my subscriptions
UbiquitousBagel commented on a post in r/Economics
buckley118 5 points

gambleˈɡamb(ə)l/verbgerund or present participle: gambling

  1. play games of chance for money; bet."he gambles on football"synonyms:bet, wager, place a bet, lay a bet, stake money on something, back the horses, try one's luck on the horses; More

  2. take risky action in the hope of a desired result."he was gambling on the success of his satellite TV channel"synonyms:take a chance, take a risk, take a leap in the dark, leave things to chance, speculate, venture, buy a pig in a poke; More

Seems like gambling to me.

UbiquitousBagel 3 points

Oh if only the world were as simple as being able to fit neatly into little placeholders like dictionary definitions.

No one said investing is without risk, but you're taking one definition of gambling and using it to fit your idea of what investing is. A = B and C = B, therefore A = C is not correct logic.

buckley118 0 points

The world rarely fits into dictionary definitions. Words, however... it’s almost as if they fit by design.

UbiquitousBagel 2 points

Words certainly do, but words without context have no meaning.

Load more comments
UbiquitousBagel commented on a post in r/AskReddit
amethyst_dragoness 3,435 points

This rings true. Of all the crap we fight about, money is a big one. I want to pay things off, partner wants to blow money and "pay things off later." Getting them to sit down and logically discuss bills is like watching a 2nd grader squirm while doing homework. We'll see how this goes. Many other good qualities, just money sucks. I manage most of the finances anyhow, and logic usually prevails in discussions.

UbiquitousBagel 9 points

The one thing I’ll never get about people is how some fail to understand the consequences of credit. I always explain it like this:

When you buy something on credit, you are creating a point in time in the future where future you has to spend less money on other things in order to pay off that thing you bought today, plus interest. The more you buy on credit today, the more money that future you has to either make or the less you have to spend in order to pay it off.

But us humans tend not to care for what happens in the future so as to satisfy a need today. Hence why people still smoke.

DownvoteToKarmaHell 2 points

Now if someone could just explain that to our politicians…

UbiquitousBagel 2 points

Agreed. Actually credit for that line goes to Ray Dalio in this awesome video that explains the economy really well. How The Economic Machine Works

UbiquitousBagel 1 point

I think I just realized why banks/brokers are not advising their clients to do this after having put myself in the perspective of a mortgage dealer. I wonder if the annual payments back to your RRSP have to be included in your debt service coverage ratio calculation and would thus decrease the maximum amount you qualify for, which would have a negative effect on the total value of that broker’s or bank’s book of business? Since the mortgage dealer makes money based on a percentage of each client’s total mortgage value, this would mean less money for them?

Even then, in the case of a bank, why not refer that client to a mutual funds dealer at that same bank who can gain a long-term client by helping the client get an RRSP set up with automatic contributions to pay back the FHB plan borrowings which could then automatically go into a mutual fund within that RRSP? The only hurdle I see to that would be, and I don’t know how banks work, but maybe the income targets from each division (mortgages vs investments) are independent of each other and smaller-picture managers wouldn’t see that the total value for that bank would be higher because they are too focused on their own team’s income targets?

Just thinking out loud here.

UbiquitousBagel commented on a post in r/CrazyIdeas
Urbexjeep15 19 points

To be clear, the Social Security"enjoyed" by our seniors currently is being paid for by the people that are currently working. The money that they paid in was used years ago for the people before them.

On a side note, I don't quite understand the worry about Social Security going belly-up. If the wages continue to increase in the future, and the Securities being paid out are to the people who were paid less to do the same jobs, wouldn't that in theory mean that there would be more money put into the system that is actually used, a surplus?

UbiquitousBagel 13 points

The answer is right in your first paragraph. The social security being enjoyed by today’s retirees is being paid for by the current working class. In order for this to be sustainable, not only do we need wage growth, but we need job growth and population growth ad infinitum. Further compounding the problem is that seniors are living longer, thus drawing money for longer. You need a certain amount of people working/contributing for every person drawing. That ratio used to be 1:10, and I believe now it’s closer to 1:2 or 3. The actuaries who decided the contribution and draw rates way back when were wrong in their forecast when it was implemented because people only drew from it for an average of 5 years after retiring. Now it’s closer to 20 years.

OrCurrentResident 0 points

You are hilariously wrong in literally every sentence of your analysis. Lifespans in the US are not currently getting longer except at the upper parts of the income ladder. The original Social Security actuaries quite famously overestimated how long people would live in the future; in the ‘90s they were all over TV getting interviewed about it. You obviously have never heard of productivity or you wouldn’t make such stupid statements about how many workers it takes to support anything. How many workers did it take to make a car in 1940? In 2018? You’re utterly unfamiliar with the income cutoff.

The cherry on top is that you think all your silly ideas make you hard nosed or something lol. No, they make you a sucker, regurgitating the same financial industry PR that I was in the room for the development of, and you eagerly swallowed up like a blind baby bird. Gullible people always think they’re smart.

UbiquitousBagel 0 points

Wow that escalated quickly. Not sure why all the hostility, but whatever personal struggles you’re dealing with right now I wish you the best of luck in overcoming them and actually searching for information that doesn’t already confirm your preconceived biases.

Load more comments
UbiquitousBagel commented on a post in r/AskReddit
UbiquitousBagel 2 points

Strange cattle mutilations.

I was a police officer in rural Canada and one of the weirdest calls I received was a cattle mutilation. We often get cattle mutilation calls and it’s usually some kids shooting rifles at the cows so we checked for bullet casings walking towards the scene but what we come upon we weren’t prepared for at all.

Normally when we arrive we will see bullet holes and blood around, and of course dead cattle. We call the livestock investigator, he does his thing and we conclude the file.

This time, however, we see pieces of cattle strewn about the field. Still not very weird because sometimes you get people chopping up the pieces for who knows what reason.

But the part that left us scratching our heads was that some of these cattle where bifurcated from head to toe. Completely split in half. but it gets weirder. There is no blood to be found anywhere, the sliced sides of the cows appear as though they had been cut with a very powerful laser, they appeared cauterized somehow, and lastly, some organs were missing in some of the cows without disturbing any of the other organs. The cows were still relatively warm to the touch, so it had happened recently. That file was concluded as unresolved and really no one knew what to make of it and had never quite seen anything like that before.

Fast forward about 3 months and my partner and I are patrolling down a highway adjacent to that same field and we see this shiny green light dancing through that same field, looked similar to those green laser pointers but instead of continuing in length for very long distances as they normally do, the light terminated about 50 feet off the ground. We don’t think much of it at the time because we have seen kids play with laser pointers before and there’s nothing illegal with that as long as they aren’t shining it at people or vehicles. About an hour later we get another cattle mutilation call in the same field with very similar results to the first time, except now when we arrive, almost all internal organs were removed, still no blood, and still completely unexplained. Hadn’t happened again after that while I was posted there.

UbiquitousBagel commented on a post in r/canada
randomu_name 1 point

I'd put an exception to telling the parents if the administrator, teacher, or guidance counsellor believes that informing the parents would pose a danger to the child.

Assuming that belief can be judged to be reasonable, like the child has informed a teacher of abuse or neglect at home or suggested it's possible or likely. Otherwise there would be no practical difference as teachers could say 100% of the time that they were justified in withholding information based on a baseless suspicion.

I believe this is a good balance between acknowledging that these students are minors in the care of their parents/guardians while also protecting vulnerable students.

I would agree. I think that's reasonable. Unfortunately it seems that the proponents of this change have unsavoury reasons for wanting to change the law, and opponents don't seem to care about taking rights away from parents in blanket fashion or setting a poor precedent.

UbiquitousBagel 1 point

So basically your position relies on the slippery slope logical fallacy as well as the false equivalency fallacy.

Slippery slope fallacy: allow this and it will open the door for the state to erode all parents rights.

False equivalency: a child wouldn’t be allowed to enter into a contract or get a tattoo, neither should he be able to have the status of his membership in a GSA withheld from his parents.

Slippery slope fallacies are weak arguments that tend to be exaggerated to drive home a baseless view point of the person arguing it. As an example, many said that legalizing recreational marijuana would open the floodgates to people using all other manner of drugs with greater frequency (the opposite has been proven to be true). Another example is in jurisdictions where prostitution has been legalized, many people argued it would cause all manner of sexual deviancy to become legalized (again not true), or legalizing gay marriage would then allow people to start marrying animals or family members.

The false equivalency argument also does not hold weight, (speaking of apples and oranges) because the circumstances and impacts (in this case not allowing a child to enter into a contract or getting a tattoo) do not align. In fact, your examples are laws that exist for the protection of the child, much like the GSA bill would.

Your assertion that the state should not begin to dictate how a child should be raised is already moot because there exists a number of laws that dictate how children should or should not be raised (mandatory primary and secondary education, child sex trafficking, age of consent, liquor and tobacco laws, child labour laws, child safety seat laws, health care laws such as a child of a Jehova’s Witness family cannot be denied a life-saving blood transfusion because of religious beliefs).

These types of positions in arguments stem solely from long-held beliefs that a parent has ultimate authority over their child and that is just simply not in the best interest of the child all the time. As an example, prior to child labour laws coming into force, it was not uncommon for children of farmers to be pulled from school in order to work the farm. Parents argued that the state should have no such say in the raising of a child. We now know better and had such a law not been implemented, we would have continued to see an increase in child illiteracy among other negative consequences.

It may help to reframe your thought process on this not as the will of the state being imposed on parents, but the will of society’s morals and standards being imposed on them, much like the above-mentioned laws have been. The fact of the matter is that the revelation to a parent of his child’s sexual orientation has and continues to have a real, negative impact on the quality of life on many LGBTQ2+ children, and Albertans will stand for it no longer. It is self-serving for parents and detrimental to a large percentage of children to take any position to the contrary.

UbiquitousBagel commented on a post in r/JusticeServed
Muddy_Roots 4,711 points

I've heard many times he's not completely blind either. But shocking, people with disabilities can be assholes too. One of the biggest assholes in high school was a kid on a motorized wheel chair. Dude would plow through the crowded hallways with no regard, often running over feet and bumping into people. Dude was a fucking cunt. Went to school with him from elementary though high school and he used to be nice and everyone loved him. But something happened and turned him in to a bastard.

UbiquitousBagel 4 points

Cunty bastards are the worst!

UbiquitousBagel commented on a post in r/Showerthoughts
UbiquitousBagel 2 points

I’m a bit late to the game but I hope this benefits at least one person. A constant feeling of underachievement is something that is common to a lot of sufferers of adult ADD, which is severely under- or mis-diagnosed, often as depression. People with ADD also tend not to stick to one thing for very long, especially when it gets tough or they become distracted by the next shiny object. They have the capacity and drive to achieve something great, but the lack of focused effort often results in half-finished business ideas, projects, hobbies, or they just generally don’t see things through to the end.

Your mind runs a million miles a second which often results in some really great ideas that if the focus was there, could change the world. Some of the world’s most notable people are sufferers of ADD, but they have found ways to focus their energy, which results in massive dedication to doing something really great.

My doctor started me on Vyvanse which is an amphetamine-based ADD drug and it has done wonders for my ability to concentrate and actually maintain a sustained effort in what I’ve been able to do. It is not the be all end all solution to ADD, but it helps put you back on to a level playing field and can be part of a long-term solution if that is truly what you are experiencing.

Not saying you have ADD, but this is related closely to my experience.

UbiquitousBagel commented on a post in r/BuyItForLife
HourLimit 3 points

Don’t know the brand... I use scissors instead of nail clippers and these cut perfectly ; have tried to get used to others in case I lose these but nothing comes close... Anyone know if these are still made?

UbiquitousBagel 2 points

I remember these, my nonna had a pair. They are generically called forbicine (for-bee-CHEE-nay).

UbiquitousBagel commented on a post in r/AskReddit
Temperment 6,198 points

Lifetime warranties.

abnormalcat 26 points

Check out Osprey Packs

UbiquitousBagel 1 point

Happy cake day!

UbiquitousBagel 30 points

I’ve heard (but can not verify) that one of the reasons Nortel went bankrupt is they had manufactured their phones so well throughout the Cold War, to the point of being resistant to electromagnetic pulses, that they almost never broke down. You can still see office phones from 30 years ago still in use today. Lack of product turnover was said to have contributed to their demise.

UbiquitousBagel commented on a post in r/aww
jakeisthewolf 334 points

At first glance I thought your dog had a split tongue and I was VERY startled

UbiquitousBagel 3 points

Me too then I quickly was like no that’s illogical ubiquitousbagel, clearly it’s 3 pieces of chewing gum sticking out of her mouth. Zoom in. Oh!!!

nonesanse 2 points

now dont cum digital, can borrow u more chewing gum if ur not allowed to masturbate instead🤣🤣🤣😂😃 sharable with ur partner collectives 😂😂

UbiquitousBagel 1 point

Am I having a stroke or just fail to understand your reply?

UbiquitousBagel commented on a post in r/AskReddit
UbiquitousBagel 2 points

I was about 5 or 6 and my younger sister would slap me then run away. I was doing crafts and needed to get back at her so I threw a pair of scissors (this was the 80s and I didn’t have safety scissors) at her, handle side first because in my child brain, I worked it out and the sharp side would stay facing away from her, and I slightly impaled her in the back.

LilithSChild 1 point

Did she slap you again?

UbiquitousBagel 2 points

Once more and then I hit her with a monkey wrench causing her lasting back issues to this day. Not after that though!

UbiquitousBagel commented on a post in r/explainlikeimfive
geak78 229 points

Yes you should do chest compressions to the rhythm of "Another One Bites the Dust"

edit: Most of the time you can do CCC or Continuous Chest Compressions unless they have drown.

UbiquitousBagel 1 point

In fact, you can do compressions only any time the cardiac arrest wasn’t caused by respiratory arrest. A good example is opioid overdose. It causes cardiac arrest only because it first causes respiratory arrest first. Giving breaths then is more important first.

Mositius 2 points

As a counter example: a lot of rock songs have the melody in the lower voice, e.g. the chorus from I don't want to miss a thing.

UbiquitousBagel 1 point

Ok now I’m really confused. What determines whether the higher or the lower harmony is dominant?

Michael_APKPLZ 3 points

Because the higher part almost always carries the primary melody. Even when you're harmonizing, the tenor or soprano voice is carrying the "strongest" part of the music, in the sense that it's what you hear first and remember the longest.

It's not limited to vocals, either. Trumpets play melody, tubas play bass. Violins and string basses, clarinets and oboes, guitars and bass guitars. Mid-range instruments like trombones and saxophones are more flexible, but if you have multiple sources of sound, the higher one will almost always get the distinctive part of the music. Even on a piano, your right hand plays the melody nine times out of ten.

UbiquitousBagel 1 point

That is a really good explanation. Thank you!

UbiquitousBagel commented on a post in r/AskReddit
Aedan2016 2,891 points

I was sick almost 10 years ago. I didn’t quite know what it was but he t was a weird pain in my stomach that kept getting worse... and I had zero appetite for several days on end.

I go to the hospital and nobody seems to believe me that something is VERY wrong. The triage nurse has me wait until I am the very last person there. When my name is called I can barely walk to the back. The doctor spends less than 5 minutes with me and gives me some anesthestic to drink. The pain subsided and I start to walk out.

Suddenly I start heaving and puke a significant amount of blood on the floor in front of the doctor. He tells me that it isn’t something to worry about and makes me leave. I knew that was a BS excuse to get me out of there.

