The piece on receipts is a bit sad to me. When I was a youngin’ I worked at a soda fountain. The owner would come by at least once a day, not to protect against theft, but because he wanted to talk to his customers. We didn’t have to worry about someone being untrustworthy.
Unintended consequence of the welfare state: man was declared legally dead years ago; judge refuses to declare him “alive” today.
I’m not sure which is worse: declaring a man dead without evidence so his ex-wife could get SSDI benefits. Or him petitioning to get himself declared alive so he could get Social Security benefits when he retires.
In either case, someone has some “splainin’ to do…” (His ex-wife opposed his petition so she couldn’t have to pay back the benefits.)
Questionable Nobel prizes.
…I was convinced I was reading the Onion when Obama got his Nobel peace prize a few years ago.
It’s unfortunate for most of those awards, it seems as if they were given prematurely in almost every situation.
PJ has it right!
“I don’t know where that leaves you, but you’re still deceased as far as the law is concerned,” Judge Davis told Mr. Miller…” (Schwartz)
One of the most interesting sentences someone could hear.
“Questionable Nobel Prices”
Has this turned into a popularity contest?
Peter Attia, “The most valuable skill he learned along the way: to ask bold questions about medical assumptions.”
Asking bold questions is a valuable skill to all aspects of life.
Social media is helping people voice their opinions, look at the middle east. Asking bold questions has led to country wide revolts…
Facebook’s unintended consequences
The piece on receipts is a bit sad to me. When I was a youngin’ I worked at a soda fountain. The owner would come by at least once a day, not to protect against theft, but because he wanted to talk to his customers. We didn’t have to worry about someone being untrustworthy.
Times sure have changed…
Unintended consequence of the welfare state: man was declared legally dead years ago; judge refuses to declare him “alive” today.
I’m not sure which is worse: declaring a man dead without evidence so his ex-wife could get SSDI benefits. Or him petitioning to get himself declared alive so he could get Social Security benefits when he retires.
In either case, someone has some “splainin’ to do…” (His ex-wife opposed his petition so she couldn’t have to pay back the benefits.)
Serious “splainin’ to do indeed.”
Why not call fraud and say neither can can SSDI anymore?