HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Got in a PISSER With The ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 12:31 PM

Got in a PISSER With The Landlord



..Went down to get a new switch plate for the light switch this morning. The landlord ask me how I was doing with my job search, I said WELL I just got approved for another 26 weeks of unemployment benefits so I can start and finish out my training program.I am working towards my Class A CDL.

She asked who is paying for the training program I said the state and WIA. She said why should the state pay for you to retrain for a new job. I said so I can get back to work and get off of UE. She said WELL!!! the state shouldnt have to pay for every unfortunate circumstance in your life. I replied and reminded her that 25% of her rents were being paid by UE benefits currently and that those benefits are saving her property management company thousands in legal cost not having to evict people and adding to the bottom line.

I closed by saying if the state shouldn't be paying for this then how about we make corporations pay, they are the ones laying people off not the state. Perhaps they took a risk in hiring me so why shouldn't the risk include retraining me if they fall on hard times, that is not my fault.

Her eyes just rolled to the back of her head.

45 replies, 3917 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 45 replies Author Time Post
Reply Got in a PISSER With The Landlord (Original post)
rsmith6621 Mar 2013 OP
randome Mar 2013 #1
RVN VET Mar 2013 #29
ReRe Mar 2013 #2
Lurker Deluxe Mar 2013 #3
truebluegreen Mar 2013 #7
sdfernando Mar 2013 #41
truebluegreen Mar 2013 #42
Rider3 Mar 2013 #4
CaliforniaPeggy Mar 2013 #5
leftyohiolib Mar 2013 #6
LeftofObama Mar 2013 #19
raccoon Mar 2013 #8
randome Mar 2013 #12
Nye Bevan Mar 2013 #14
bettyellen Mar 2013 #17
antigone382 Mar 2013 #23
A Simple Game Mar 2013 #20
Bandit Mar 2013 #9
RILib Mar 2013 #24
demosocialist Mar 2013 #10
Sherman A1 Mar 2013 #11
MindPilot Mar 2013 #13
Douglas Carpenter Mar 2013 #15
rsmith6621 Mar 2013 #16
Kalidurga Mar 2013 #18
Spitfire of ATJ Mar 2013 #21
Blue_In_AK Mar 2013 #22
Cleita Mar 2013 #25
Locrian Mar 2013 #26
Coolest Ranger Mar 2013 #27
southernyankeebelle Mar 2013 #28
Ian David Mar 2013 #30
Nuclear Unicorn Mar 2013 #31
rsmith6621 Mar 2013 #32
Nuclear Unicorn Mar 2013 #34
rsmith6621 Mar 2013 #36
Nuclear Unicorn Mar 2013 #37
HiPointDem Mar 2013 #39
newthinking Mar 2013 #43
lastlib Mar 2013 #33
Nuclear Unicorn Mar 2013 #35
lastlib Mar 2013 #38
HiPointDem Mar 2013 #40
newthinking Mar 2013 #44
treestar Mar 2013 #45

Response to rsmith6621 (Original post)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 12:33 PM

1. You can't convince someone who is dead set on not listening to opinions outside her head.

But you made good points.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 02:58 PM

29. Brain dead, not dead set

The landlady is crude, rude, insensitive, and, well, a little on the stupid side of the intelligence matrix.

She should care about her rents. Are they being paid or are the not. If paid, she has no further concerns. If not, well, then, she's got a problem. Other than that, if she wants to comment on her tenants lives it should be to compliment or support them. To criticize and insult someone the way she did demonstrates a cold heart in a soulless body.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Original post)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 12:34 PM

2. Priceless!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Original post)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 12:37 PM

3. Usually

That is something that the righties and I will agree about. Training to put people to work so they can be productive and pay taxes is always a good investment in society.

Not really an effective way to argue against the government helping people become qualified for a job so they can have a better life. The price of education in the USofA is completely out of hand, and I do not think the Gov should pay for it when it comes to 100K for a degree, but some price control in that area would be a positive.

Hope it works out well for you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lurker Deluxe (Reply #3)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 12:53 PM

7. Disagree, in part.

The cost of education is out of hand and the government should step in to A) control those costs OR B) make sure EVERYONE who is qualified can receive higher education, without being burdened with tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt when they graduate.

That's what a civilized nation would do, especially one that wants to be on top in innovation and equality and progress.

