"Metspitzer" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 10:13:17 -0400, jmcquown >
> wrote:
>
>>On 6/16/2013 9:04 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 07:25:13 -0500, George Leppla
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Returns are a whole 'nother story.
>>>>
>>>> One guy would buy a lawnmower every April and return it every October.
>>>> Decided he didn't like it. I refused to give him a refund one year, he
>>>> took the mower home, drained the oil then ran it until it seized up...
>>>> then wrote a letter to the company and they authorized a full refund.
>>>> In my mind, he should have gone to jail for fraud.
>>>>
>>>> In May/June, we could count on multiple returns of prom dresses...
>>>> AFTER
>>>> the local proms were over.
>>>
>>That's been going on for a long time. I appreciate a good, reasonable
>>return policy but that is such an *obvious* scam.
>>
>>> What ****es me off about it is, the store does not pay for it. We all
>>> do. I'd rather see more sensible policies and lower prices.
>>>
>>Yes, we all pay for it. But criminally minded people don't think about
>>things like that. Any way to get a freebie, that's what they're about.
>>
>>Getting back to the nutjob with the Dunkin Donuts rant... the policy of
>>getting your order free if you don't get a receipt doesn't make any
>>sense. Who the heck even notices if you don't get a receipt for fast
>>food? I'd be changing that policy toot sweet.
>>
>>Jill
> Giving a receipt keeps the employees from stealing. Without a
> receipt, the employee could pocket the cash.
>
> I used to stop on the way home from work and get Popeye chicken. One
> guy at the window would charge me 5.03 (without ringing it up) for the
> order. (That 5 bucks was going in his pocket) I bought the same thing
> enough times to know it was 6.30.
>
> After the 3rd time, I called and reported him.

Did you pay the $3.81 you owed?

On 2013-06-16, graham > wrote:

>>
>> After the 3rd time, I called and reported him.
>
> Did you pay the $3.81 you owed?

DOH!

good one.

"George Leppla" > wrote in message
...
> On 6/15/2013 6:42 PM, jmcquown wrote:
>
>> I worked at JC Penney when I was a teenager. I was forced (by a
>> manager) to accept the return of a pair of obviously worn blue jeans
>> that had a *Sears* label in them. The woman insisted she bought them
>> from Penney's, it didn't matter if the label said Sears. I wasn't rude
>> to her but I sure wasn't going to give her a refund without a receipt to
>> back up her obviously bogus claim. The manager wouldn't back me up.
>> The "customer" walked out of the store with cash. Me? I got a lecture
>> about how the customer is always right. Sorry but that's no way to run
>> a business.
>
> Returns are a whole 'nother story.
>
> One guy would buy a lawnmower every April and return it every October.
> Decided he didn't like it. I refused to give him a refund one year, he
> took the mower home, drained the oil then ran it until it seized up...
> then wrote a letter to the company and they authorized a full refund. In
> my mind, he should have gone to jail for fraud.
>
On another group a guy posted that he had returned something to Home Depot
for a refund even though he had bought it somewhere else. When I called him
dishonest, you wouldn't believe the amount of flack I received.
Graham

On 2013-06-16, George Leppla > wrote:

> The couple who returned their stereo system after 3 months bought an
> expensive vacuum cleaner. Brought that back a week later.... and took
> the refund and bought another stereo system.

Not only common, but an ever escalating problem. So much so, Costco
hadda totally revamp their return policies to deal with scammers who
were returning video/computer gear every time there was a new model
upgrade. They eventually completely refused any/all returns/refunds
on all electronics gear. Totally ruined it for honest customers.

Thanks, jerks!

nb

On 16/06/2013 11:09 AM, jmcquown wrote:

>>> Getting back to the nutjob with the Dunkin Donuts rant... the policy of
>>> getting your order free if you don't get a receipt doesn't make any
>>> sense. Who the heck even notices if you don't get a receipt for fast
>>> food? I'd be changing that policy toot sweet.
>>>
>>> Jill
>>
>> The policy is common. It keeps the help reasonably honest. They can't
>> pocked the cash for the coffee or burger.
>>
> Ahhh, okay. I get that. Too bad they can't trust the "help".



I don't know about the policy being common. It sure isn't here, with the
exception of places where you have to wait for an order. However, it is
a fact that most surveillance cameras are set up to watch the staff, not
the customers.
>
> I worked at a vending company for a year. Snack and drink vending
> machines. It's a HUGE business. I was the route accounting supervisor.
> My department kept track of inventory pulled/vs sold/vs spoilage/vs
> cash sales for each route and each route driver.
>
> The woman who had been running the "cash room" for 12 years found a way
> to embezzle money. (Vending machines are a cash & dollar bill
> business.) She was a trusted employee who had been stealing from them
> for years.


