mgridle
-
Posts
120 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by mgridle
-
-
1 minute ago, Ironhold said:
Hard to afford the associated costs if you're broke.
Only reason why I didn't head for greener pastures (re: North Dakota) once the recession hit. My car's in such rough shape that it couldn't make the trip, and I'd have had to choose between getting a vehicle that could make the trip and having money to settle once I get there.
You're not the first person we've had this argument with.
You are absolutely right it is hard to move it you are broke. I don't begrudge or fault you for that. However, now you know better (i.e. you have life experience about it) and as such you should have a plan of escape if need be so you can get to greener pastures.
That's called preparation.
-
9 minutes ago, Ironhold said:
I have an MBA. I was training for a career in insurance when the recession hit. When that happened, several insurance companies that were looking to expand to my area cancelled their plans, while those that were in the area froze hiring... meaning *two* job offers that were dependent upon my finishing my undergrad work were rescinded.
Hence my having to start at a newspaper: there were jobs, but none in the industry I trained for.
That sucks, no bones about it. But the recession has been over for quite some time (at least 4-5 years). If you are still complaining about the last one, then you aren't preparing yourself for the next one . . .my condolences.
-
5 minutes ago, Ironhold said:
Again, you're just looking at numbers, not the direct landscape.
Well you are giving me an anecdote. Anecdote do not facts make. Of course, I'm looking at the numbers-b/c that is what directly reflects the conglomeration of the landscape. There are always going to be pockets that are better and pockets that are worse. As a whole, it is in no way shape or form "rough" out there.
If you are a competent, responsible, hard-working individual-you will find a job, period. If you are not competent, responsible, and hard-working-you may find a job . . .depending on how desperate the company is for a warm body. When it gets rough, the competent, hard-working responsible people will have a hard time finding a job. But that's not today.
-
4 minutes ago, pam said:
If you live in an area like I do where the cost of living has risen dramatically but wages haven't kept up with that raise, it's tough.
Then you do what responsible self-confident people do. You move.
Anything else is just an excuse. If the economy was bad (and I'm sure it will be soon), I'd somewhat agree with you. But the economy is not bad at all.
-
16 minutes ago, Ironhold said:
It may be 4.1% nationally, but various areas still have their own regional quirks when it comes to employment and so those factors should be considered.
Totally agree, except the highest unemployment rate is in Alaska @ 7.3 and in the continental it's at 5.6 . . .that's hardly recession levels. If this is rough, heaven help us b/c their will be a lot of flaying drowning people when a recession does it. We have it so good economically we don't know what rough is.
-
22 minutes ago, Ironhold said:
Your response was so acidic as to effectively take away his humanity.
You presumed the worst of him and let him have it.
It may be 4.1% nationally, but various areas still have their own regional quirks when it comes to employment and so those factors should be considered.
In my area, for example, I could make double or even triple my newspaper wages if I took up as a security guard at one of the local prisons. Why haven't I? I blew my knee in an accident a few years ago; I'd never pass the physical. Office jobs are tight around here unless I want to spend all day in a call center, and so the newspaper it is.
? I didn't presume the worst of him. I don't think he is a horrible human being, no where did I say that. He has a problem, low self-confidence and no girlfriend. I explain how that became a problem and why it will continue to be a problem unless he fixes it (in fact he already knew it was a problem). He said "I fear", no dude you don't fear, you know. It's not fear it is an inability to admit reality. I told him what he needs to do to fix it.
And yes my analysis of his family is correct; he has been taken care of his entire life (by his parents), never forced to fend for himself and then he wonders why no girl will want to marry him. Pretty simple stuff here, you don't become an outdoor cat by staying in your nice safe little indoor cat box.
Necessity is the mother of invention. When you are forced to live on your own, you learn you either sink or swim. Some people sink, but most people if actually forced would figure out how to swim. You don't learn how to be a responsible, hard-working adult by living in your parents house-rent free, utility free claiming "it's for a good cause, I'm saving up for marriage and house"? Really, you haven't paid for college by yourself, you haven't paid for mission by yourself, you don't pay rent by yourself, you don't live on your own? You haven't built up the self-resistance to setbacks and self-confidence to handle yourself on your own. And yet you are going to magically be able to have the self-confidence to buy a house and get married b/c you've saved and keep them!
Having a house is a big responsibility, having a marriage is a big responsibility; being able to "afford" a house or "afford" getting married is really immaterial. Having money for those things comes in a far second to what is required to actually hold them-which is being responsible. A house requires maintenance, fix the gutters, mow the lawn, pay the bills, buy the fridge, etc, etc, etc. So does a marriage.
Sure you can buy a house with money, but if you haven't figured out how to be responsible and live on your own you will lose it pretty fast, same thing with a marriage.
I don't think anyone (this gentleman or his parents) are evil, bad, horrible people. Misguided yes, but bad not in the least bit. I'm sure they are perfectly good people who are trying to do their best-which unfortunately has the opposite effect.
-
1 hour ago, darthzilla99 said:
Everyone thanks for the advice. For those of you who decided to character assassinate my parents, you are more wrong about them than Napoléon Bonaparte was when he invaded Russia during winter. You can criticize me all you want and it's just water off a duck's back to me, but leave my family alone. They put me through college and my mission because they love me and so I do not have to go through unnecessary debt.
Dude, I'm not "character assassinating" your parents. And please don't be passive aggressive-if you have a problem with something I said, just please directly address me about it, don't passively aggresively say "those who decide to character assassinate". And no, it's not water off a duck's back, if it was your wouldn't passive aggressively dig me on it.
You may not like the truth, but it is the truth and I was right. They paid for your college and your mission-you didn't earn it yourself. I understand that this is the way things are done these days. I understand that parents these days do everything for their child so they don't have debt, can live a better life, etc. etc. etc. The problem is that is doesn't work and it actually causes more problems than it solves. Yes your parents are and have enabled you.
If you paid for college and your mission on your own, you wouldn't be living at home and you wouldn't be complaining about low self-confidence and you wouldn't be complaining about no girls.
You asked and the main problem is about low self-confidence. I'm telling you why you have low self-confidence. Your parents have enabled you your entire life by doing things for you that you are perfectly capable of doing for yourself and thus b/c you are unsure of your own abilities (b/c others have done it for you), you have low self-confidence.
This is really simple and really easy. Again I'm not character assassinating your parents, I'm telling you what they have done (I'm not attributing malice to what they have done). That's not character assassination. I don't think they are bad or evil people, I think they were duped by modern society and consequently screwed up your upbringing, but that's not malice.
It's very simple, it goes like this (and this is a true story). My 5-year old son constantly told me "I can't tie my own shoes", "I can't, I can't". For the longest time, we tied his shoes for him. I still got "I can't do it". Eventually, it got to the point, that I knew he could do it, I had confidence in him that he could do it, but he didn't have confidence he could do it. So one day, I just told him no, I'm not doing it for you-I know you can learn how to do it yourself, you do it. And guess what . . .he did! What would have happened had I continued to tie his shoe-I would have demonstrated by action that I didn't have confidence that he could do it himself.
Oddly enough man, (and I'll blow your mind), I have more confidence in you than your parents have in you. Why? B/c I know you can survive on your own. I know you can get a job, regardless of distances, etc, (all that is just excuses), and I know you can live on your own without your parents help.
No you may not like my response, you don't have to, you can throw it in the trash-it's your life not mine. But if you want to fix your life, you will recognize this problem and if you do choose to fix your life you will look back in x # of years and say . . .hmm you know what mgridle was actually right all along.
- BeccaKirstyn and Sunday21
-
2
-
7 minutes ago, pam said:
I'm not even sure that is really as much of an issue that it might have been years ago. Times are tougher these days and more and more are choosing to live at home. I have absolutely no problem with one of my kids moving back home. I know how rough it can be out there.