My opinion. Peace.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truebluegreen (Reply #7)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 04:00 PM

41. I've told people for years that it is in the best interest

of the United States to have a well educated population, and to that end I believe in free public education all the way up through an Associate Degree or equivalent. How to pay for that would be another matter but I would rather see tax dollars spent on that then on grounded F-35 planes or another warship we don't need. Some people look at me like I have the plague or something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sdfernando (Reply #41)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 05:29 PM

42. You are absolutely right!

A funny thing is, we were headed that way. There's an old saying, "as goes California, so goes the nation." And back in the 60s, California had probably the finest system of higher education in the world. Supported by tax dollars, any resident of the state who qualified could attend and pay zero for tuition. This was when living costs were such that a student could support him/herself waiting tables, so really, anyone could go. And it worked. I have no doubt that California's prosperity of that era was fueled by this pool of highly-educated people, from all walks of life. IMHO.

Then Saint Ronnie of the Raygun became governor. Ronnie didn't want to pay for the education of "people who disagreed with him", so he cut the funding. And now we have what we have ("as goes California...).

Now, as you say, we can't afford butter 'cause we hafta buy all these guns.

It would be nice to have a national conversation on those terms again, wouldn't it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Original post)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 12:37 PM

4. Very well done!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Original post)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 12:40 PM

5. You rock, my dear rsmith6621!

That's telling her.

Good luck with getting your Class A CDL.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Original post)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 12:44 PM

6. "She asked who is paying for the training program" that would be where our discussion ended

but not before telling them that's none of your damn business then slamming the door in their face

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftyohiolib (Reply #6)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 02:20 PM

19. Totally agree!

If I wanted the landlady's opinion I would have asked for it. These types always seem to gang up on the less fortunate. It seems like, if for some reason you're down on your luck, it's a sign of weakness and you should be ridiculed for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Original post)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 01:04 PM

8. Landlady. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to raccoon (Reply #8)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 01:21 PM

12. Eh. 'Actor' usually means both genders now. 'Policeman' the same.

We should drop gender-based terms entirely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #12)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 01:29 PM

14. Wait.... so no more "Best Actress" Oscar?

And should I be saying "waitron"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #14)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 01:44 PM

17. server is the generally accepted term these days. and most actors these days do indeed call

themselves actors whether they are male or female.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #14)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 02:45 PM

23. "actress" was invented in Hollywood.

In the larger world of theatre, "actor" for both men and women is the standard, and has been since the beginning. I say this as someone who spent a long time in the theatre world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #12)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 02:27 PM

20. So are you saying landlady is a derogatory term?

Who knew?

Is it still safe to clear my throat, or will that offend someone?

Perhaps we need a derogatory term for people that are offended when no offense is meant.

I'm surprised you didn't take exception to raccoon's name.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Original post)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 01:06 PM

9. Why should some people get Free education and others HUGE student Loans?

I can understand if the Government provides no interest loans for training/education, but I sort of agree with your landlord in that I don't understand why yours should be free and others not so much....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bandit (Reply #9)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 02:46 PM

24. my state used to give college scholarships to residents by merit

 

I don't know if they do that any more.

Edited: yes they do, although there is now a financial need factor as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Original post)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 01:13 PM

10. K&R nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to demosocialist (Reply #10)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 01:20 PM

11. Well Done!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Original post)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 01:27 PM

13. Wait, your landlady doesn't get it?

Your landlady doesn't get that her income is (at least in part) dependent on your UI benefits? It reminds of my DoD contractor co-workers who complain about government spending.

Maybe she would be willing to pick up where the state left off and pay for your retaining?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Original post)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 01:38 PM

15. just last week sitting in a local bar where a fair number of business sorts drink after work

I heard two right-wing Tea Party Republicans carry on with their nonsense about the socialist government and the socialist Democratic Party the socialist President Obama. The both were going on about how government needs to get out out the way so free enterprise can work. Well, that would be bad enough. But earlier in the conversation one of them was talking about their plans to build an extended care facility for elderly and disabled that would rely almost entirely on Medicare and Medicaid funding as well as additional government support much of it no doubt coming as a results of the dreaded "Obamacare". The other right-wing blowhard was the second in command of a federally funded program that tries to promote business development and tourism for the islands where I live. They don't seem to accomplish anything except keeping themselves in a luxurious lifestyle. I guess market discipline and tough love are for lesser life forms then themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douglas Carpenter (Reply #15)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 01:43 PM

16. Hey Douglas



...Where they said they wished government would get out of their way, that is where I would have said OK lets have them roll up the roads that corporations use to make profit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Original post)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 02:04 PM

18. When you do get that better job...

I would move. Your land lady is a stupid busy body. I can take stupid and I can take a busy body, but both in the same person is very difficult indeed. No doubt she is horrid in other ways.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Original post)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 02:32 PM

21. Tell her you went to the Church and the pastor was out buying a new car.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Original post)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 02:41 PM

22. I'm a landperson

and I don't care where the rent money comes from, just so long as I have it at the first of the month.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Original post)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 02:48 PM

25. You baffled her with reason and facts.

Good for you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Original post)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 02:51 PM

26. she's a fool.

