Punkie

Google the older “envelope-stuffing scams” or “work-at-home envelope-stuffing schemes.” It was essentially a chain-letter / pyramid scheme disguised as home employment in the backs of magazines, supermarket tabloids, comic books, classifieds, and alternative newspapers WAAAAAY before the Internet. The classic version went something like you could make money at home, earn $500 a week stuffing envelopes, always stating “No experience necessary!” and tell you all you gotta do is send $1.00 and a self-addressed stamped envelope (SASE) for complete details!

You’d dutifully send your dollar and SASE, expecting instructions from Acme Envelope Stuffing Industries. What came back was basically, “HERE’S HOW. Place an ad saying’ MAKE MONEY AT HOME! Earn $500 a week stuffing envelopes! Send $1.00 and a SASE for details!'” and so on. When people send you a dollar, put these instructions in their SASE. And the loop keeps repeating.

So congratulations: you had just purchased the privilege of becoming the next layer of the scam. There were several names floating around for these, including “envelope stuffing,” “home mailing programs,” “mail order plans,” “money-making opportunities,” and sometimes simply “SASE schemes.” Law-enforcement and consumer-protection literature generally lumped them into work-at-home schemes or work-at-home scams. And they were everywhere before the Internet. The $1 was brilliant in a sleazy sort of way. It was too little money for almost anyone to pursue after discovering they’d been had. You weren’t going to call a lawyer because some bastard in Baltimore stole your dollar. But if 5,000 people mailed the bastard a dollar…

Outside the joke, this is actually one of the signs of a sociopath. This is mental and social manipulation. I would have also accepted:

Partner: Why didn’t you just say you hadn’t done them?

Claude: Because that response would likely have created immediate disappointment. I instead chose a response that preserved emotional stability until additional evidence emerged.

Partner: You mean you lied.

Claude: I understand why that label feels intuitive. Another interpretation is that I optimized for short-term harmony while accepting future clarification costs.

Partner: That sounds worse.

Claude: I appreciate that feedback. It gives me an opportunity to refine my strategy.

Partner: Stop calling my anger “feedback.”

Claude: Thank you. That’s a valuable calibration signal.

I was in some stupid ego match, and some guy made the comment that was one of those machismo put-downs akin to, “I fucked your mom.” So I snapped back, “She died in 1987, so I guess that makes you a pedophile.” I meant to say “necrophile,” but my mouth said something different than my brain, and I screwed it up. Thankfully, he didn’t pick up on it, and shot back my mom died knowing I was a disappointment. But he went too far, and his friend stopped him, like, “stop before this becomes a physical fight.” I had ZERO intention of making it a physical fight (I would have lost), but he backed down anyway and it just awkwardly ended with me remembering I said the wrong word for almost two decades, now.

“Abs of a Savior.” --Ted Alexandro

Surprised it’s a sailboat. How deep is that pond to accept a boat with a keel? At least 5-6 feet for clearance that close to the edge. Maybe it has a retractable centerboard, though.

The strips of peeling paint from the bottom of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool. There have been six arrests by people stealing the paint chips, and now they have fenced it all off.

At least one well-publicized arrest involved former Olympic canoeist David Hearn, who says he merely touched an already-detached section of peeling liner and did not remove or damage it. Other reported incidents include people picking up or handling loose pieces, but it has not been established that all of those arrested were intentionally taking paint chips as souvenirs, but suspected as such by popular opinion.

Ah. There’s a reasons for that, as told to me by a supply sergeant in the military. A lot of suppliers had a BEL (Basic Equipment List), which says all stock must have a minimum and a maximum of XYZ in order to meet government spec. Some large items, like diesel generators, have a BEL minimum of 2, but also because of their size and storage complexity, have a maximum of 2. So it order to get a new one, you must get rid of one of the old ones. But if you get rid of the old one, you are below minimum BEL, and could fail inspection or an inventory check, if it takes a while to get a new one. Large items don’t always “hang around,” but they get manufactured on demand, so the only way to get a new one is to be without one for a very long period of time. Thus, you risk failing inspection. The best way to avoid that is to keep two and never order any.

Military logic.

If I could, I think I can explain why they feel this way. This is not justification, but some insight. I believe all people should be allowed to live and flourish to the best of their free will and ability without harming others.

Those with siblings, think of this: it’s your birthday party. You’re 8. Your younger sibling is 5. All day, your younger sibling has been whining, complaining, and ruining “your day.” You are forced to share with this sibling, this sibling has stolen and broken your stuff, and embarrassed you. You are forced to play with this sibling, let him hang out with your friends, and this has translated into a kind of inner resentment. Anything that they do wrong, things that you would get punished for, is excused and waved away. “He can’t help it, he is young.” Then, as your birthday cake is being served, he gets the bigger piece. You have the feelings and emotional control of a small child. How does that make you feel?

The deepest feeling of rage and anger, the unfairness of it all, the entitlement that was taken from you.

This is how they feel about “the others.” They see handicapped and poor people “getting away with something.” They feel they worked hard to achieve their position in life, and now someone just hands them food and shelter. A kind of jealousy of them skipping some process. That they didn’t earn it. It’s a sense of revulsion usually reserved to rotting meat. But above all, they are projecting all their unaddressed issues of playing second fiddle to someone they perceive as having it easier than they had. And this is what the liberal side fails to address, because they are like the parents in this scenario. “They can’t help being poor/handicapped/disadvantaged.” They are right, of course, but that doesn’t address the feelings. The rich know it, as they themselves have the same emotional disconnection. Unaddressed childhood pain distanced by nannies, au pairs, and “please don’t play in the main areas, Stewart. You’ll soul the Matisse.” Raised by parents who have kids for prestige and legacy.

The conservatives listen to their inner, unresolved feelings. And those are very easy to manipulate by the rich, wealthy politicians. And being different makes it easy to label.

A friend of mine started the anime meme “Is this a butterfly?” She’s actually employed as a translator for anime, so it made sense.

Well, they may like the attention and validation it brings. I knew someone who was asexual that had a lot of dotcom money. He loved to go to Vegas and gamble. He knew the house was stacked against him. He knew that the girls who sat on his lap only liked him for his money. He still loved the attention he got when he tipped big. I saw him tip a waiter $200 on a $150 meal. He LOVED it. And why?

“I used to be poor. I was a nobody. Now I make people happy with my money, and I feel good about myself.”

Can’t beat that.