No it's not "rough" out there. Unemployment rate is 4.1% . . .how is that rough? If you want a job, you can get a job. Economically speaking it is in no way, shape or form rough. It's actually pretty dang good. If this is rough . . .whoa buddy wait till the next recession-that will be rough.
Sure it might be expensive. . . .but it's always been expensive. You share an apartment . . .it's called growing up.
-
5 minutes ago, Ironhold said:
You didn't listen to a word, did you?
?? What the heck are you talking about.
-
1 hour ago, Lee said:
I mean my mother raised me, I was only cared for during the day by my grandmother whilst my mother was at work. I think you can work and raise children at the same time.
3 hours ago, Lee said:My wife wants to go to work as soon as possible, because she has been offered a wonderful job. I had a great mother but she never stayed home with me, my grandmother cared for me when I was a child.
It is possible but not advisable. Why in the world does your wife want to work? Which of these:
For prestige and praise of the world?
For money?
To demonstrate, she can do anything a man can?
Because she has been brainwashed?
Because you've been brainwashed?
There is absolutely nothing, nothing more critical in the entire world than raising the next generation and doing it right?
Children absolutely 100% need a mother at home. The scriptures tell us this, prophets tell us this, life experience (from those who are older) tell you this? Why go against everything that has been taught?
I think you mentioned you are highly educated. Why are you treating your child like a dog. Now don't get all bent out of shape. What do you do with a dog? You buy it and then when you are away from the house you pay someone else to take care of your dog b/c you aren't there. Seriously why have a child, if all you do is put it in day-care. B/c you want to take it out and play with it every now and then? Think how cute it is, how look it's so cute, look I can play with it . . .but nope we are too focused on ourselves, our work, our career that we are going to put the kid in day-care for 50+ hours a week.
Human beings aren't dogs and they need human bonding. They need parental biological bonding, they need bonding with their mother. Study after study after study demonstrates the benefits of infants bonding with mothers, it demonstrates that single motherhood (or single parenthood for that matter) is an total failure. They have lower grades, less socially stable, more likely to go to jail, etc. etc. etc.
Yet single-motherhood, and it's twin barbaric act of putting a small child in day-care away from it's parents is held up like some paragon of virtue. It's horrible. Putting your child in day-care when you have the ability to care for it, IMO it is a form of child abuse. You are depriving the child from something it desperately needs-stable, constant contact with individuals who desperately care about it, especially when it is an infant. If day-care workers desperately cared about your child . . . you wouldn't have to pay them to take care of it.
Seriously dude, it's your life, but I can tell you now, you and/or your wife will look back on it with regret if you decide to put your child in day-care and you had the means to not do so.
Day-care is a necessary evil, for some people who have had life just smack them upside the head-death of a spouse, divorce, major job losses, etc. But it is not something that one should make a choice to do.
I sware feminism is a cancer and it will rot out everything.
-
1 hour ago, anatess2 said:
Ohhh... this is what gets you in trouble. Making judgments without knowing facts. I am married to an American for 20 years now. Now tell me again how I don't know or even understand American culture. I live in one!
But yeah, that... what, chip on your shoulder? unmoving set narrative?... is bogging you down.
You may think you do; but you don't. So what that you are married to an American. That is irrelevant. You weren't raised American; you still have cultural heritage, ties, thoughts, ideas, etc. to the country you were born in. That's fine, there is nothing wrong with that.
Who is the one with a chip? Who is the one with the unmoving narrative? I have history, stories, ancestry that has been passed down from generations to me. I have ancestors in my namesake that go to the Revolutionary War, ancestors that fought on both sides of the Civil War. I have journal records about what they did, the struggles they fought and how they made this place great.
And yet you, you who are an immigrant, who weren't even born in this country presume to know more about my heritage, my ancestry, what made my country great, than I do?
