Containment What will happen when Barb dies?

  • 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
Pinkamena Diane Pie said:
Isn't that illegal? I mean, Chris isn't exactly skilled enough to conceal even something small like a figurine to steal. Wouldn't think he could dump trash into a private dumpster without getting caught.
Click to expand...

People don't usually pay attention to dumpsters or people putting stuff in them (or taking stuff out for that matter) unless it results in them not being able to put their own shit in there. Then they get pissed but it's usually repeat offenders who get caught.
 
Pinkamena Diane Pie said:
Isn't that illegal? I mean, Chris isn't exactly skilled enough to conceal even something small like a figurine to steal. Wouldn't think he could dump trash into a private dumpster without getting caught.
Click to expand...

If the dumpster is locked up you can't mess with it, but if it's out in the open then it's free game. It varies from state to state.
 
LoveYouLongTime said:
If the dumpster is locked up you can't mess with it, but if it's out in the open then it's free game. It varies from state to state.
Click to expand...

It's generally illegal to steal services you aren't paying for. The person paying for it is getting ripped off, so is whatever trash hauler is supposed to be being paid for it. Actually locking it just means you'd have to commit vandalism to do it and couldn't claim ignorance. Also if you have to trespass on private property to do it, it's illegal.
 
AnOminous said:
It's generally illegal to steal services you aren't paying for. The person paying for it is getting ripped off, so is whatever trash hauler is supposed to be being paid for it. Actually locking it just means you'd have to commit vandalism to do it and couldn't claim ignorance. Also if you have to trespass on private property to do it, it's illegal.
Click to expand...
I'm sure the law'll catch up to Chris one day while hauling out whatever spoils were festered on 14 BLC.
 
AnOminous said:
It's generally illegal to steal services you aren't paying for. The person paying for it is getting ripped off, so is whatever trash hauler is supposed to be being paid for it. Actually locking it just means you'd have to commit vandalism to do it and couldn't claim ignorance. Also if you have to trespass on private property to do it, it's illegal.
Click to expand...

Technically speaking, it should be illegal but plenty of states, including Virginia it's legal to dumpster dive unless local law says otherwise. Though would laws differ for tossing in trash instead of taking it out?
 
LoveYouLongTime said:
Technically speaking, it should be illegal but plenty of states, including Virginia it's legal to dumpster dive unless local law says otherwise. Though would laws differ for tossing in trash instead of taking it out?
Click to expand...

Yes, because in the first case, you're merely taking something abandoned on public property in which there is also no reasonable expectation of privacy. Which is why dumpster divers and PIs and weens stealing Chris's homework can get away with this if it's on public property. In the other case, though, you're stealing the service of hauling the trash without paying for it.
 
AnOminous said:
Yes, because in the first case, you're merely taking something abandoned on public property in which there is also no reasonable expectation of privacy. Which is why dumpster divers and PIs and weens stealing Chris's homework can get away with this if it's on public property. In the other case, though, you're stealing the service of hauling the trash without paying for it.
Click to expand...

Ah, okay that makes sense.

An after thought due to me avoiding work: I wonder if when Barb was more spritely she snagged items from dumpsters to try and return for money. Seems like within the realms of something she would do.
 
LoveYouLongTime said:
Ah, okay that makes sense.

An after thought due to me avoiding work: I wonder if when Barb was more spritely she snagged items from dumpsters to try and return for money. Seems like within the realms of something she would do.
Click to expand...
Most places require a receipt to prevent such a thing, shop lifters would steal an item then try and return it to another store for cash.
 
Slowinthemind said:
Most places require a receipt to prevent such a thing, shop lifters would steal an item then try and return it to another store for cash.
Click to expand...
Chris successfully rips off stores by buying at one place on discount and returning at another for full price. He calls it "wheelin and dealin".
 
Marvin said:
Chris successfully rips off stores by buying at one place on discount and returning at another for full price. He calls it "wheelin and dealin".
Click to expand...
I did not think Chris was that smart, did Barb put him up to it?
 
Marvin said:
I'm sure he got grilled for that.

I don't think I follow.

Are you saying "Chris should be given a limited allowance, rather than he just be given access to his full check"? Or are you actually saying that Barb is doing the exploitation?
Click to expand...

Yes. In my own mind, I think it'd be wise if some would handle his income with caution. There are people on social security and they don't e-beg. I'm not sure how much he gets from the government. Is Chris spending his check more on luxuries than necessities? If so then this maybe a problem for him. It can be addictive and in the end he'll end up with little or nothing. Barb's already in debt. I'm not sure she's good with balancing money either. *shrugs* It's his money. He may do as he pleases with it. I'm not saying he doesn't deserve a penny. He needs that money to take of himself.

I'm not accusing anyone of exploitation. I don't know entirely how they spend their money. However, I was shocked he spent more than spent over $8581.62 on video games. Where's he getting the money for that if he has no job?
 
Cupcakes55 said:
Yes. In my own mind, I think it'd be wise if some would handle his income with caution. There are people on social security and they don't e-beg. I'm not sure how much he gets from the government. Is Chris spending his check more on luxuries than necessities? If so then this maybe a problem for him. It can be addictive and in the end he'll end up with little or nothing. Barb's already in debt. I'm not sure she's good with balancing money either. *shrugs* It's his money. He may do as he pleases with it. I'm not saying he doesn't deserve a penny. He needs that money to take of himself.

I'm not accusing anyone of exploitation. I don't know entirely how they spend their money. However, I was shocked he spent more than spent over $8581.62 on video games. Where's he getting the money for that if he has no job?
Click to expand...

From the American tax payer.
 
Slowinthemind said:
Most places require a receipt to prevent such a thing, shop lifters would steal an item then try and return it to another store for cash.
Click to expand...

A lot of corporate places will bend policy to keep the customer happy, even if they steal. If not, those places will give gift cards instead of cash.

Marvin said:
Chris successfully rips off stores by buying at one place on discount and returning at another for full price. He calls it "wheelin and dealin".
Click to expand...

Don't fucking remind me. How many times did we have to lecture Chris about stealing? That particular conversation caused me a lot of stuh-ress.
 
Cupcakes55 said:
There are people on social security and they don't e-beg.
Click to expand...
Those people probably wouldn't get money if they ebegged. They also have shame.
Cupcakes55 said:
If so then this maybe a problem for him. It can be addictive and in the end he'll end up with little or nothing.
Click to expand...
Here's what happened: back when the household expenses were paid for, Chris got $1300 a month and spent $1300 a month on toys. Now that the household expenses aren't entirely paid for, Chris gets $1300 a month and spends $1100 a month on bills and necessities, and spends $200 a month on toys.

As Chris has more responsibilities, he pays them. That's what's happening right now.

When Chris cries on video about needing money, it's not because his bank account is at -$200. It's because it's at $0 and he can't buy the other $1100 of toys he's usually used to buying.

(I'm pulling the numbers out of my ass, of course. But in general, that's how it works.)

Chris isn't pissing away his money and failing to meet his obligations. Instead, what he's doing is being a giant baby because his obligations are preventing him from the extravagant lifestyle he's used to.
For the above, I left out Barb's personal obligations.

Together, Barb and Chris share things like the mortgage and electricity and internet, etc. Chris absolutely should pitch for his half of the expenses.

Where things get tricky are their personal expenses. Privately, Chris and Barb each have their own sets of debt that they have to pay off. However, Barb's debt dwarfs Chris'. Like 3x or 4x or something.

Barb also has full access to Chris' bank account and credit cards and everything. If not in name, at least in spirit. (That is, the accounts might be in Chris' name, but if she screams at Chris, he'll sign whatever she needs him to.)

Chris' tugboat (and if he gets any new credit issued, that credit as well) frequently goes to help pay off Barb's debt.

Now, if Chris' bank account does go into the red when paying for Barb's debt, is he at fault, morally? If he bought some toys and then later went in the red when Barb tried to pay off her debt, is Chris the fuckup here?

Some would say that, yes, since Chris' name is on the account, he's responsible for it, no matter what. If he doesn't want to go into the red, he should buy less toys.

Other people might say that Barb is exploiting Chris, and even though he could technically tell her to fuck off, practically speaking, he's brainwashed. It's not really his fault.

I understand both arguments, but still, I have to go with the latter one. I don't think it's remotely fair for Chris to have to live like a monk, paying off Barb's debt, just for her to leave a pristine financial corpse when she dies.

If Chris was living on his own and screeching about how he can't pay his bills? Sure, I'd laugh my ass off about that. But when fatty is getting grilled because he has to make a choice between either covering for Barb's financial fuckups, or enjoying what little he can of his manchild life? That's less funny.

Who knows, maybe if we're lucky, we'll get the Barb bankruptcy saga.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom