this and offer advice. I love that people with borderline personality disorder have adopted the language of the disability rights movement. Nothing warms the cockles of my heart more than someone with a mood disorder so severe they can't smile in their customer service role because of all the rage and emotions complaining they are unfairly seen as less capable. Nothing makes me smile like someone complaining that a disorder whose symptoms cause them to try to murder people for minor sleights is described is "stigmatizing" [Borat voice] NOT!
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 01:07
|
|
|
[Ontario] Final update to Feeder Employee.quote:A lot of people asked to know how it went Monday, and I am both glad and sad to say Sarah has been let go without much ado.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 01:24
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:I've been in grad school man, yeah we love our free food but no one would steal from their friends for it, we'd just crash literally any campus event where refreshments were provided. That's above and beyond behavior, dude's just an rear end in a top hat. I'm house-sitting right now and feel kind of guilty that I ate three or four cheese sticks that were in the refrigerator, and a few Rice Krispie treats. So to make up for it, I brought over two bottles of soda that the kids like so when they get back to town we'll have a nice treat. Man, I remember babysitting when I was younger and the parents telling me the same thing, to make myself at home and eat whatever I want it kind of deal, and I always felt bad if I ate anything! Although there was the time years ago, I house for a previous professor of mine, who's married to this really nice Japanese lady, and he told me, kind of laughing, to enjoy whatever they had in the house. The only thing in their freezer or refrigerator that had any English language on it was a packet of ketchup from McDonald's. Edit: that nerd jerk dad who refuses to take any interest in his girls reminds me a lot of my dad. I was an Avid Reader when I was a kid, and still am, but when I was a kid it was all Stephen King or dragonriders of Pern, discworld, etc. The only books my dad has ever read were Louis L'Amour westerns, and he decided that the best way to bond with me was to threaten to throw away all of my fantasy garbage books as he called them, if he caught me reading them. Instead, I had to read one of his western books about the single daughter of some dude with 6 Sons. And yes, he quizzed me at the end of every chapter to make sure that I actually read it. Somehow, I did not become a fan of his western books, and went right back to the fantasy novels as soon as I was done reading that one horrible one. He made no secret about the fact that I had chosen poorly, and refused to have much to do with me throughout most of my childhood, other than to criticize me nonstop. Now me, I don't have kids of my own, but I'm the official auntie and godmother of two kids I nannied for from pretty much their entire childhoods. The girl is definitely more into Star Wars, but loved watching Transformers Beast Wars with me, but that doesn't mean that was all we ever did. A lot of the stuff she wanted to watch or read, was nowhere near anything I was interested in, but you do what you do for family because you love them, not just because it benefits your interests. The fact that dude has three daughters is really sad, but I can't imagine he'd be any better with a son. Cowslips Warren fucked around with this message at 02:15 on Jun 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 01:43
|
|
|
Does anyone remember the saga of the goon who had no job functions? Because this /r/legaladvice saga reminds me of it: I have become a forgotten employees for a few months at my job. I want to start a new job and wondering legal ramifications. xpost from r/jobs (self.legaladvice) quote:This is in Texas. UPDATE: I am a forgotten employee who has been "working" for over a year. I got found out. (self.legaladvice) quote:I post this a year ago: [SNIP]
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 01:45
|
|
|
Caganer posted:she's obviously going to dump him and date the car Just shave your head. Jesus lady
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 01:47
|
|
|
Caganer posted:Does anyone remember the saga of the goon who had no job functions? Because this /r/legaladvice saga reminds me of it: I... don't think they can do anything to him? He quit, what are they gonna do, fire him? At any rate I used to have a job where I basically did nothing (the head of engineering left like a month after I joined, and his replacement decided we weren't going to do the thing I'd been hired to do, so I spent like two years writing tools nobody used and eventually I stopped giving a poo poo) and it was in fact driving me loving insane so I don't blame him for moving on
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 01:52
|
|
|
loquacius posted:I... don't think they can do anything to him? He quit, what are they gonna do, fire him? There's a concept in employment law called "engaged to work". It's mostly used in the context of hourly employees - basically if you're at the jobsite waiting on assignments, and required to do so, you must be paid. That, in combination with the fact that many, many tech firms use being put on "the bench" as an indirect firing method, means there is not much they can do. If they were smart, they'd fire him for insubordination for not doing the phone call they requested, since he mentioned putting in 2 weeks. But we've established they are not that smart. Even the lawyers seem to agree with me. They all tell him not to talk on the phone (since you can be sued for anything regardless of merit) but that's your standard "don't talk to cops" (HR are basically cops)
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 02:04
|
|
|
loquacius posted:I... don't think they can do anything to him? He quit, what are they gonna do, fire him? Plus it’s only a matter of time before someone noticed, so smart of the guy to figure out his next gig while enjoying the ride.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 02:33
|
|
|
fruit on the bottom posted:Plus it’s only a matter of time before someone noticed, so smart of the guy to figure out his next gig while enjoying the ride. The best is it's actually illegal to retaliate against someone for quitting (violating at will employment laws). So unless they can articulate specific misconduct saying he was a "bad" employee etc will probably lead to a payday
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 02:39
|
|
|
Reminded of the tale of a goon who realised he no longer had any actual job duties.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 02:47
|
|
|
I don't understand why he put in two weeks. That was a risky move. Maybe his new contract had an exclusivity thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 02:47
|
|
|
loquacius posted:I... don't think they can do anything to him? He quit, what are they gonna do, fire him? they could try to go after him for fraud if he knowingly cashed a paycheck without having any job duties. he definitely needs to lawyer up and not talk to anyone, depending on what his pay rate was he just needs to be more trouble than he's worth to go after. this isn't a slam dunk but depending on how much money they paid him in error it might be worth it to try to claw some of it back
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 02:49
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:they could try to go after him for fraud if he knowingly cashed a paycheck without having any job duties. he definitely needs to lawyer up and not talk to anyone, depending on what his pay rate was he just needs to be more trouble than he's worth to go after. this isn't a slam dunk but depending on how much money they paid him in error it might be worth it to try to claw some of it back At the same time, he was given paychecks without being fired. Even if he had no job duties, I can see a judge simply going "That's your problem if you didn't fire him" and letting him keep all the money.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 02:53
|
|
|
He says somewhere in the comments that someone was signing off on his timecards, which makes me suspect it's a combination of them trying to trick him into admitting fraud & them going after whoever kept mindlessly going "yeah he worked that much, go pay him." The latter's 100% not his problem and the risk of the former means he shouldn't say poo poo, though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 02:57
|
|
|
Yeah like, he technically should have notified people he'd stopped getting assignments, but I don't think that's legally enforcible.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 02:58
|
|
|
It's not a crime to get paid to sit there and not actually work on anything specific given that nothing was assigned for you to do other than be present.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 03:00
|
|
|
HR is hounding him only because if the company cant claw back from this guy its gonna claw the flesh it wants right outta HRs rear end
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 03:03
|
|
|
Dude's freaking out too much, mountain out of a molehill. Every company of medium size or above has had "6 mos worth of paying someone worthless or worse than worthless" in structural inefficiency, just fix it, it's not a big deal. Make him start working or let him go as redundant or w/e.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 03:04
|
|
|
Barudak posted:HR is hounding him only because if the company cant claw back from this guy its gonna claw the flesh it wants right outta HRs rear end Yeah, I think the company has suddenly realized that they made a massive gently caress-up (they intended to fire him but completely forgot that he was shoved off in some empty building) and are trying to save face by finding a way to pin it on anyone but their own stupidity.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 03:09
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:I don't understand why he put in two weeks. That was a risky move. Maybe his new contract had an exclusivity thing. apparently it makes it easier to claim fraud if you use their resources to do another job or don't show up to jobsite
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 03:13
|
|
|
Remember that spanish guy where they tried to award him a long service award only to discover that he hadn't shown up to work for six years? The toughest punishment they could give him was a $30,000 fine, but they'd payed him $41,500 a year for six years, so he still made $219,000 profit out of it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 03:25
|
|
|
Just found out BF (20M) looks at lolicon porn and I (19F) don’t know what to doquote:So my bf and I were texting today and we were talking about sex trafficking and why I understand mom’s being scared to let younger teenage girls go to the mall alone etc. and he brought up about how when he was 14 he looked up CP because he was 14 and that’s what he was attracted to and is still kind of grossed out by ever doing
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 04:51
|
|
|
La Brea Carpet posted:Just found out BF (20M) looks at lolicon porn and I (19F) don’t know what to do What are the odds on there being a pedo lurking the reddit thread that gives the OP an answer besides "Leave him immediately and block him on everything"?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 05:07
|
|
|
very high
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 05:09
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:At the same time, he was given paychecks without being fired. Even if he had no job duties, I can see a judge simply going "That's your problem if you didn't fire him" and letting him keep all the money. it could go either way. like, the company had a duty to ensure they were getting their money's worth, but at the same time if this dude was fully aware that he was 'fired' and was being given no responsibilities yet continued to draw a check, cashing those checks could be seen as fraud he's probably safe if he shut up and routed all communication through a lawyer
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 05:17
|
|
|
I mean he had some guy actually sign off on his time cards, I can't see them getting him for fraud for cashing the checks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 05:33
|
|
|
Xun posted:I mean he had some guy actually sign off on his time cards, I can't see them getting him for fraud for cashing the checks. not unless he goes to HR and admits on a hidden camera that yes he did know he was fired and yes he did cash the checks and no he didn't tell anyone and if someone writes you a check in error and you cash it and refuse to give the money back that's fraud. now if they write you a few dozen checks in error, that's more their fault, but still
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 05:39
|
|
|
It’s not like this guy was actually fired and found some way to trick them into giving him money. They made a mistake and forgot he was part of a closed department and continued signing off on all the “Yes, this is an employee and this is his money” paperwork. He was never fired because you need to actually process an employee as “fired”. Employees don’t have to assume that they’re fired because everyone else is if they don’t get a notice. Judges tend to look poorly on companies trying to insist that all their paperwork is a mistake and shouldn’t count.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 05:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 10:29 |
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Employees don’t have to assume that they’re fired because everyone else is if they don’t get a notice. this is why they're trying to get him to come in and explain exactly how fired he knew that he was to HR "look, we'll give you your two weeks, we just need you to come in and sign some paperwork" *prints out my_crimes.docx* "its just a formality"
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 05:50
|
|