So please tell me again who exactly is making judgment without facts? This crap that is in the US for the last 20 years, isn't American heritage or culture, it's not what made this country great, no way, no how. It may be current American culture-but it is just fumes. It is just the fumes of the last remaining sparks that actually made America great; and when it finally burns up, America will fall and will be just like any other country in the world. The current American culture would never, could never have saved European bacon twice in the span of 30 years.
Alex de Tocqueville-America is great b/c America is good, if she ever ceases to be good she will cease to be great.
Like I said, you may think you know b/c you've lived here for 20 years, but you don't know and you can't know-it is impossible. I don't begrudge you for not knowing. But I do think it is a little egotistical smattered with some hubris to think you do know.
-
Just now, anatess2 said:
Hah hah. Filipinos are not a massive world power because we are a tiny archipelago who desires to be left well enough alone. Lapu-lapu, a Filipino, killed Magellan to repel the Spanish colonials. It wasn't until we became majority Catholic that we bowed to Spanish rule, thinking they were our religious leaders. But we won a rebellion against the Spaniards and fought the Americans for our independence... and got it. Look into your history. We had 2 representatives in the US Senate in the middle of the Chinese Exclusion Act and while Blacks were still segregated from American society. And yeah, we kicked the dictator Marcos out of power in a peaceful uprising without a single shot fired and without any help from anybody else.
Rugged individualism does not equate to kicking your kids out of your house. Kicking your kids out of your house is what led to your broken families where a multi-millionaire hollywood celebrity goes on TV to say the welfare program is necessary because she has family who are on welfare and they really need it. A multi-millionaire who can't even help her own family. Lots of them in the US like that.
That's fine you can have your opinion. But you quite simply do not know what you are talking about and you are simply wrong. You weren't born here, you aren't culturally American so I don't expect you to know or to even understand. That's fine. I'm out.
-
12 minutes ago, Grunt said:
If the conversation happened in the same way it did in this thread? Of course I would have. Actually, things would likely have never gotten to that point because they would have gone horribly wrong as soon as you said "your Bishop is an idiot". I'm usually extremely polite and respectful in person, but I don't handle insults well. Like I said, I still have that new Mormon smell. Haven't even taken the tags off yet. I struggle to have the love and kindness of my brothers and sisters. I hope to someday, though.
But you and I both know that face-to-face conversation never proceed like conversations on forums do. It is the nature of the medium; and you just have to accept that fact. For example, the first thing had anantess mentioned what she did would have been my screwed up face, 🤒 giving her the "what the heck???" look, where-in she would have immediately without me saying anything explained more. In fact, she would have explained in much more detail without any prompting anyways.
It is the nature of the medium . . .just accept it and move on.
12 minutes ago, Grunt said:Like I said, I still have that new Mormon smell. Haven't even taken the tags off yet. I struggle to have the love and kindness of my brothers and sisters. I hope to someday, though.
Don't sell yourself short. I bet you've got a lot more love and kindness than you think you have.
-
-
1 minute ago, Grunt said:
What branch?
I was jesting; I've worked in military as a contractor most my life.
-
4 minutes ago, anatess2 said:
You don't know @Grunt. He's military...
Hmm . . .good point. Maybe I'm military too :-)!
-
6 minutes ago, anatess2 said:
My parents are not enablers.
Okay fine. But again that's why America became the dominant massive world-power; it's why Philapinos never did.
Rugged individualism, that is what made this country great. It's why no other country or people in the history of the world has done what the US did. It truly was an exceptional nation.
-
1 minute ago, Vort said:
Don't you think that's rather two-faced? I try not to talk about people in any way that I wouldn't talk to them face to face (public figures occasionally excepted). I don't always succeed, but usually I do. I thought, or rather hoped, that this was the LDS norm.
