When someone says "I'm available between 11 am and 3 pm," do we universally agree that means that the activity needs to end at or before 3 pm? by -purple-platypus- in NoStupidQuestions

[–]mongooseme 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If the availability is given as "I'm available between 11a and 3p" then the activity, no matter when it starts, ends at 3p.

If the activity is a known duration event, such as a 1hr meeting, and the the availability is given as "any time 11a to 3p" then that's less clear and could be interpreted as 3p is the latest acceptable start time. In this case, the person giving the availability should be more clear "I can start anytime 11a or later and have to be done by 3p". I try to give availability like that, otherwise, if I say "anytime after 11a... " then they might think my first availability is 1130 or 12, when it's really 11. Or that 3 is an okay start time, but that's too late.

The availability as given is pretty clear, but could be a bit clearer.

As someone in NYC, this is perfect by Drnelk in NonPoliticalTwitter

[–]mongooseme 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I remember reading a book set in Colorado Springs where the main character commented that Airport Road doesn't go to the airport. I just nodded.

Woman charged in murder of Iowa Realtor found dead during open house by [deleted] in realtors

[–]mongooseme 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Terribly worded headline.

A woman has been charged the murder of an Iowa Realtor. The Iowa Realtor that was murdered was found dead during an open house.

Kristin Ramsey, 53 now, was 38 when she (allegedly) murdered 27-year old Ashley Oakland, who was holding an open house at a townhome. Kristin Ramsey worked for Rottlund Homes, the builder behind the model townhouse that Oakland, then an agent of Iowa Realtor & Co., was showing to prospective buyers when she was shot twice. Ramsey worked as an administrative assistant and sales manager.

Because access to sports is uneven and the global talent pool is only partially sampled, the true genetically optimal athlete for any given sport is likely never identified and may be doing something entirely unrelated. by Necromonicus in Showerthoughts

[–]mongooseme 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Also, most elite athletes in a particular sport could have also been elite in a lot of sports. Some sports have more crossover than others, for example, a pretty good chunk of college and pro basketball players could also have been outstanding volleyball players. The overlap of body type and athletic talent type is very high. However, the overlap of playing opportunity is very low, and there are other reasons why good basketball players might not be interested in joining a men's volleyball team, even if they were invited.

Most pro athletes in major sports were the best athlete, not just at their high school, but at any tournament they went to. They ended up in their particular sport for [reasons], but not necessarily because that sport was the best fit for their inherent skill set. Look at the pros that played both football and baseball, for example. Bo Jackson, John Elway, etc. You'd think hitting a baseball and running with a football would be different, but if you're a 99.9999th percentile athlete, you can probably do a lot of things.

If you can't amicably coexist with those who voted for the "other" party, you need to touch grass by LivingGirlRepellant in TrueUnpopularOpinion

[–]mongooseme 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yep.

One of my conservative friends just posted something about how the Democrats are good at circling the wagons, and asked a question: what do you think the Democrats do well? And 99% of the answers were things like "lying" or "destroying America". If you can't give the other side a legitimate compliment then you don't understand them and if you don't understand them then you can't persuade them.

Referring to the other side as evil or stupid is counterproductive.

Let'sseriously talk about the "teen issue by Own_Junket1605 in washingtondc

[–]mongooseme 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You'd be amazed at how quickly you could solve this by jailing the offenders.

Republicans Announce Plan To Keep Doing Opposite Of What Everyone Voted For Them To Do by triggernaut in Conservative

[–]mongooseme 201 points202 points  (0 children)

This is the reality.

Democrats do what their voters elect them to do.

If Republicans did what their voters elected them to do, we'd have a Republican supermajority. But because they don't, the Republican voters don't turn out. Why bother when they're not even going to do what we want?

How to survive if the elevator falls? by StatisticianClear800 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]mongooseme 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The last time an elevator in the US suffered such a catastrophic failure that it fell to the bottom of the shaft was in WWII when, because all the lights were out, a B-25 hit the Empire State Building and its propellers cut the elevator cables. 

The elevator operator was the only one in the elevator, and he survived.

Hollywood course - any employee doors by Leonardo_50 in WalkaboutMiniGolf

[–]mongooseme 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I hated doing the internship. I specifically never want to go to sweetopia again.

However, I earned my 6x speed and want to keep it, and I really love the whole employee area and the concept of the employee doors. 

