Category Archives: Deep Thoughts

I think…therefore I’m dangerous.

How to Tell if the Person You’re Dating is After Your Money

Posted on by
18

A objective list of things to consider to reveal the truth.

A very, very good friend of mine — someone I’ve known for a very long time — has begun dating a woman who may have ulterior motives in the relationship. My friend is apparently quite smitten with this woman and I suspect it’s because they met at a time in his life when he was feeling particularly vulnerable to an agreeable woman’s “charms.”

Sadly, my friendship with this person is on the rocks — indeed, he’s tuned me out completely and won’t listen to anything I have to say. And although many of his other friends have similar suspicions about this new woman in his life, they just want to “keep out of it” because it’s “none of their business.” I think they should be ashamed of themselves. I think friends who really care do need to get involved, at least to offer objective advice.

I’m doing my part. Here’s list of bullet points to consider when there’s a possibility that the person you have begun dating might be after your money:

  • How did you meet? Dating sites are excellent tools for people trolling for good financial partners. Many sites encourage you to provide financial information such as annual income. This makes it easy for someone looking to improve their finances to find someone in a better financial situation then they’re in.
  • How quickly did conversation turn to your material possessions? Did you mention your multiple homes, flashy European car, or airplane? (These are just examples, of course.) If someone is interested in your money, they’ll be impressed by what you own and more anxious to “seal the deal.”
  • What techniques did this person use to get and keep your interest? This can be conversation based — for example, agreeing with everything you say or siding with you against a common enemy. Or it might be more emotionally based, such as sharing risqué photographs or personal details to gain your trust. A rather well-off friend of mine who tried dating sites told me that a few of the more desperate women sent him “boudoir photos” very early on in their email conversations.
  • How quickly did the other party satisfy your basic emotional needs? I’m talking about button-pushing here — “sealing the deal.” Women can easily seal the deal with good sex, the sooner the better. Men can seal the deal with things like flowers, romance, hand-holding, cuddling, and/or excellent foreplay before sex. Someone looking for a meal ticket will want to build a strong emotional bond quickly, while you’re still wowed by all the attention you’re getting and don’t have time to think clearly about what’s really going on.
  • How big is the financial inequity between you? There are five main things to consider here:
    • Employment status. Is this new person gainfully employed? Has he/she been working steadily for a while or bouncing from one job to another? While being “freelance” or “self-employed” might sound good, if there’s no work and no revenue, it really doesn’t count as being gainfully employed.
    • Income. Is this person earning enough income to cover living expenses with enough left over to live comfortably? Is his/her standard of living and lifestyle similar to yours?
    • Outstanding debt. Does this person have a lot of outstanding debt such as student loans, credit card balances, and personal loans? If this person owns a home, is it under water? If so, by how much?
    • Net worth. Is this person’s net worth — that’s total assets minus total debt — negative? Someone who is in debt up to his/her eyeballs will be highly motivated to find a partner who can help prevent him/her from drowning in it.
    • Retirement savings. Does this person have his/her own retirement savings including pensions, IRAs, and retirement investments? Someone without a retirement plan could be looking for someone else to provide it.
  • Has the other party asked for assistance? Has this person appealed to you to help with his/her finances? Perhaps borrow a small (or larger) amount of money? Ask your advice about refinancing or selling a home? Enlist your help getting a job?
  • Has the other party indicated that he/she wants to get married? Marriage — as I’ve so recently discovered — is more than just a vow of love until “death do you part” (which can apparently be broken). It’s a legal and binding contract with all kinds of ramifications on finances. If the other party is in a hurry to get married, it might be because he/she is in a hurry to grab your purse strings. Remember that a good prenuptial agreement can save you far more than it costs to draw up. And if your new partner refuses to sign it, that’s a pretty good indication of what his/her intentions really are.

In my friend’s case, an objective look at these points raised a lot of red flags. It seems that there’s a huge financial inequity between him and the woman he’s dating. In addition, the woman was extremely quick to seal the deal (yes, with sex) and gain his trust. That, coupled with what I know about the woman’s personality and my friend’s extraordinary behavior changes after they met, has me convinced that she’s primarily motivated by the financial benefits of a relationship with him. But because she meets his emotional needs — constant agreeability, ego stroking, companionship, and sex — he’s become blind to what’s so obvious to the rest of us — including the friends who simply won’t speak up.

