Posts by vividranger8

Joshua Gray75 said:" checking an address would result in fines of $100"

Is it just me, or does that sentence sound completely nonsensical... or maybe there's something wrong with my head?🤔

I've been scouring the web trying to find where they actually specify the fine amounts for people attempting to cross into another county or city without a permit... but I'm coming up empty... 🤔

Does anyone have a link?

Look, crossing into another town or city isn't even illegal—regardless of what the cops are doing out on the streets; what's actually banned is leaving your place of residence. And honestly, the fact that they can't even word a simple restriction properly, let alone enforce it, says a whole lot about the folks running things right now.

P.S. Since every single letter from the federal government lists a massive wall of laws and regulations it's based on, it would be pretty nice if the authorities actually cited their specific authority when rolling out these massive measures. Just a thought—it might be a tiny contribution toward that famous "rule of law" everyone talks about.

Benjamin Barnes2 said:A few days ago, the NSCZ was practically begging everyone to just stay put and not leave their homes.
Now, the Department of Justice is out there slapping fines on anyone who ignores those requests.
I actually witnessed this firsthand tonight—a DOJ vehicle was at a checkpoint, pulling cars over and checking addresses just to write up $150 tickets.

I haven't personally seen a hundred-dollar fine handed out yet, but I definitely saw what was happening...

Honestly, you can take a fine like that and throw it straight in the trash. There’s absolutely zero legal basis for punishing people just because they "ignored a request."

Keith Cox6 said:Where on earth did you get the idea that the police aren't monitoring people in isolation?
Let’s recap here: there are the "registered" folks in the system who are actually isolating, and then there's the massive group of people who—just because they felt like it—refused to "register" by notifying their family doctor or the local health official. So, the issue isn't the people the system actually knows about. The problem is the huge majority who were exposed to someone potentially infected, or even confirmed cases, but kept their mouths shut and decided to "speak up" only after symptoms kicked in—by which time they’d been walking around freely or infecting medical staff by withholding the truth.
My sister is a doctor at one of those hospitals where nearly half the staff is out on quarantine. With that in mind, I have to ask: who is left to treat everyone else? We were already short-staffed, and now we're even more depleted. It’s no wonder surgeries are being postponed; oncology patients have never been in a more precarious spot because everyone is suddenly preoccupied with COVID.
Also, when you compare the measures implemented here to other—let's say, more liberal—systems, don't forget that our economic, financial, and healthcare capabilities are way below the average of the places you're citing. We simply aren't equipped to handle the fallout of this crisis, which is why the measures are so drastic and why following them feels like such an impossible struggle.
Well, honestly, it would be better if we were hit by a permanent recession next, because clearly, the priority is ensuring you can invoke your constitutional guarantee to go water the plants in an apartment in a neighboring city. If pausing your life is such a struggle, you'll probably all end up unemployed, banging your heads against whatever little wall hasn't collapsed from an earthquake yet—well, if only I had known. But you knew!

Sent from my iPhone 12 using Reddit

I’ll just stick to commenting on those folks you're calling "part of the system"... I mean, if some guy who's supposed to be in strict isolation suddenly pops up at a CVS, wouldn't you expect the cops to just haul him straight off to mandatory quarantine—like, toss him right into a Brooklyn jail or something? And then, once he's finally out, maybe a judge could slap him with a massive fine. If that actually happened to the first person, I bet everyone else would think twice before sneaking out for a stroll after their quarantine ends!