The next day I went to a different hospital and immediately got into a room. I went through X-rays and various other tests. Turns out I had multiple ulcers in my stomach that were pushing against some other organs. I was immediately attended to and the problem went away entirely within a few weeks.

I have health insurance (my family is quite wealthy too) AND live in Canada. I ended up contacting health Canada and had the doctor fired. I debated civil action, but opted not to

UbiquitousBagel 6 points

Health Canada doesn't get involved in physician disciplinary action, that would be your provincial college of physicians.

UbiquitousBagel commented on a post in r/IAmA
UbiquitousBagel 1 point

I like the idea of it, but I think it’s being masqueraded by politicians as being a progressive humanitarian policy rather than (at least in my suspicions) it’s a way to save money for the government at the end of the day (also not a bad thing). If UBI replaces several different programs such as welfare, EI, OAS, GIS... think of how much would be saved per year in administrative costs in not having to run those programs. Wages, lease, admin costs for each of those programs I’m sure runs into the billions per year even before the cost of the actual payments is factored in. Even if it’s $2 billion/year, you would need an uptake of about 142,000 more people claiming UBI benefits in order to make it more of a cost (assuming 50% of the population co-habitates which equals an average payment of $14,000/person and government shuts down all other low-income supplement programs).

As for the neo-con retards who can’t see past their own blind fury, this would be a net benefit for Canada financially, and that doesn’t even consider the undoubted reduced cost of having fewer people in destitute poverty.

UbiquitousBagel commented on a post in r/AskReddit
kungsverige -36 points


UbiquitousBagel 6 points

I won’t downvote you like so many others have. I don’t know your life or what is taking up your time. What I will say is some things in life can’t be TLDR’d, and sometimes you just have to stop and smell the roses. I didn’t stop to smell the roses for the first 35 years of my life and I regret it terribly. 35 years passes very quickly if you don’t live in the moment and take the time to just smell the roses.

UbiquitousBagel commented on a post in r/canada
kiduncool 155 points

I have a question: wouldnt dicriminalization of drugs encourage drug use? And would that put a strain on their already strained public health care system?

Edit: For clarification, I'm asking about the strain this puts on Canada's health Care system. I get less people are dying in porutgal by drug overdose because of medical benefits, and they get clean needles, provided through the healthcare system, which to me suggests a higher cost.

Edit 2: Also Portugal's drug use is still much higher than Canada's.

Edit 3: Portugal: Reported lifetime use of "all illicit drugs" increased from 7.8% to 12%, lifetime use of cannabis increased from 7.6% to 11.7%, cocaine use more than doubled, from 0.9% to 1.9%, ecstasy nearly doubled from 0.7% to 1.3%, and heroin increased from 0.7% to 1.1%

Final edit: well as with most political issues, there seems to be some degree of ambiguity of the outcome, misinformation, speculation, and what is the more "moral" choice, on both sides. I remain undecided on the issue, but I thank you all. And remember, keep an open mind.

UbiquitousBagel 1 point

I wouldn’t be surprised if drug use increased as a result of decriminalization or legalization. From my point of view, a lot of people self-medicate with illegal drugs to treat some of the symptoms of undiagnosed mental health issues. Ketamine is a good example of a pharmaceutical-turned-street drug used by a lot of people that shows promise in clinical trials for the treatment of PTSD and depression-related disorders, with a much lower latency period before it takes action than traditional antidepressants.

If it meant that more people might have access to cleaner, safer drugs like this, I would be all for legalization. I don’t think it will cause a massive rise in drug use for the majority of people who don’t already use them or need them in one way or another.

view more:
next ›
10,559 Karma
7,142 Post Karma
3,417 Comment Karma

Following this user will show all the posts they make to their profile on your front page.

About ubiquitousbagel

  • Reddit Birthday

    November 26, 2016

Other Interesting Profiles

    Want to make posts on your
    own profile?

    Sign up to test the Reddit post to profile beta.

    Sign up