Poor Choices
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2014
It seems almost Stalinist except for the being useless as part of the workforce.
🎨 Artcow Iconoclast / Jonathan Mack Sweet - The Chris-Chan of Arkansas
- Thread starter Holdek
- Start date
-
🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
-
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2014
Sweet would try to seize the means of production and end up lost in a factory for eight hours.
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2015
Good Will hires exceptional individuals, Sweets.
I'm sure Sweets watches his mom and not the other way around.
I'm sure Sweets watches his mom and not the other way around.
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2014
Good Will hires exceptional individuals, Sweets.
I'm sure Sweets watches his mom and not the other way around.
Good Will also pays those people below minimum wage.
I mean, he'd be making more than what he makes right now, but as a liberal I must protest the underpayment of these workers, regardless of their mental faculties.
Equal work deserves equal pay.
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2014
Sweets Never Understood College said:
I wonder how emotionally destroyed you'd feel if you realized that there was no sex program there either? Because that would now make everything you obsess over there either not exist anymore or not exist in the first place.
Welfare Leech said:
You do realize that you tend to get MORE money from a job than by the government, right? I mean, I have no clue what your SSI would rate at, but based on several samples I've witnessed, including people with multiple disabilities, I'm fairly certain that a part time gig pays out noticeably more than it. Also, you get a weekly income as opposed to monthly income, so money comes in more often. I can tell you just don't want to work, like a true welfare leech.
And this mortgage shit is coming out of nowhere, probably since you needed another excuse to just sit on your ass. By the way, your wages would pay it off just as well if not easier.
Oh PLEASE said:
Oh don't you even bother to begin lying here Sweets. I'm certain the missus is your minder, what with you having no power at home, as according to your own words. Of course then again I have no faith in your words, but still. One or the other bro.
Jonny Entitlement said:
First off, do it yourself you manchild; it's your damn life. Secondly, respect is earned, not given. Jesus you literally sound exactly like the "progressives" you hate.
What's a Job? said:
That'd be basically every job out there, although I can understand shitting on waiting tables. Mainly because you get below minimum wage due to loopholes and have to rely on tipping.
PITYPITYPITYPITY said:
You plagiarized others and pissed off/creeped out everyone there by basically being a lazy, shitty employee who sperged over little things; You never listened to your boss, went behind HIS back, impersonated him, and was once again a shitty employee due to being so entitled and demanding; the third business never even existed; and the last thing was basically you refusing to help and do your job again because fuck everyone but me.
Bound2
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2014
And another:
He's not refusing to work guys, he's just not attempting to improve his situation by applying for jobs that he is capable of doing. Big difference.
Also, what kind of rent agreement says "you must employ my son but pay him nothing but he's also totally watching you"? Oh, right, the patently false kind.
The only "evening entertainment" Belch will get is from his own hand. Sorry, Sweetie, but women don't tend to like unemployed forty year old men with pubes glued to their face.
I'm not refusing to work, dingus, I'm just opting out of a system (note small s) that treats employees like chattle, easily disposed of for the tiniest mistake, and going it on my own for a while. It's not as if I misrepresented myself when I started work at the small engine shop-- Dale knew I didn't know a butterfly gasket from my butthole. He could have just let me go at any time and hired on another shop assistant-- oh, no, wait, he'd actually have to pay a new worker. Oops. Cheap old sack. I say I was a "manager", but my real job, as per the rent agreement on the store space, was to keep an eye on the old fartknocker and make sure he didn't either screw up or cheat us. I will always regret that I failed at that. I am sorry I greatly underestimated the abilities of a man well in his fifties who didn't know you don't buy equipment from a kid barely old enough to shave with no receipt or paperwork. I now have to hunt him down and set things right.
Sure, I was on a prepaid meal plan too. It was built into the dorm residency package. Some schools serve a pretty bare-bones meal except maybe for special occasions, or when they entertain important guests. When they're regularly dishing up things like steak and quail to students, however, and throw away more food at the end of an evening than many third-world countries see in a month of Sundays, you have to wonder just how big the school's food budget is. To say nothing of big-screen TVs in the commons lounge, the state-of-the-art (for 1997, anyway) computer labs, and the-- ahem-- evening entertainment, if you know what I mean, and I know you do.
He's not refusing to work guys, he's just not attempting to improve his situation by applying for jobs that he is capable of doing. Big difference.
Also, what kind of rent agreement says "you must employ my son but pay him nothing but he's also totally watching you"? Oh, right, the patently false kind.
The only "evening entertainment" Belch will get is from his own hand. Sorry, Sweetie, but women don't tend to like unemployed forty year old men with pubes glued to their face.