Keith Cox6 said:Where on earth did you get the idea that the police aren't monitoring people in isolation?
Let’s recap here: there are the "registered" folks in the system who are actually isolating, and then there's the massive group of people who—just because they felt like it—refused to "register" by notifying their family doctor or the local health official. So, the issue isn't the people the system actually knows about. The problem is the huge majority who were exposed to someone potentially infected, or even confirmed cases, but kept their mouths shut and decided to "speak up" only after symptoms kicked in—by which time they’d been walking around freely or infecting medical staff by withholding the truth.
My sister is a doctor at one of those hospitals where nearly half the staff is out on quarantine. With that in mind, I have to ask: who is left to treat everyone else? We were already short-staffed, and now we're even more depleted. It’s no wonder surgeries are being postponed; oncology patients have never been in a more precarious spot because everyone is suddenly preoccupied with COVID.
Also, when you compare the measures implemented here to other—let's say, more liberal—systems, don't forget that our economic, financial, and healthcare capabilities are way below the average of the places you're citing. We simply aren't equipped to handle the fallout of this crisis, which is why the measures are so drastic and why following them feels like such an impossible struggle.
Well, honestly, it would be better if we were hit by a permanent recession next, because clearly, the priority is ensuring you can invoke your constitutional guarantee to go water the plants in an apartment in a neighboring city. If pausing your life is such a struggle, you'll probably all end up unemployed, banging your heads against whatever little wall hasn't collapsed from an earthquake yet—well, if only I had known. But you knew!

Sent from my iPhone 12 using Reddit

Not ready? Seriously? When things really kicked off in Italy, they were banning funerals and weddings—well, unless it was just immediate family, anyway. It shouldn't take some genius-level intellect for our crisis management teams to see what's happening across the European Union and just... I don't know, apply those same rules here immediately? But nope. Here, someone dies, 150 people show up to the funeral, the virus spreads everywhere, and *then*—only then—do they finally pass a rule...!?

hollowwalker24 said:Around 865 Americans got busted breaking quarantine—some were repeat offenders, too

With people acting like this, I guess we should probably expect even stricter lockdowns and mandatory quarantines soon...

Like I said before—and I’ll say it again—these folks clearly need an electric collar with a GPS tracker. That way, if they step out of bounds, maybe a little shock would remind them to stay put...

But hey, it’s not just about them—it’s kind of on all of us too, I guess. We've basically built a country where criminals of every single kind just wander around town freely, or they flee to Austria or Canada and just laugh right in our faces. So, like, can we really expect regular folks to step up and be responsible? All those police officers hunkered down at checkpoints right now—they could have been used way more effectively if they were actually checking in on people in isolation every single day.

Joseph Taylor11 said:Did I actually read this somewhere, or was I just dreaming that you can't change your registered address right now?🤔
For instance, I own an apartment in the city and want to update my residency. I’ve got the deed and everything is squared away with the Democratic Party..

Why is this blocked? Is it suspended, or is it just gone for good?🤔

Check out my post from "Today, 08:11," then you'll totally get what's going on (I think I'm struggling with how to drop a link here, haha).

So, to avoid any weird drama with these checkpoints, I headed down to the Police Department this morning to try and register my current address. But nope—registration is totally off the table right now because there isn't a soul working at the Ministry of the Interior; everything is just shut down indefinitely. I asked the officer at the info desk (who was literally the only person there) what I should even do if I get pulled over while my official residence is listed somewhere else. And get this—the cop just goes, "Well, they know registration isn't possible right now..." Like, seriously!?

It’s pretty wild that even the online registration system isn't working either. I guess the folks at the Ministry of the Interior think this virus attacks computers too...

Matthew Jackson2 said:Generally speaking, the smartest move is just to steer clear of any high-risk activities altogether. Our first responders already have more than enough on their plates without having to deal with preventable accidents, and if you look at it objectively, these mishaps are really just a matter of cold, hard statistics—the more people you cram into the mountains, the higher the statistical probability that someone is going to need an emergency intervention.

Alright, I get it, you don't have to go overboard, but look—even on an airplane, they tell you to stretch your legs during the flight! I mean, I kind of feel like, in the long run, emergency services might actually end up with a massive workload just dealing with folks who spend a month or even a year stuck on their couches. My point isn't aimed at people who are actually sick or under quarantine, obviously—where staying cooped up at home makes total sense—but you know what I mean.

Jack Cook7 said:They aren't "taking it slow," they just have absolutely no clue what they're doing.

If they actually knew the drill, they would've dropped a full list of step-by-step measures and clear conditions months ago.

This whole latest mess with the farmers' markets and especially the ban on traveling between cities—with all this confusion over who's even in charge—just shows they're totally lost. They're basically making it up as they go, just trying to scramble out of the last mistake they made.

When you're handling something this massive, you cannot have different agencies tripping over each other. You can't have a huge crowd of people wondering, "Wait, do I ask this guy or that guy?" Anyone who has ever managed a major project or large-scale support knows that. This kind of confusion alone creates about 90% of the total system overload and all the errors that follow. Instructions need to be crystal clear, simple, and unambiguous, and they need to be released way ahead of time so everyone can sort out their questions before the hammer actually drops.

But hey, that's our favorite Brussels bureaucrat for you. As if he's ever done anything serious in his life where he actually had to take responsibility for a screw-up.

And then there's the earthquake, which really highlights how broken this country is. Even the Italians, despite all the chaos they were dealing with in Lombardy, ended up donating tents to us because this country didn't even have its own! Seriously? That is just pathetic. Man, if a 6.5 hit us right now, hundreds of thousands of people would be left out in the freezing cold, literally facing sub-zero temps, wind, and snow. Not to mention the casualties, the injured, the sick, and little kids.

The government is completely incompetent across the board. But hey, at least we joined NATO and the EU, right?

Look at what happened when things went south in Italy—NATO USA snatched their tests, Germany blocked shipments of equipment that was already paid for, and the Czechs swiped humanitarian gear being sent by Russia. Meanwhile, we're sitting here so lost that even Italy has to send us aid. Yeah, that's our "greatest achievement" right there.

Exactly! I mean, seriously, how can we expect people who struggle to fill out a basic tax return in DC, or can't even put together a simple sentence in English, let alone figure out how to wear a mask properly, to handle the biggest global plague of our century? It’s kind of ridiculous, right?

The whole thing feels like a setup—they just want to be able to stand on those campaign stages once this all blows over and claim their "brilliant" leadership saved us. But honestly, looking at how much they've ignored regular folks over the last few decades... yeah, I'm not buying it for a second.

Jose Scott3 said:Oh sure, you'll just guarantee everyone else behaves—like someone heading out to their ranch or a cabin won't stop by the ExxonMobil station, then hit the grocery store, then swing by cousin number one's place, then maybe cousin number two's...

The whole point is to kill off any kind of social contact, not just restrict walking around. There’s zero guarantee that someone actually out and about isn't going to grab an opportunity to hang out.

And being a "responsible individual" doesn't mean squat. The last two weeks have already proven there are way too many people who couldn't care less.

Maybe we should actually do something about those irresponsible folks, right?

nimbleharbor10 said:Exactly. What kind of threat does a man pose just by digging in his own dirt out in a rural area? It is sheer idiocy to prevent him from doing that.
My take is this: someone drafted this in an incredibly poor and imprecise manner. They are banning far too much, and the language is vague and lacks any legitimate justification. You should regulate gatherings, not basic movement.

So, a few days ago, I headed out into the mountains where the only thing I was likely to run into was a bear. And honestly, that was the whole point—just to stay as far away from people on the streets as possible...

Karen Morales said:Hey,

I’m a dual citizen (American-American) and have been living in the States since high school. I did all my schooling and worked entirely here in the US—never actually finished school or held a job back in America.

If I move back to America and leave my money sitting in US accounts—what does my tax situation look like? I’ve paid every cent of tax owed here, and there's no way I'm paying double.

It looks like there isn't a treaty between the two countries to prevent double taxation.

Does that mean I'm stuck owing taxes to the US government for all those years I was working stateside? 🙂

Also, if I move back and buy property using "foreign" money, is that just going to trigger an audit from the IRS?

Thanks a ton!

Nah, you aren't! You're only responsible for paying taxes once you officially become a tax resident—basically, when you register your primary residence in the US. Something like that, anyway, I guess.

Larry Brown14 said:Hey, quick question... can I actually pull cash out in Germany using an American card? Which ATMs should I be looking for, and what kind of fees am I going to get hit with here...?

Well, it really just depends on what kind of card you've got and which bank you use. Honestly, your best bet is to just check your bank's website or app—they'll have all the lowdown on those pesky transaction fees.

Laura Chavez93 said:We shall see after May 25th...

So, I was just setting up my online banking over at JPMorgan Chase—super easy, right?—and then this random pop-up hits me asking if they can use my personal info for all that marketing and junk stuff... I mean, obviously not! So I just clicked NO.

Benjamin Taylor6 said:About 14 years ago, our company went through privatization. The new owner promised us the moon and the stars—which is usually how these things go, right? Then, after a few years, he went out and took out several massive mortgage loans, putting the very land our factory sits on up as collateral. The money was ALLEGEDLY intended to fuel the day-to-day operations of our firm, which employs about 120 people.
But if you look at our "normal" operations, you won't see a single cent of that impact. The owner pulled in roughly $7 million in loans, yet I’d be surprised if even a million actually made it into this company. We ended up with a couple of pieces of used machinery, nothing more.
Then the recession hit, and somehow, we managed to weather the storm. For the last few years, work has been plentiful—we have plenty of orders coming in—but the real issue is that nobody has invested a dime back into the business. Not in the equipment, not in the staff... nothing. And we all know those massive loans were drawn down in a few big chunks. Now, the owners are trying to play smart, claiming everything was spent on running the business, which is total nonsense because the company hasn't touched a penny of borrowed money in five years. Granted, we are struggling, but...
The struggle isn't caused by a lack of work; it's caused by a complete refusal to reinvest.
The employee council receives certain financial reports, but they are utterly useless when it comes to tracing where that loan money actually went. Honestly, it feels like those reports are written in a language only a specialized CPA could decipher—not some engineer who doesn't deal with high-level finance in his daily life.
Now, word is getting around that the money never even landed in our company's account. Instead, it was allegedly diverted to a sister company to be invested abroad, where the owner holds several other businesses.
Those of us on the union side and the employee council just want to know one thing: how do we find out what happened to that loan money? Because the second anyone brings up a raise or better working conditions, the owner immediately starts whining about how much money he spent and how we all need to chip in to pay off his debts.
So, how do we uncover the TRUTH? Because from where I'm sitting, it looks like we're being forced to tighten our belts just so someone else can fund a private hotel in Moscow.

We need this information to give us leverage during negotiations. We need to walk into that room with hard facts, rather than letting them treat us like idiots.

The owner isn't going to hand over this info—or if he does, it'll be scrubbed clean so nothing is visible. And the bank that issued the loans? They'll just hide behind "proprietary business secrets." There's a strong suspicion that the cash never even hit the books of the company providing the collateral, but was instead snatched up by an overseas parent company.
And apparently, that shell company only has about ten employees.

Is there any way for the employee council or the union to get answers from the IRS? The FBI? The GAO?

Well, I guess you'd need to get a look at the actual business ledgers—you know, really dig into the books—and then have some kind of expert go over everything to make sense of the numbers. As for how you'd even get your hands on those books in the first place... man, I haven't got a clue.

Alright, look, we really tried to dig up some actual, solid info here—but honestly? It feels kind of childish, you know? Especially when you consider how incredibly serious and transparent every bank is being about all this stuff. 😁 😵

wiredlynx28 said:When you walk into a bank, just ask for their client questionnaire. You'll see clearly marked what's mandatory and what's elective, along with specific citations stating why certain info is required under statute 👍
.
Then there are those people who get all worked up and attack the bank, only to have their checking account closed immediately.
A quick copy-paste from the General Terms and Conditions:
The Bank reserves the discretionary right to refuse a Client's request to establish any business relationship with the Bank without explanation.

It works the same way when they terminate a relationship without explanation. Then clients jump to their own conclusions—thinking it was because of an "optional" question that was actually mandatory, etc.—all without actually looking up the facts. They can sever a business relationship for various reasons, most commonly because
- the Client provided false or inaccurate personal data, or other information necessary for the proper and lawful provision of services when signing the checking account contract or a specific additional service contract;
- the Client's account activity damages the Bank's reputation;
- the Bank is unable to perform due diligence measures in accordance with the provisions of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act;
- the Client acts contrary to the mandatory regulations of the United States and societal morals.
Upon termination of the checking account contract, the Client and any authorized representatives are required to return all cards and other instruments or documents received from the Bank related to the checking account. Furthermore, the Client is obligated to settle all outstanding obligations regarding the checking account, including interest and fees.