You bring up a good point, but I don't think what you claim is accurate or practiced, especially on a forum. For example, someone accused me of a forked tongue on this thread. I highly doubt in actual face-to-face conversation that would ever have been said. I'm fairly positive things you've said and others would never be said face-to-face probably quite frequently in the heat of battle so to speak on this forum.
I also don't agree that it is being two-faced as being two-faced is being insincere and deceitful. What I wouldn't do is tell someone how wonderful they are to their face and then say they are horrible not to their face-that is certainly two-faced.
It's why generally I keep my opinions to myself, except for my wife and close, close friends (or anonymous message boards :-)!) I generally don't have a problem with say 95% of decisions leaders make, but they aren't immune or exempt from making stupid, boneheaded decisions.
I have opinions that sometimes a leader does something stupid . . .so sue me.
-
4 minutes ago, Vort said:
I have never heard any Latter-day Saint say or even suggest such a thing. I believe this is a strawman.
Granted I was being hyperbolic. But it is self-evident from this forum, Bishops and Stake Presidents are except from acting like or being idiots . . .clearly b/c we can't say it.
6 minutes ago, Vort said:I'll bet you five dollars that you would never say "You're an idiot" to the face of a bishop you respect. In almost any imaginable circumstance, calling a bishop or other Church leader "idiot" is a bad move.
I actually tend to agree with you, but I think you're missing the fact that American norms are not worldwide norms. A Filipino branch president might very well be led by the Spirit to tell his congregants not to worry about the children running around, and instead just to concentrate on the meeting at hand. Actions that would be shameful for American Saints (e.g. letting your children run screaming up and down the aisles) might not be so in other cultures.
Well I wouldn't call most people an idiot to their face either; however, I have no problem when talking in a third-party context about so-and-so being an idiot. That's fine if you'd like a less harsh word, "short-sighted", "slow", "not smart", maybe you'd like the term "fool" or "jerk" or "pinhead" ,etc. Point being most of us refrain from using those types of words face-to-face but we will use them in a third-party context.
My main point, is I don't think the Bishop is exempt from being "short-sighted" if you please from time to time.
-
3 minutes ago, zil said:
In this post:
...you make accusations which you cannot possibly know the truth of (unless you'd like to now clarify that you actually know @darthzilla99 in person). You go beyond just what can be reasonably concluded from his OP straight to extreme possibility as if the extreme possibility were known fact. Rather than commenting on how one might perceive a person in the situation he describes, you jump straight to accusing him of being the worst of those things.
I suppose darthzilla99 might appreciate and benefit from your hyperbole, but it seems more likely that your advice would have been better served without the initial insults.
(I do have a suggestion, if you'd like to debate the merits of those comments, comment on that thread not try and cross-thread things).
?? Hyperbole. Like what?
The bit about Eagle Scout, RM. Yeah actually those are things I know about; an individual who actually earned their Eagle Scout without mom and dad pushing them to earn it wouldn't be living at home after college. An RM who wasn't pushed to go on a mission won't be living at home after college. Parents who aren't enablers to their children, don't let their children live at home after they are in college.
"Perceive" . . .what does perceive have to do with anything?
The facts (not perception) are a 31-year-old male who has a college degree and has the mental, emotional, spiritual capacity to be a fully functioning autonomous member of society. Yet he is not; he is living at home with his parents working part-time waiting for something to require him to move out of the house.
The facts are someone like that will never be able to attract a really good mate, period. That's not perception, it's reality. If this individual does meet someone to marry, it's pretty easy to analyze based on what has been said the type of person they will currently marry. Someone who will control their life and tell them what to do with it. That's not an insult-that's just reality.
The guy already admits he knows what the problem is (he is immature and irresponsible). Immature and irresponsible adults want other people to control them or to enable them so they can continue being immature and irresponsible b/c being responsible can be really scary. The only way to stop that is to stop being immature and irresponsible and to take charge.
I did make an allowance for living at home if his parents were sick or for a noble cause. I'd make an allowance if he had some intelligence problems (but probably doesn't b/c he did graduate from college).