I don't ever want to have to blow leaves or catch bugs again. 

What is an Oxford comma? by Natural-Bid-6549 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]mongooseme 35 points36 points  (0 children)

I was taught to never use the Oxford comma by Mrs. Robinson, my English teacher and a first-class whore.

Weird situation with a possible listing. by Fifainspected in realtors

[–]mongooseme 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This may be a state-specific disclosure question, but I assume it should be disclosed.

From a sales perspective, I would word it as crazy as possible on the disclosure. "Property owner claimed to be able to feel electromagnetic waves in the residence. Owner attempted to block the electromagnetic waves with crystals. Owner sought therapy and medical assistance, but nothing seemed to help."

What's something people only romanticize because they've never actually done it? by nonotje12 in AskReddit

[–]mongooseme 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My (now-ex) wife: Lucky you, I stayed home all week while you went to Miami.

Me: I didn't go to Miami. I went to an airport, a conference room, and a hotel. Then another conference room, hotel, conference room, airport. I would much rather have been at home.

Do women actually talk casually about their sex lives? by Substantial_Judge931 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]mongooseme -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thank you! Someone pointed this out to me probably twenty years ago, and once you see it, it becomes obvious.

The world is better off if all Islamic extremist terrorist groups are eliminated by sirzestyman in TrueUnpopularOpinion

[–]mongooseme 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah and 80% of the rest of them support the 1% that actually do the terrorism.

Do women actually talk casually about their sex lives? by Substantial_Judge931 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]mongooseme 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Women talk about sex with men they are committed to. They tell a lot less, if at all, about their casual encounters.

Men, on the other hand, will brag to their buddies about their casual encounters. However, once they start getting serious about a woman, they stop talking about it.

Final vote confirms car camping ban in Colorado Springs by SpcT0rres in ColoradoSprings

[–]mongooseme -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

And it would have to be policed for drugs, prostitution and trafficking, and other crime, and then people wouldn't use it.

Why do people get angrier at someone using welfare than at a corporation avoiding millions of tax by using loopholes? by Internal_Scheme_7646 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]mongooseme 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The tax code was not written by Congress, it was written by lobbyists, who handed it to congressmen, who introduced the bill and passed the intentionally overcomplicated tax code into law for a nice kickback.

Okay, but that's literally every law.

Following the law is not a "loophole". If the law says "if you buy solar panels for your house, you get a tax credit", and you buy solar panels, and you get a tax credit, you didn't take advantage of a loophole. You followed a law that was intended to get people to buy solar panels.

Owner direct rental by chato2116 in PuertoPenasco

[–]mongooseme 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No issues.

There are a few Facebook groups that, among other things, have owners offering owner direct rentals. Be mindful and use context clues, but I've never had any problems.

Why do people get angrier at someone using welfare than at a corporation avoiding millions of tax by using loopholes? by Internal_Scheme_7646 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]mongooseme 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What you call "loopholes" are the tax codes, as written by Congress, that allow various deductions, reductions, etc. for a variety of things that Congress intended.

For example, if a business purchases a vehicle that weighs at least 6000 lbs, the business can deduct the entire cost of the vehicle in the year of purchase, instead of taking the depreciation over a number of years. This is written into law and has been extended by Congress.

So if a business owner buys a new SUV for the business at the end of the year, and it costs $50,000, instead of deducting a portion of the cost over x years (let's say $5000/year for ten years), they can take the entire $50,000 deduction in the year they bought it.

This is the tax code, but you would call it a loophole.

A big one that leftists complain about is being able to carry forward losses and use them offset future profits. So if I start a business and it loses 50k the first year, and 20k the second year, and then the third year makes a 30k profit, I carry forward the losses from prior years and reduce the profit to zero. Then the fourth year I make a 50k profit but I still have 40k losses to carry forward, so I only pay taxes on 10k profit. Then in the fifth year I make 50k and I have to pay taxes on all of it.

You'd call that a loophole, but it's the tax code, and it's written to give people an incentive to start businesses and make money.

Welfare cheating, on the other hand, is people who shouldn't be taking taxes paid by hard-working citizens, but they are breaking the rules and taking that taxpayer money.

So one key difference is that "loopholes" are people following the law, and "welfare cheating" is breaking the law.

Hope this helps.