What makes this all the more lamentable is that my friend, at age 56, is at a point in his life where he’s achieved an enviable amount of financial security. No, he’s not rich, but he’s financially stable with a positive net worth and very little real debt. To take on the financial responsibilities of a person he barely knows just because she’s pushed the right buttons when he needed them pushed is breathtakingly tragic.

Now I don’t know if my friend will read this. He very seldom reads my blog. I’m sure that if he does, he’ll recognize himself and his situation. He’d be blind not to.

But will he take what I’ve written here in the spirit in which it was intended: as a wakeup call to objectively look at the situation and possibly slow down? Or will what I’ve written here for him further damage our long friendship? Sadly, his irrational behavior lately leads me to believe that it’ll do the latter, possibly destroying our friendship forever. I believe that at this point, he’s too far gone down a foolish path.

As good good friend, however — a really good friend who truly cares about his emotional well-being — I’m willing to take the risk. To do otherwise would be to betray our long friendship.

I hope he reads this and understands.

Congratulations! You’ve made it to the end of yet another lengthy blog post here on An Eclectic Mind. If you got this far, you must have gotten something out of what you read. And isn’t it nice to read Web content that isn’t full of annoying ads?

How about doing something to show your appreciation? I’d love it if you’d add a comment at the end of this post to share your feedback with me and others. But I’d really love it if you’d visit my Support page and chip in a few dollars to help cover the cost of hosting this blog and motivate me to keep writing new, interesting content. It’ll only take a moment and I really would appreciate it!

 

Communication Breakdown

Posted on by
2

And no, I’m not talking about the Led Zeppelin song.

Imagine this scenario: A married couple have been together for many years. She’s been described by more than a few people as an “overachiever” — someone who sets many goals and then sets out to achieve them. She gets bored easily and is always looking for new challenges. He’s more laid back, generally satisfied with what he has, and often just takes whatever life hands him and makes it work for him.

In the beginning, the differences between them were minor. But as she shifted in one direction, he shifted to the other. After a long time together, she was ready to move on — preferably with him — and he resented the fact that she just couldn’t accept the status quo.

In the later years, she often brainstormed with him, usually on long car rides, about the things they could do together to make a more interesting life that relied less on the 9 to 5 grind he was stuck in. He almost always agreed they were good ideas. She thought they were on the same page.

But they weren’t. For some reason, he kept nodding but he wasn’t really agreeing. Yet he never told her how he really felt or what he really wanted. She never knew.

Then it was too late.

Communication breakdown.

Or think about this scenario: Same couple, but they’re living apart. She’s gone to her summer job for the fifth season in a row. She left early because she likes it there and can do more work earlier in the season. He doesn’t want her to go early, but he never tells her. He keeps his anger and resentment to himself.

She never knows how he feels because he never tells her. Instead, he tells everyone else, making her look downright evil for leaving when he wanted her to stay.

But he never told her. She never knew.

Communication breakdown.

Or this scenario: Same couple. He’s called her to tell her he wants a divorce. She’s surprised at the suddenness of it all — only a month before, they’d talked about him spending the summer together where she works. She’d begun planning, preparing, making room in her cramped quarters for another human being and a dog.

So when he suddenly tells her he wants a divorce, she’s shattered.

Communication breakdown.

Or how about this scenario: Same couple. They’ve talked it over in person and although she’s still shocked by the suddenness, she realizes that it really is over. She asks if it’s okay to wait until she returns home in October to take care of the formalities. He agrees.

In the meantime, he’s called her family members and at least one friend who lives where she works. She doesn’t know about this; he asks everyone not to tell her. The friend gets the wrong message from the call. He tells the wife that the marriage can be fixed. That all they need to do is get together and work on it. She’s doubtful, but he’s so sure. She starts to think that maybe he’s right. That maybe when she gets home they can talk it out and make things work.

But two weeks later, the husband contacts the wife, asking if she’s given the split any thought. She doesn’t understand — she thought they agreed to wait. What’s the hurry? But he won’t return her calls or texts promptly. When they finally speak, she’s strung out, confused by her friend’s advice and the signals she’s getting from her husband. She’s not rational on the phone. He gets angry.

Two weeks later, it happens all over again. Now she’s really upset, especially when she can’t get him on the phone right away to talk and doesn’t understand what his hurry is. And then when she does reach him, he’s nasty and hostile.

Communication breakdown.

And this scenario: Same couple. Not understanding how a man she’s loved for so long can be so hostile and mean to her and unsure of her future, the wife is completely strung out.

When she finds out about the other woman, things come to a head. She can’t sleep. She has no appetite. She cries on and off during the day with the tiniest thing setting her off. She begins seeing a grief counselor for help.

She writes him a long letter trying to explain her side of things and trying to get him to explain why he’s hurting her so badly. He doesn’t respond. This only makes things worse.

Communication breakdown.

In all these scenarios, a lot of pain is dealt out — mostly because of a failure to communicate. When will it end? That’s something the wife would really like to know.

Freedom without Guilt

Posted on by
Comment

Looking at the positive side of divorce.

My friends have all been incredibly supportive as I go through the divorce process. They’re constantly offering uplifting words of wisdom and telling me to treat myself well.

Another author, who I remain in contact with mostly via Twitter, said in a private direct message:

long time ago— after breakup—I asked myself—what couldn’t I do while still in arelationship—I went to art school. You?… travel…?

I responded truthfully:

I’ve always had a lot of freedom to do what I want. Now I have freedom without guilt.

And I think that sums up the situation pretty well. Although I’m still not sure how the divorce will affect me financially, I know it won’t change the core of what I do with my life.

My husband didn’t didn’t have any real direction — he’s been like a rudderless ship for a long while. I need a direction to move in, so I made my own. My husband always gave me the freedom to do that. (I think that’s where our relationship was far better than average — we gave each other the freedom to do what we wanted.) He also followed my lead in many things: learning to ride motorcycles, owning and riding horses, and learning to fly are just three examples.

Although he never complained about us mostly doing “my” things — until it was too late and the marriage was over — near the end I felt a sort of unspoken resentment from him when I did or suggested doing things he didn’t approve of. When I carried on — as I always did when he said nothing to stop me — I felt deep down inside that things weren’t quite right, but could never identify the source of the feeling.

I realize now that it was guilt.

His unspoken cues signaling disapproval of certain decisions and actions were picked up by my subconscious, making me feel guilty without knowing why. The feeling manifested itself as a sort of uneasiness that made what I was doing just a little less enjoyable. Or, worse yet, made me doubt, for no logical reason, whether what I was doing was right.

That’s all gone now. Without the disapproving frowns and glares, I can get on with my life without feeling guilty. That is, by far, the best outcome of this divorce.

It’s a real shame that he didn’t speak up and communicate better with me while we were together. I think a lot of the problems that we had in the last few years would’ve been resolved before they eventually destroyed our marriage. Communication was always a one-way street with us. He claims I never gave him a chance to speak, but in reality he never really tried to.

Hell, I don’t talk all the time.

One of the things I’m looking for in my next partner is someone who can always be honest with me and communicate exactly what’s on his mind. I’d rather be with someone who lets me know — in no uncertain terms — when he’s not happy with me than feel that uneasy sensation of guilt when I’m doing something he doesn’t approve of.

Some thoughts on Gun Control

Posted on by
7

It’s not black and white.

On Facebook today, yet another one of my friends was ranting about the need for gun control. He especially took offense to the “cars kill more people” argument, which I agree is pretty idiotic. Of course, I chimed in.

Truth is, neither guns nor cars kill people. People kill people. A gun (or a car) sitting on its own won’t kill anyone. It takes someone to pull the trigger (or drive carelessly) to kill.

My friend lashed out against the people who say that with gun control, only the bad guys will have guns. I’m one of those people. Sadly, I believe that the bad guys and wackos will continue to be able to get guns, no matter what the law says is allowed.

How about some Facts?

I then mentioned an article I’d read a while back that reported on studies that have shown that in cities where tough gun control laws were enacted, gun-related crime went up. I didn’t have the link handy, and someone immediately accused me of quoting the NRA. So I tracked down the link, which I’d bookmarked in Delicious — indeed, it appeared in the list of Interesting Links here back in January. The piece is called “More God, Less Crime or More Guns, Less Crime?” and it reviews two books that look at the relationship between religion and crime and gun control and crime. Because it’s a lot harder for Facebook users to click a link and read an article than simply click a “Like” button, I included the three key paragraphs to support my argument:

Take Washington, D.C. Before the ban on handguns was implemented in August of 1976, DC ranked 20th in murder rates out of the top 50 cities in America. After the gun ban, DC shot up to either #1 or #2, where year after year it held steady as “the murder capital of the nation,” as it as dubbed by the media. As a control experiment of sorts, after the Supreme Court decision in the Heller case overturned the DC gun ban, murder rates dropped and have continued to fall ever since. According to Lott, whose data is based primarily on crime statistics provided by the FBI, once the gun ban was lifted, homicide rates plummeted 42.1%, sexual assault rates dropped 14.9%, robbery excluding guns dropped 34.3%, robbery with guns plunged 58%, assault with a dangerous weapon excluding guns sank 11%, assault with a dangerous weapon using guns tumbled 35.6%, and total violent crime nosedived 31%, along with total property crimes decreasing a total of 10.7%.

Chicago showed a similar effect, Lott demonstrated. Ever since the gun ban was implemented in 1982, no year has been as low in crimes as it was before the ban. Island nations (which serve as good tests, Lott says, because their borders are more tightly controlled from extraneous variables) demonstrate the same effect: Jamaica and Ireland homicide rates increased after gun bans were imposed. Ditto England and Wales: After a gun ban was imposed in January of 1997, homicide rates slowly climbed and peaked at an average of 28% higher after the ban. (By dramatic contrast, Lott said that in 1900 London in which people were free to do whatever they wanted with their guns, there were a grand total of 2 gun-related deaths and 5 armed robberies in a population of many millions, and this was 20 years before gun laws began going into effect in 1920.)

Why do more guns mean less crime? Lott offers a very practical explanation: it is extremely hard to keep criminals from getting and keeping guns. In other words, Gun bans are primarily obeyed by non-criminals. Criminals that already have guns do not turn them in, and potential criminals that want to get guns have no problem procuring them on the street illegally. Lott cited several studies by criminologists who interviewed criminals in jail and collected data on the amount of time they spend casing a home before burglarizing it. In the U.K., where gun bans are much more prevalent than in the U.S., the criminals reported that they spend very little time casing a joint and that they don’t really care if someone is home or not because they know the residents won’t be armed (whereas they, of course, are armed). Their U.S. counterparts, by contrast, reported spending more than double the time casing a home before robbing it, explaining that they were waiting for the residents to leave. Why? They said that they were worried they would be shot.

More Guns, Less CrimeAnyone truly interested in taking a different, fact-based look at the gun control argument should probably track down John Lott’s book, More Guns, Less Crime. Or keep ranting without the facts. Whatever.

But Assault Weapons?

Don’t get me wrong — I don’t think anyone should have an assault rifle. That’s not what the founding fathers were thinking about when they penned the Bill of Rights. The Second Amendment was written in a time when armed militias were needed to protect small towns. Part of our gripe with Britain at the end of the 18th century is that they wanted us disarmed so they could control us. The Second Amendment was written, in part, to prevent the government from having the ability to do that. And I’m sure that came in handy in 1812 when the British came back for a second try.

Sadly, the NRA and Second Amendment proponents have twisted that around to say we have the right to bear any weapon. I really don’t think that’s what was intended.

Aurora

What happened in Aurora is simple. A freaking nut job legally got his hands on guns and, in his deluded mind, carried out some sort of mission which involved killing a lot of innocent people. No gun control law would have prevented him from getting guns if he wanted them badly enough.

Or maybe he would have built a bomb or — to take my Facebook friend’s analogy a step further — used an SUV as a ramming speed killing machine at an outdoor event. The problem wasn’t the guns as much as it was the person who held them.

Guns don’t kill; people kill.

Thinking about Gun Control

I have some pretty strong thoughts and feelings about gun control — and oddly enough, they’re from both sides of the argument. In other words, I’m not for it or against it. I do think something needs to be done, but I don’t know what it is.

What’s the solution? I don’t know. I don’t think there is one. But anyone following the Aurora story should know that gun permit requests and gun purchases have gone up in Colorado in the past week. I think that says something about how people really feel about guns.

And several fellow Arizonans truly believe that if this had happened in Arizona, all the gun-toting “patriots” there would have put this guy down before too many people were hurt or killed — and saved taxpayers a lot of money on legal proceedings in the process.

I don’t know what the answer is. Without all the facts, how could I know? How could anyone?

But until I do, I’m certainly not willing to step out on a limb and support any policy that might make matters worse.

June 30, 2014 Update
I’ve finally gotten around to writing up the site comment policy on a regular page (rather than post) on this site. You can find it here: Comment Policy.

Message to Commenters: This is a hot topic where people easily fly off the handle. Don’t let your passion on this subject convince you that it’s okay to attack others who do not agree. This site’s comment policy will be fully enforced; if you can’t be civil, don’t waste your time commenting here.

A Donation Request from the Boy Scouts of America

Posted on by
6

And how I handled it.

Apparently, Arizona Highways magazine has once again featured my helicopter charter company, Flying M Air, in its magazine. This time, I’m on a list of “31 Things To Do Before You Die.” Although I should be thrilled about this, I’m not. I’m only in Arizona half the year and, in all honesty, have begun thinking of moving my business to Washington permanently.

But I digress.

With publicity like that comes the usual collection of beggars. People looking for money or service donations or “partnerships” with what they believe are ultra-successful businesses come out of the woodwork, visit my site, and start contacting me by phone and email. The ballsiest of these (so far) has been The Boy Scouts of America. Here’s the email their fundraising person sent me yesterday:

Today I am writing concerning the Grand Canyon Council, Boy Scouts of America’s First Annual East Valley Golf Tournament, which will be held on Saturday September 15, 2012 at the Alta Mesa Golf Club in Mesa, Arizona. This will be the first of what we hope will many annual golf out to celebrate the Character Development programs of Scouting here in our community.

Scouting serves nearly 50,000 young people annual in our community with the mission of preparing our youth members to make ethical and moral over their lifetime by instilling in them the Scout Oath and Law. You will find enclosed additional information about some of our successes for your review.

The Alta Mea Golf Club’s 7,093 yard Dick Phelps designed Championship course will provide a wonderful setting for our first annual event. The East Valley Golf Tournament will include lunch, great raffle items, a silent auction, and a player participation package that will be worth in excess of $150.

The event’s auction and lunch will create a great deal of excitement that will top off a perfect day of golf and fellowship. Most auction items are unique, high quality items and/or packages that auction winner’s treasure. I’d like to ask you to consider donating a Multi Day Excursion. Your donation will help Scouting make a positive difference in the lives of over 50,000 children in our community. All donors are recognized in the event program.

If you would like to contribute to this worthy cause, please contact us. Should you have any questions, please contact me at 602-###-#### or XXXXXXX@bsamail.org. Thank you for your consideration of our request. Your generous support will be deeply appreciated!

There was no enclosure. She obviously copied and pasted a boilerplate letter into the message content field on the form on Flying M Air’s website.

Apparently, her editing was limited to requesting a specific service we offer: a Multi-Day Excursion. What you might not know, however, is that our Southwest Circle Helicopter Adventure costs $6,995 for two people. So she was asking for us to donate nearly $7K worth of services for … wait for it … recognition in the event program and their deep appreciation.

Wow.

I did say ballsy, didn’t I?

Of course, The Boy Scouts of America have been in the news quite a bit lately. The New York Times‘ July 17, 2012 article titled “Boy Scouts to Continue Excluding Gay People” — published just two days before I received the email above — begins with the summary:

The Boy Scouts of America has reaffirmed its longtime policy of barring openly gay boys from membership and gay or lesbian adults from serving as leaders. The decision, announced on Tuesday, came after what the organization described as a wide-ranging internal review, and despite public protests.

The article goes on to provide details. If you’re not aware of BSA’s stance on gays, you really ought to read it or one of the dozens of other articles exposing the BSA as the homophobic, backward-thinking organization that it is. Just Google “boy scouts gay” and you’ll get enough links to last through a week of reading.

I guess the BSA’s fundraising people think that their stance on gays is something we should all be glad about — something we all want to support by donating to their charity events. Why else would I get an email message asking for a donation so soon after the BSA made their announcement?

Well, I’m not glad. I don’t think any group should be discriminated against for any reason. The BSA is excluding scouts and leaders based on their sexual orientation. That’s just plain wrong.

I didn’t waste much time crafting a response to the request. I kept it short and simple:

I’m sorry, but the BSA’s anti-gay stance makes it impossible for us to support them. I’m sure you understand.

And I don’t think anything has given me as much pleasure lately as clicking that Send button.