I'm not insulting him, I'm telling him the facts. It's his life-he can live it however he pleases. I fail to understand where I was hyperbolic and insulting.
-
4 minutes ago, Carborendum said:
Well, I gave a talk in Sacrament on Mother's Day that covered mothers staying at home. It was easy to prop up my wife's grandmother vs. my wife's mother as contrasting examples.
Grandmother: one of the earliest feminists. She even said to her children that if she had it to do all over again, she'd never get married. She had quite the career an a lot of awards from being good at what she did. But now in her old age, she is wondering why her children don't spend time with her.
Mother: SAHM. One of the earliest homeschoolers in the country. Spent almost every day doing things to keep her children close to the gospel. She continues to be an integral part of the lives of her children and grandchildren. The whole extended family knows exactly who they are mostly because of this woman.
A woman from the ward who was also a SAHM and partial homeschooler came to me aftewards and thanked me because she had begun to be swayed by cultural norms and wondered if she should put her kids in daycare and get a job. She now knew how important it was for her to stay at home and be a mom.
The thing is that the topics are going to be at the level of the speaker. And if a speaker is listening more to the philosophies of men than scripture, they will give a speech that reflects that. I'm not sure what can be done to change that.
Maybe I'm wrong about this (I hope I am). That's cool, . .. obviously not about your grandmother but that you were giving a talk about this topic, good for you! I agree with you last paragraph, it is just the way of the world. If we as members are more listening to scripture than man, it will be reflected in our wards and stakes, if not that will also be reflected.
Very sad with your wife's grandmother; we reap what we sow in life. It is sad for her and a learning lesson for the rest of us.
-
1 minute ago, Grunt said:
I'm sorry. I chose my words poorly. What I meant to say was you definitively called the Bishop an idiot, then claimed you were speaking of his "idiotic message", then claimed to stand behind your statement. You're flip-flopping between two stories.
See how that works?I appreciate the apology. Thank you, apology accepted.
No, I didn't flip flop. I'm afraid we are really getting wires crossed here. I can explain more of what I meant, but I don't think it will do much good except more problems. Can we just call it a day?
-
1 minute ago, Grunt said:
You've got a forked tongue and the backtracking doesn't change the facts. Personally, I'd have locked your account for personally attacking a Bishop, or any other member, rather than the message. I still have that new Mormon smell, though, so I'm less forgiving and loving than my brothers and sisters.
Just great. Personal attack. I didn't personally attack you, but you feel it okay to personally attack me. Lovely.
No forked tongue at all. I'm not backtracking in least bit.
First you say, apologize, then when I say I stand by what I said with the information I had at the time and now that more information has come out I have no opinion on the matter, you say I'm backtracking?
So which is it dude? Maybe you should take a look in the mirror.
-
1 minute ago, zil said:
At the risk of becoming party number 3 to this pointless argument, this is not the first thread wherein you have jumped the gun and found unwarranted fault rather than seeking increased understanding before making assumptions about a complete stranger. Please consider that this may be an example where you need to check yourself.
No zil, that is incorrect. I have commented on a grand total of 3 threads on this forum. Maybe you should take a look in mirror.
A nerdy LDS guy with a lot of childish interests and LDS dating
in Marriage and Relationship Advice
Posted
Good for you on getting extra cash. Oh yeah, when you get yourself in a bad spot it sucks climbing out of it. Ocare sucks and I'll be glad to see it gone. Most of the time getting in a bad spot generally relates to either getting overleveraged on debt or by some medical catastrophe. Being too far in debt you can do something about. Medical . . .sometimes crap happens and it sucks. Just the way life is, sometimes no matter what you do you get a bad hand.
But those who are self-confident, hard-working responsible individuals will figure a way to turn a bad hand into a winning hand. Mark Cuban once said if he lost everything, he could become wealthy again. And I totally believe him. I may think he is a jerk-but he has the right attitude to be financially successful in life.