If you're 27 and never had a girlfriend, is it too late?

Post Reply New Topic

Now I don't have any TVs. Burglars took them and six consoles and 200 games and 100 blurays and 2 computers

I'm sorry
hugs

why, oh why do you have to keep on returning?

I want to see if I can go over 3 weeks without masturbating, see if that does any mental changes to me

Thanks. I feel like I can never afford to buy that stuff back. Even though my stuff got stolen I have to pay $700 on my tax return. Does the tax man care that my stuff got stolen? No. Does the burglar have to pay income tax? No.

I bought most of that stuff on ebay but can I buy it again on ebay? They're trying to pass a new parcel tax. I mean, buying stuff at brick and mortar stores already costs twice as much as the rest of the world and this 10% parcel cost would double the cost due to admin costs. Amazon, who previously only had to add tax onto items that cost more than a thousand dollars, charges a $50 admin fee to collect the tax (which can't be claimed on your tax return even if you can claim the tax itself).

As for the Australian Tax Office, they will increase their admin costs far more than they raise their revenue. This applies to a lot of cost cutting measures the government implements. They cost more to implement then they save.

I know. I'm contracted to the government to test their websites. You would think that, since they spend millions of dollars per year on testing, with a staff that takes up two floors of a 300 foot wide building, you'd think they'd have the most reliable websites known to man, they they go offline several times per day

When people visit certain government departments, the staff have instructions to say "you can do that much more easily online then here", then they give a demonstration, which routinely fails. How are they supposed to convince the populous to use their website when in fails in demonstration?

I don't think this parcel tax is about regaining revenue lost to online shops, I think it's the retail lobby trying to get a tariff against online good. The government panders to lobbyists over the good of the general population. Why should I support our stupid shops? We have nearly the highest minimum wage in the world and yet for that price we get incompetents who know nothing about the products they're selling.

If they want to raise revenue, why don't they tax the mining companies? Because they pander to them more than anyone. True that mining is the only part of our economy that still functions now that most of the car factories have shut down but if they're the only Australian companies making a profit, that doesn't mean they should be exempt from tax.

You're lucky in America. You don't have to live under a government that cuts welfare and raises taxes at the same time. You don't have to live under a government that combines that worst aspects of right-wing thatcherism and left-wing socialism at the same time (Thatcher may have been a milk-snatcher but at least she got things done in a timely manner, our politicians couldn't pick their own nose without orders, signed in triplicate, sent in, sent back, lost, found, queried, subjected to public inquiry, lost again, and finally buried in soft peat for three months and recycled as firelighters).

And they passed that anti piracy bill without finishing the inquiry as to why online services (movie downloads, game downloads, etc), cost two to three times as much here. Just who are they working for anyway?

bummer

well not so lucky they constantly trying to take our rights, raise taxes, one side wants to cut all welfare. both want to pass more and more online sales taxe. they want to pass a federal sales tax.

oh and in my state we do income tax, others do sales tax, well my state wants to do both and double or tripple tax us.
they want to keep the gas tax, increase it and add a millage tax. they doubling our car registration tax.

its horrible.

PillowSpider, tell us your story, please. What made you so bitter? Was it an aspie guy?

her ex was an aspie that was bad apparently. so she takes it out on us.

Was he financially unstable?

I'm not bitter. I just think it's gross that some guys think there's a quid pro quo of sex because they bought you dinner a few times.

Maybe I should just stay in my little room, not talk to anyone, hate fun and b***h members of the opposite sex want nothing to do with me because I'm a pathetic little no-life loser who would probably do the gene pool a favor by going for a long swim in bacon pants in shark-infested waters.

Then why are you responding to posts that have nothing to do with that, as though they do? Sure, make your feelings known to someone who as actually stated that that is what they think, but you are clearly misinterpreting what RetroGamer is saying which leaves him no room to defend himself as it is like asking the classic question "have you stopped beating your wife? Yes or no?".

I'm used to being told yes-or-no questions are always to be answered with "yes" or "no", and anything else is rude. The asker needn't even have the patience to listen to anything more than a monosyllabic answer, and it'd be very inconsiderate of me not to let that syllable satisfy them by being one of the two they expect to hear.

But you don't see how it is inconsiderate to ask a question where both the answer "yes" and "no" could be inaccurate? That's effectively what is happening - assumptions (actually misinterpretations, I believe) are being made, and "disapproval" of someone's post is being given based on these false assumptions.

Exaggerated scenario to show what I'm trying to say:

Person A: "I prefer to eat fruit."
Person B: "How dare you not like vegetables!"

Person B is trying to argue over something Person A never even said, and is probably not even true. They have unsuccessfully read between the lines and seen things that weren't there.

no one wants us to die they say. but here's proof.

Nope, that's not what she's saying.

So much misinterpretation going on around here! I just made a thread about how aspies are more literal so our communication is clearer, but clearly we have our communication problems too!

"pathetic little no-life loser who would probably do the gene pool a favor by going for a long swim in bacon pants in shark-infested waters."

are the sharks just going to cuddle with him when he does that?
no they going to kill and eat him. so she thinks we are pathetic little no life losers who the world would be better off without.

she was pretty clear in your word use how is it i could misread it?