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2014
I don't want to work! said:
Tiniest mistake? I dunno, I consider poor customer service, ignoring what da boss says completely, and treating people based on ethnicity is not only more than one mistake, but multiple large ones. This is like saying the Germans made a tiny mistake in their plans for Operation Barbarossa, when there are so many reasons why they'd have petered out anyway.
I'm about to lie said:
You tried to paint yourself as the manager, and that you got complaints for being helpful. Sweet, do you even pay attention to what you say right after doing so?
What's A Circumstance? said:
It probably has to do with him not wanting to upset yer mum, the person who he was dating at the time. I'd know that'd sour the relationship pretty damn badly.
I Call BS said:
Nope, pretty sure you were a stock boy and clerk based on what you've said about the details; not really a manager. By the by, call it a whacky hypothesis, but I can see a good possibility being that your mom got your paycheck instead of you, and she just told you that you weren't getting paid; mostly because the last time you had free reign, you got your shit destroyed at a college that she probably sank thousands of dollars into.
I know I wouldn't trust you with money, doubly so since you're trying to throw a scarce resource into an impossible quest.
Tanglepubes on Forgiveness said:I will always regret that I failed at that. I am sorry I greatly underestimated the abilities of a man well in his fifties who didn't know you don't buy equipment from a kid barely old enough to shave with no receipt or paperwork. I now have to hunt him down and set things right.
Like I'm supposed to believe the Beau was more incompetent than a fucktard who was hired on due to nepotism. Not just nepotism, but who is so goddamned inept that he should've had nothing to do with the business in the first place. A person whose fucking "revenge" is just helplessly leaving reviews, which is easily tracked back to him since he was stupid enough to announce his plan. Reviews that will not have any impact on his business whatsoever.
And this was all done because you didn't get to foist off your trash and abuse the job for your own gains you little shit.
100% Truth Failure said:
This is coming from a functionally incompetent doofus who thinks living in a trailer is living the highlife based on his stalking days. This is also coming from someone who is a routine liar, if not by fabrication, then by omission. He has also regularly vacillated between hyping the place and shitting on it.
... said:To say nothing of big-screen TVs in the commons lounge, the state-of-the-art (for 1997, anyway) computer labs, and the-- ahem-- evening entertainment, if you know what I mean, and I know you do.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2014
Why does Sweet put "friends" in quotes? =(
Also, I wonder if Sweet read the noodle guy story?
Like Adamska kind of said, I didn't mean to depress Sweet, I was just pointing out that expecting ASU to be essentially frozen in time is unrealistic.
I also wonder why Sweet is so fixated on things like computer labs and dining (features that should be pretty standard in one form or another at any university anyway)? I don't recall Sweet ever talking about what the classes he took were like, and classes are a pretty big part of going to a school.
Also, Sweet talking about the "perks" of college living that students get to enjoy but he doesn't kind of reminds me of how communists would apparently complain about the supposed decadence of Western society.
As for work, what's Sweet's explanation for why he doesn't at least do volunteer work and really do something for society?
Also, I wonder if Sweet read the noodle guy story?
Like Adamska kind of said, I didn't mean to depress Sweet, I was just pointing out that expecting ASU to be essentially frozen in time is unrealistic.
I also wonder why Sweet is so fixated on things like computer labs and dining (features that should be pretty standard in one form or another at any university anyway)? I don't recall Sweet ever talking about what the classes he took were like, and classes are a pretty big part of going to a school.
Also, Sweet talking about the "perks" of college living that students get to enjoy but he doesn't kind of reminds me of how communists would apparently complain about the supposed decadence of Western society.
As for work, what's Sweet's explanation for why he doesn't at least do volunteer work and really do something for society?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2015
Because he doesn't have friends. He has people he wants to use and that's it.
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2014
Sweets doesn't want to learn. He wants to have phone sex and all the food he can eat and computer labs to share his godawful comics with the world.
The man has never cared about learning anything in his entire life. Motherfucker won't even learn how to use a cell phone or make a comic that people can read and enjoy.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2014
Sweet probably sees nothing wrong with the clarity of the comics he makes - like I said earlier, they're probably clear as day to him, and he projects that expectation onto others (or at least that they're still fairly readable despite his failing eyesight), apparently.
Also, as someone else pointed out, Sweet's ideal life is apparently living on the campus of ASU (and it has to be Arkansas State University, not any other ASU in the country, nor any other university for that matter), and being on the school paper perpetually while phone dating and certain other stuff Meowthkip pointed out above. Not anything beyond, it seems.
I haven't seen him talk about being married with children, owning a house or car, or having a journalism career that's more prestigious than a college paper, as being an ideal life (as far as I can recall).
Also, as someone else pointed out, Sweet's ideal life is apparently living on the campus of ASU (and it has to be Arkansas State University, not any other ASU in the country, nor any other university for that matter), and being on the school paper perpetually while phone dating and certain other stuff Meowthkip pointed out above. Not anything beyond, it seems.
I haven't seen him talk about being married with children, owning a house or car, or having a journalism career that's more prestigious than a college paper, as being an ideal life (as far as I can recall).
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2013
You know, I know this is old, but in light of Jon going on about revenge against his manager again, I thought I'd bring up this old chestnut:
This was brought up a while ago waaaay upthread, but I think it was dropped back when most of us [re: me] thought that Jon actually participated in the managerial duties of the shop. We know now that he did not, and was not the co-owner, either. He was little more than a stockboy. However, that did nothing from stopping him from using the pronouns "us" and "our" when talking about the shop. In this case, Jon was talking about a ferociously intimidating creature, a black kid who had yet to hit the age of 13, who sold them the lawnmower. In light of recent revelations, I thought I'd give a look at this, and even as I type these words, I'm beginning to suspect something about what actually happened around the incident (which most of you folks probably already guessed!).
So this child - not old enough to be called a teenager - sold these guys a lawnmower. Of course, there was no "these guys", there was just the Beau. Jon was not a manager, and did not know anything about machines. So, then, Beau, a grown man, probably with shop and hardware experience, bought a lawnmower from a minor, aaaaand - apparently that was that.
Cut to later. The police show up (a repeating occurrence in The Sweet Life), and suddenly 'their' shop is at risk of being shut down for trafficking hot goods. Now, personally, I would have thought that trafficking stolen goods involved actually selling the the goods in question, but I'm no legal expert. I tell you what though, the cops certainly were, because, according to this story, they knew exactly where to go to find this single piece of gardening equipment. That's some pretty good intuition there. How would they know that this shop, that had no background of selling stolen property, had this particular mower?
Well, I know as much about policework as I do law, so who knows. What I do know is that there is a sudden shift in pronouns towards the end of the story. What started out as "us" and "we" suddenly becomes "I" and "my". Specifically, "I had to smooth things over and return the mower. " Now, this is odd. Jon did not drive, so unless he got a ride from someone (meaning he had help, thus he was being dishonest), or got a cab (meaning he had help, thus he was being dishonest), then it's safe to assume that the place he had to return the mower to was within walking distance. Why did Jon have to do this? Because the Beau was so incompetent? Why didn't his mother make her boyfriend return it?
Further, why would Jon be made to interact with whomever it was being returned to? Jon has a tendency to be... well, to put it gently, Jon is a repellent, disgusting, insecure, dishonest, untrustworthy, thoughtless, delusional, ignorant, irresponsible, perverted, criminally-inclined guttersnipe that lives in somebody's house. Not really the face that you want repping your business.
And then he says this:
"Never saw Junior or my $20 again."
I ... wha ... wait - "$20"? What $20? Jon never mentions any amount of money either in the post above or the one before it. Why would money be involved? All he had to do was return something.
And then I got to thinkin'. See, one of Flaplips's big problems is that, for a guy who says he such a better American than others, he doesn't seem to understand much the Fifth Amendment. Everything he says not only makes him look worse, but paints him as the guilty party.
My theory:
"They" didn't buy the lawnmower from the kid. Jon did. Dale probably had something to do, and the child came in in his absence. Sweet was there and the kid tried to sell to him. He gave the kid money from the shop, or he somehow had the money on him, and exchanged it for a lawnmower while being too inept to know any better. Someone who knew the kid, possibly the parents, confronted the child later and asked him where the mower was. He confessed he sold it at the shop, and the police were called to deal with the situation. They probably said the family wasn't going to press charges if the mower was simply returned. Dale made Jon return it.
Thoughts?
Jon Sweet said:
This was brought up a while ago waaaay upthread, but I think it was dropped back when most of us [re: me] thought that Jon actually participated in the managerial duties of the shop. We know now that he did not, and was not the co-owner, either. He was little more than a stockboy. However, that did nothing from stopping him from using the pronouns "us" and "our" when talking about the shop. In this case, Jon was talking about a ferociously intimidating creature, a black kid who had yet to hit the age of 13, who sold them the lawnmower. In light of recent revelations, I thought I'd give a look at this, and even as I type these words, I'm beginning to suspect something about what actually happened around the incident (which most of you folks probably already guessed!).
So this child - not old enough to be called a teenager - sold these guys a lawnmower. Of course, there was no "these guys", there was just the Beau. Jon was not a manager, and did not know anything about machines. So, then, Beau, a grown man, probably with shop and hardware experience, bought a lawnmower from a minor, aaaaand - apparently that was that.
Cut to later. The police show up (a repeating occurrence in The Sweet Life), and suddenly 'their' shop is at risk of being shut down for trafficking hot goods. Now, personally, I would have thought that trafficking stolen goods involved actually selling the the goods in question, but I'm no legal expert. I tell you what though, the cops certainly were, because, according to this story, they knew exactly where to go to find this single piece of gardening equipment. That's some pretty good intuition there. How would they know that this shop, that had no background of selling stolen property, had this particular mower?
Well, I know as much about policework as I do law, so who knows. What I do know is that there is a sudden shift in pronouns towards the end of the story. What started out as "us" and "we" suddenly becomes "I" and "my". Specifically, "I had to smooth things over and return the mower. " Now, this is odd. Jon did not drive, so unless he got a ride from someone (meaning he had help, thus he was being dishonest), or got a cab (meaning he had help, thus he was being dishonest), then it's safe to assume that the place he had to return the mower to was within walking distance. Why did Jon have to do this? Because the Beau was so incompetent? Why didn't his mother make her boyfriend return it?
Further, why would Jon be made to interact with whomever it was being returned to? Jon has a tendency to be... well, to put it gently, Jon is a repellent, disgusting, insecure, dishonest, untrustworthy, thoughtless, delusional, ignorant, irresponsible, perverted, criminally-inclined guttersnipe that lives in somebody's house. Not really the face that you want repping your business.
And then he says this:
"Never saw Junior or my $20 again."
I ... wha ... wait - "$20"? What $20? Jon never mentions any amount of money either in the post above or the one before it. Why would money be involved? All he had to do was return something.
And then I got to thinkin'. See, one of Flaplips's big problems is that, for a guy who says he such a better American than others, he doesn't seem to understand much the Fifth Amendment. Everything he says not only makes him look worse, but paints him as the guilty party.
My theory:
"They" didn't buy the lawnmower from the kid. Jon did. Dale probably had something to do, and the child came in in his absence. Sweet was there and the kid tried to sell to him. He gave the kid money from the shop, or he somehow had the money on him, and exchanged it for a lawnmower while being too inept to know any better. Someone who knew the kid, possibly the parents, confronted the child later and asked him where the mower was. He confessed he sold it at the shop, and the police were called to deal with the situation. They probably said the family wasn't going to press charges if the mower was simply returned. Dale made Jon return it.
Thoughts?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2013
Yeah, when you put the pieces together like that, it makes for a convincing solution. Naturally, he'll come up with some new detail he suddenly "remembered" about the incident to attempt to paint himself in a more flattering light, most likely by shifting any potential blame onto either the owner or the black kid, or maybe the police or Emmanuel God or who the fuck knows.
Really his biggest problem is that, again, just like Chris, he's a terrible liar and can't keep his stories consistent across multiple retellings. He handwaves this away by saying that he remembers them differently each time, or places emphasis on different parts of the story, as if that would explain the continuity errors. But that doesn't hold water, Thumbelina.
I have a ton of stories that I know from my past, and I tell them almost exactly the same every single time. I don't leave out details or add new ones, and I certainly place emphasis in almost always the exact same spots every single time, or damn close. At most, I use slightly different wording between retellings, but this goes way beyond that.
See, I've told a lie or two in my day, and what they say about the truth being easier to tell than lies is true, because truth often has elements to it that aren't merely "these are the events and how they happened." Stuff like what you were feeling, how you or someone else did the thing, what else was going on around the thing...a good picture or a painting doesn't just have the foreground object. The phrase "the devil's in the details" is funny to me for two reasons: first, the guy who coined it must not have been very attentive to continually miss things by rushing through them, and secondly, because the small, minute details of situations and experiences are often more profound than their less-subtle, larger cousins. That's how we're able to discern so much about you, Sweetness: because it's the things you don't say that are as important as the things you do, or how you say them, or in this case, what you leave out or add between retellings of your boring ass stories about a life poorly lived.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2013
I find it hard to believe that the cops would shut the place down over them buying a single stolen lawnmower. I'm sure this kind of thing happens all the time in such a shop and that you'd have to Know that the goods were stolen for it to be a crime.
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2015
In many jurisdictions, it is a criminal offence to buy any type of stolen goods.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2013
Yeah, but it's not equal work. It's a semi-charity job. Those folks are otherwise unemployable.
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2014
Sweets absolutely does watch his mom. Specifically, he watches his mom get beat up by a bunch of thugs while he cowers like a spineless shitsack.
- Joined
- May 20, 2014
His inability to understand that other people have a different perspective than he does is one of the primary reasons I think he has autism.