And for those claiming they were wronged by questions regarding children and such—did you even file a formal grievance?
Another copy-paste from the bank's terms:
If a Client believes their rights in a business relationship with the Bank have been violated or that their Account has been unfairly charged, they are authorized and obligated to submit a written grievance to the Bank without delay via mail to the business address, fax, or email, or by delivering it to a bank branch, clearly marking it as a grievance. Bank employees will forward the grievance to the competent department for dispute resolution. The grievance must include a detailed description of the event/situation as well as evidence demonstrating the grounds for the Client's claim. If the description or evidence is incomplete, the Bank may request that the Client supplement the grievance. The bodies conducting the grievance resolution process and their authorities are governed by Bank policies.

I mean, this is kind of like when a doctor prescribes you antibiotics, right? You ask them why you need them, and they just basically tell you to "go Google it." Like, seriously? Who’s actually supposed to be the expert here—me or you? If we’re being professional about it, for a place like ABC, it should look something like this:

* Required info includes:...
* Optional info includes:...

So, based on what you’re saying, since this isn't exactly top-secret stuff, I guess you're free to post it.

Thanks in advance!

wiredlynx28 said:Look, providing info about children is strictly optional, so there's no requirement there.
Everything should be completely transparent at any major US bank—you can find all the data, disclaimers, and general terms of service right online.
And regarding the cancellation policy, I didn't just pull that out of thin air; it's clearly listed in the bank's online database.

Well, let's just wait and see, shall we? Because honestly, where on any actual bank's website does it clearly state something like:

1. these are mandatory details required because the federal government is forcing our hand
2. these are mandatory details just because we decided we want them
3. these are optional details we're asking for because we're curious about you, but feel free to skip them if you don't feel like sharing

Where is that actually written? Not for a single bank out there, for that matter—so, yeah, "transparent." It's a rhetorical question, really, since we already know the answer.

wiredlynx28 said:Look, the bank just informs you exactly what type of data they need and why, then you simply check a box to say whether you consent or not. 👍

For the hundredth time, they can ask these questions if their internal policies mandate that specific Questionnaire, but it’s ultimately up to the client whether they want to provide that info. If they refuse—and if it's mandatory—the bank won't open the checking account, period. They can just go to another bank that doesn't require it. Simple as that.

Oh, sure! Like they're actually gonna sit there and tell a client, "Hey, we're using your data to build a profile on you just so we can target you with more ads and sell you more services"? Yeah, right... I'd love to see them try that one.

wiredlynx28 said:Steve, in my experience, once I checked in with my managers at Wells Fargo, things like professional qualifications and residency status were strictly mandatory requirements. If I weren't already in this industry, I would have thought they were optional 👍
Just because those specific questions were required there doesn't mean every other institution operates the same way.
They actually walked me through their system to show me exactly what was required versus what wasn't, so I highly doubt Chase wouldn't have similar mandates. Not everything handled internally by a bank is voluntary; some things are simply non-negotiable 👍
If these weren't mandatory, you can bet they wouldn't be sending out notices to clients or freezing accounts—that serves absolutely no one's interest.

Looking at those European Union laws coming into effect soon:

Data controllers are required to inform you when they collect personal data about you. You have the right to know the name of the controller, what the processing is going to be used for...

Man, I am seriously curious to see how banks are going to justify asking for your college degree or even how many kids you have... 🙄

William Cook7 said:Fair enough. Could you clarify what kind of contract we're actually talking about here?

It’s just, you know, one where it basically says you’ll do some work for someone else, and then—get this—that person actually pays you... like, actual dollars. Honestly, I guess the specific legal label on the contract doesn't even matter that much.