A simpleton who thinks that people are entirely self-sufficient and dependent on NOTHING from civilization and/or cooperation.

She would be the first one to perish if there was ever anything like a 'survival of the fittest' max max scenario... as others pointed out, she'd be flushed down the drain if she lost her income from 'gov socialism'.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Original post)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 02:53 PM

27. I never get tired of threads like this

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Original post)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 02:54 PM

28. In her mind she is thinking (can you smell the brain thinking) you are part of the 47% that

 

are takers. LOL You should remind her that when you were working you helped pay for people's unemployement for your taxes. You should ask her what is better. Helping people get retrained for a new job or robb banks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Original post)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 02:58 PM

30. If all of her tenants lost their jobs and couldn't pay her...

... she'd be pretty quick to declare bankruptcy and ask for the government's help for protection from her creditors.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Original post)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 03:01 PM

31. "how about we make corporations pay, they are the ones laying people off"

Ummm...not to draw too fine a point but, maybe if they were making sufficient revenue they wouldn't be laying off employees. Employment is a reaction to consumer demand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #31)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 03:18 PM

32. Just Maybe



...employers should pay in to a state fund to assist their laid off employees with worker retraining especially when that industry is rated by the Department of Labor as an industry that is in declined.

I spoke with a Worksource councilor last week who said that the first grade class that started last fall will need to retrain for a new career 7 times, not change jobs 7 time but retrain. Essentially people will go to their graves with student loan debt following them. He closed the discussion up by saying the new corporate philosophy is not to engage in long term relationships.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Reply #32)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 03:21 PM

34. They already pay UE and WC insurance

It's not their fault consumers stopped consuming. They'd rather have the business -- it's how they make that filthy, filthy lucre they love so much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #34)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 03:28 PM

36. And maybe it is....



...maybe the lack of creative innovation or making the product out of reach is in part of the issue.

Frankly I think we should be able to buy worker training insurance to pay for time like these with out having to go into a lifetime of debt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Reply #36)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 03:30 PM

37. What greedy, profit-hungry business puts products "out of reach"? How does that even make sense?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #34)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 03:50 PM

39. it's not their fault if consumers stop consuming? of course it is, if they're the ones cutting wages

 

& jobs and lobbying for safety net benefit cuts.

whose fault do *you* think it is?

you think consumers just decided en masse to 'stop consuming'?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #34)

Thu Mar 7, 2013, 03:45 AM

43. Ha, you bought the myth. Large corporations are job *consolidators*

on the whole, not job creators.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #31)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 03:18 PM

33. maybe they could use some of those record profits they've been raking in?

Just a thought, maybe not necessarily good......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lastlib (Reply #33)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 03:22 PM

35. Those aren't profits. They're squirreling-away cash reserves.

They only make profits if business is good -- and business isn't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #35)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 03:41 PM

38. okaaa-a-a-a-ayyyyyyy..................

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #35)

Wed Mar 6, 2013, 03:52 PM

40. corporate profits are at all-time highs. so business is certainly good for someone.

 

The move provides hope that the lost decade for stocks is finally over. Bulls claim the recovery is slowly improving, as corporate profits also reach new highs. The New York Times recently reported that corporate profits accounted for 14.2 percent of national income in the third-quarter of 2012, the largest share in over 60 years.

http://wallstcheatsheet.com/stocks/dow-all-time-high-how-is-this-time-different.html/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #40)

Thu Mar 7, 2013, 04:12 AM

44. People don't get that Mega corps are leeches thriving by using their

power and unlimited access to government and market loans and resources to buy out the smaller businesses that are actually the real creative engines.

They often strip out companies tossing out productive, yet lower profit components, and then using our hard won productivity technologies and innovations to *reduce* labor. That is where many of them are making their money. Through financial leverage, control of government resources, finding competitive markets and turning them into semi-monopolies, automating and eliminating labor.

Mega corporations only expand to increase their power and global footprint. Often times they *reduce* choices in the marketplace, because it is actually more profitable for them.

Just travel outside to a part of the world that they are not fully in control, like Eastern Europe. Not so many wal-,marts, but the selection of products dwarfs what we have in our brick and morter mega corps shelves.

I have no doubt that if they had to actually compete on a level playing field based on innovation and not financial thuggary, market corruption, and mega propaganda they could not.

STOP saying they "create jobs"! They don't! (others, not you HitPoint)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rsmith6621 (Original post)

Thu Mar 7, 2013, 04:15 AM

45. She could find no one to rent the places

without it - does she suppose that there is an endless supply of tenants able to pay rent?

She probably fancies herself one of the 1% because she owns a building.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread