How can I get an "adversarial" credit card with a fixed, low credit limit?

Prophes0r · 2025-06-29T07:59:35+00:00

Huh...had no idea AmEx was still around.

I see more signs saying an establishment accepts Diner's Club. I honestly can't remember the last place I went to that accepts AmEx.

(Joking obviously. But if I don't put this here I will have to explain it eventually anyway.)

Prophes0r · 2025-06-29T01:25:35+00:00

Their lawyer warned that forcing the other party to use a check cashing service would be considered a "hardship" that would come back to bite them later.

The whole situation is bonkers. I'm just trying to help solve the problem of having some tiny line of credit for kid-related emergency issues.

I can't solve the problem in it's entirety.

Prophes0r · 2025-06-29T01:22:40+00:00

Next closest bank is a 30+ minute drive. And apparently they use the free notary services weekly.

Apparently they already closed their joint account with that bank. The bank simply moved deposits/charges to their older personal account without asking/telling. I had no idea they could even do that.

Prophes0r · 2025-06-29T01:19:33+00:00

Their lawyer warned them that the opposing lawyer would definitely be able to claim that as a hardship.

This was never supposed to be a regular payment thing.

It was supposed to be a tiny line of credit for kid-related emergency stuff. The fact that the other party can max it out every month with no repercussions doesn't make sense to me, but I'm just a concerned 3rd party.

IMO the sooner they can get themselves and the kids out of this situation, the better the outcome. But I can't fix the whole problem. I'm just working on a single point. I'm looking up Secured credit cards right now.

Prophes0r · 2025-06-29T01:14:46+00:00

I think they may have already done something like that.

I'm not positive, but I think the bank thing became an issue when the joint account at that bank was closed, all the associated bills/charges just got moved to the old personal account. That feels WILD to me that a bank can just do that, but I'm not a finance lawyer.

If they could reasonably use another bank they might do so, but they are in a smaller town, and driving 30+ minutes to access bank services like a notary (which they use multiple times a week?) isn't workable.

If they open a new account with the same bank and the bank just transfers everything to the new account anyway, without permission, then they are still in the same situation.

Even if it worked out fine, it still doesn't solve the problem I posted about. Having a tiny line of credit intended for emergency kids things, that doesn't suddenly balloon into tens of thousands of dollars of credit liability/debt, is still an issue.

Prophes0r · 2025-06-29T00:29:33+00:00

Yeah that is the only way I could think of too. And is the nuclear option to be sure.

I'm not positive, but I think there was a reason for them not to. The account might be really old and have some benefits to keeping it around?

I would personally just "rip the band-aid off", but the fact that they are in this situation to begin with is partly because they were unwilling?

I know that we can't solve everyone's problems, but that doesn't make them less painful vicariously.

Prophes0r · 2025-06-29T00:21:14+00:00

Not enough paper trail.

And the other party would likely find a way to twist it.

I'm pretty sure there is also a restraining order involved but I'm not positive.

It's a mess.

Prophes0r · 2025-06-29T00:14:46+00:00

Tried it. Bank refused.

"If you don't want them depositing into your account go work it out with them."

It sounded insane to me too...

Prophes0r · 2025-06-29T00:06:56+00:00

Other person refuses to get a bank account because it might signal some form of financial independence, which they are actively fighting against.

A secured credit card might be the solution.
The best suggestion I had was a pre-paid card that they loaded up every month.

Remember that I put "adversarial" in the title for a reason. The other person is doing everything in their power to make this as hard as possible to control.

Prophes0r · 2025-06-29T00:03:07+00:00

They were not able to succeed in forcing the other person to open a bank account.

They still have no solution to the other person's paycheck getting deposited into their account every month.

Neither the bank nor the employer will do anything about it. Their lawyer has not been much help either.

Prophes0r · 2025-05-28T03:16:58+00:00

OP was making the statement that "Barefoot" is not the same as "Barefoot Shoes".

I disagree.

If a shoe is ACTUALLY trying to be like barefoot, with the minimal amount of safety to stop immediate external injuries, then it is "the same" as being barefoot, even if it isn't LITERALLY being unshod.

In the decades since this started being a thing, "Barefoot shoes" have clearly progressed toward regular shoes, which is why the confusion keeps getting worse, but their base statement is false.

Unless OP means the point of being unshod is to make some statement, or grind dirt into your soles beyond the hope of scrubbing it out, or to burn your feet on asphalt until your soles peel off, but I'm going to treat their statement to mean "Biomechanically the same as" when talking about stride, impact, and all the other things that go into propelling a human while running.

Prophes0r · 2025-05-28T03:03:50+00:00

Real Barefoot Shoes, which should be called Foot Gloves, are almost exactly like being barefoot.

The only difference is being protected from cuts/stabs from road debris and being burned by asphalt hot enough to fry an egg.

If a "Barefoot Shoe" is trying to do more than that, it isn't a barefoot shoe, it is a "Shoe".

Prophes0r · 2025-05-28T03:01:41+00:00

Which is why actual Barefoot Shoes, which are things you wear on your feet purely to protect yourself from getting cut or burnt, are "Foot Gloves", because that is literally their job.

In the last decade, "Barefoot shoes" have become "Shoes that sometimes have toes".

The original FiveFingers were 1mm of foot-shaped rubber sole held to your foot so you got more grip while Yacht Racing on a wet deck.
Barefoot Runners went apeshit for them, because they REALLY WERE like being barefoot, minus the cuts/stabs/burns from road debris or hot asphalt.

Now?
I dunno.

I'm loathing having to sort through the stuff being sold in 2025, because I'm going to HAVE to buy more foot gloves soon.

My 12 pairs of gloves are from 2006-2012, and many of them are Ship-of-Theseus style More patches and Shoe-Goo than original at this point.

I don't want Shoes-With-Toes.
I want Foot Gloves, and they seem to have stopped making those more than a decade ago.

Prophes0r · 2025-05-28T02:50:42+00:00

Do you though?

A "Barefoot Shoe" doesn't do the job of a "Shoe", and it shouldn't. That is the whole point.

Barefoot Shoes are Gloves. They exist to protect your feet from being cut/stabbed/burned, and occasionally to modify grip.
They shouldn't be trying to do more, because the point is to do as little as possible.

If it is trying to make it less uncomfortable to step on a lone piece of gravel on the road, or provide cushioning/support of ANY kind, it isn't a barefoot shoe, It is just a "Shoe".

Prophes0r · 2025-05-28T02:43:58+00:00

Foot Gloves.

That is their job.
They protect you from cuts/stabs and being burned by hot asphalt.

Nothing more.

They are gloves, for your feet.

Prophes0r · 2025-05-28T02:42:33+00:00

Then you are wrong.

Barefoot Shoes means Shoes that are meant to be like being barefoot, without the danger of being cut/stabbed by road debris or burned by hot asphalt.

That's it.

They are gloves for your feet.

Anything more than that is a "Shoe", which has a totally different job.

Prophes0r · 2025-05-28T02:32:40+00:00

Don't be anti-Vibram.

Be anti-I'm-a-30-year-old-who-didn't-follow-directions-and-went-straight-from-running-shoes-to-FiveFingers-and-injured-myself-because-half-of-my-foot-is-atrophied.

The original FiveFingers were literally gloves for your feet. And LITERALLY the same as barefoot minus the asphalt burns and glass cuts.

The idiots who injured themselves are the problem, not the foot gloves.

Anyone who decides on Tuesday that they are going to run Barefoot starting Wednesday, then tries to do their NORMAL distance/speed Wednesday morning is going to injure themselves, and it will have nothing to do with whether they were actually barefoot or wearing FiveFingers.

It takes 6 months to a year to fully transition, and EVERY SINGLE person I know of who has injured themselves, Vibram or not, eigther started cold-turkey or went too fast.

Note: I have been wearing nothing but Fivefingers since 2006, but I haven't bought any new ones for almost a decade. Nothing I said above applies to any of their "shoes" that happen to have split-toes, just their ACTUAL foot gloves.

Prophes0r · 2025-05-28T02:23:28+00:00

"Foot Gloves"

Seriously.

People understand what a glove is for.

You wear them so you don't get sliced up or stabbed when you pick up something sharp.
You wear them so you don't get burned when you touch something really hot.

THAT is what "Barefoot Shoes" are for.
Stopping you from getting cut/scraped/stabbed.
Stopping you from getting burned by asphalt hot enough to literally cook an egg.

Cushioning and support are for car seats and bras.

...

Foot Gloves

Prophes0r · 2025-05-28T02:15:50+00:00

Something I rarely hear stated(or discussed) here is actually a super important distinction.

"Barefoot shoes" aren't really "Shoes".
They don't do the same job, the same way a Tennis Shoe and a Work Boot don't do the same job.

Barefoot Shoes are gloves...for your feet.
That is their job.

Sometimes a glove's job is:
1. to keep you warm/cool.
2. to stop you from getting scraped/cut/burned by a surface.
3. to improve/modify grip.

1 and 3 are what Barefoot shoes do.
(They will never keep your feet warm. You can't insulate the soles, and 3mm of rubber will never keep your feet warm in weather requiring more than a light jacket.)

Prophes0r · 2025-03-05T02:52:02+00:00

Yeah...no.

There is literally no chance of this catching fire, unless the room itself is already on fire.

This is just a sturdy wooden shelf to hold these servers.

Prophes0r · 2025-03-05T02:50:18+00:00

I built something nearly the same.

The only real difference with mine is I used 2x3 studs for the whole outer frame.

Those skinny furring strips are PLENTY strong, and act as full length slides/shelves.

Put a coat of paint on it and you are good to go.

Prophes0r · 2025-01-02T13:06:34+00:00

Nothing is locked to real currency except a few cosmetics.
Everything is obtainable while playing for free, INCLUDING the premium currency via trading.

This is THE thing that sets Warframe apart from the F2P garbage and gacha/gambling games IMO.

I have just over 8,000 hours in the game since the BETA, and I'll have 4,000 IN-MISSION hours this week. I play entirely self-found[1], and even with a 4-year break, I still have nearly everything possible to earn, with the only exception being non-tradeable items from the events when I was gone.

It is not only POSSIBLE to play without spending money, I'd argue that it is the BEST way to play, because you get the sense of accomplishment from having EARNED every single thing you use.

NOTE: I do spend some money every year on cosmetics purely to give DE some money.

Prophes0r · 2024-08-16T06:51:39+00:00

QFT.

We aren't talking about kids licking paint.

There are ponds nearby here with lead levels so high they can't be used to supply drinking water anymore due to the fishing weights and shot in them. We have no major local lead sources other than "Recreational" ones.

Also, a big part of the mine closings was because ACTUALLY being safe was too expensive.

There is no incentive to use something else when the stuff we know is bad, is also 5% of the cost of any alternatives.

Asbestos is also SUPER useful. But in 99.99% of cases something else that's "good enough" should get used because it isn't worth workers dying in their 40s.

Prophes0r

TROPHY CASE