I used to date a girl whose sister in law ran the advertising accounts
office for a local newspaper. The SiL got busted a few years ago for
embezzling several million from the newspaper. She blew most of the
money on clothing she never even wore. When the cops searched her house
it was jam packed with stuff still in original packaging. The last I
heard, she was still fighting restitution orders, though the court did
grab a piece of property they had bought and there was a public auction.

On 16/06/2013 11:53 AM, Metspitzer wrote:

>> Jill
> Giving a receipt keeps the employees from stealing. Without a
> receipt, the employee could pocket the cash.

But.... how would that impact coming back the next day and demanding a
free meal?

>
> I used to stop on the way home from work and get Popeye chicken. One
> guy at the window would charge me 5.03 (without ringing it up) for the
> order. (That 5 bucks was going in his pocket) I bought the same thing
> enough times to know it was 6.30.
>
> After the 3rd time, I called and reported him.
>


There was Korean run convenience store where they always left the till
open and seemed to make up prices for a lot of things, and never rang up
sales. He also had the cheapest cigarettes around. It became apparent
that he was selling bootleg cigarettes. I contacted the provincial sales
tax office.

On 16/06/2013 12:42 PM, wrote:

>> The other guy and his wife were involved in a number of lawsuits over
>> accidents and injuries. The last one I was aware of was when a mop on a
>> rack in the store of a major retailer fell and hit her on the head. How
>> much damage could a mop handle cause? Apparently.... enough to install
>> an inground pool.
>>
>>>
>
> People like that are soooo frustrating, not much others can do about
> it.
>


Avoid them. Don't do them any favours and don't have them at your house.
They might stage an accident.

On 6/16/2013 9:16 AM, wrote:

> I hear her latest is she thinks she will sue the doctor because he
> said before he would do a knee replacement she had to lose weight.

When I needed back surgery, my surgeon said he wouldn't do it if I
didn't quit smoking. It actually was the motivation needed for me to
quit after 35 years of smoking. I thank him for that. That woman
should take the suggestion to lose weight before a knee surgery as a
wake up call and appreciate it. It might be just as hard to quit
smoking as to lose weight.

--
CAPSLOCK–Preventing Login Since 1980.

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 00:14:30 -0400, Cheryl wrote:
>
>> On 6/16/2013 9:16 AM, wrote:
>>
>>> I hear her latest is she thinks she will sue the doctor because he
>>> said before he would do a knee replacement she had to lose weight.
>>
>> When I needed back surgery, my surgeon said he wouldn't do it if I
>> didn't quit smoking.
>
> Maybe you're glad he did, but I would have told him to get ****ed.
> That's not exactly part of the Hippocratic oath to deamand the patient
> do something that is unrelated to their ailment. Not to mention that
> many people GAIN weight when they quit smoking. Which would have been
> detrimental to your condition.

Could he have been concerned about the effects of anaesthetic on a smoker?

--
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

On 6/18/2013 5:46 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>
>
> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 00:14:30 -0400, Cheryl wrote:
>>
>>> On 6/16/2013 9:16 AM, wrote:
>>>
>>>> I hear her latest is she thinks she will sue the doctor because he
>>>> said before he would do a knee replacement she had to lose weight.
>>>
>>> When I needed back surgery, my surgeon said he wouldn't do it if I
>>> didn't quit smoking.
>>
>> Maybe you're glad he did, but I would have told him to get ****ed.
>> That's not exactly part of the Hippocratic oath to deamand the patient
>> do something that is unrelated to their ailment. Not to mention that
>> many people GAIN weight when they quit smoking. Which would have been
>> detrimental to your condition.
>
> Could he have been concerned about the effects of anaesthetic on a smoker?
>

Absolutely... smokers heal slower than non-smokers. Here is one article
but there are many other studies supporting this:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1142504/

For elective surgery, a Dr. has a duty to make sure that the patient is
as healthy as possible to reduce the number of possible complications.

Another problem is that you can not smoke in a hospital. Healing after
an operation is stressful enough... you really don't need to add
nicotine withdrawal to that.

FWIW... I never lecture people about quitting smoking. Grown-ups make
their own decisions. I don't let them smoke in my house and if they are
trying to quit, I do all I can to encourage them, but what people do
with their own bodies is their business.

George L

> wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 00:15:37 -0500, Sqwertz >
> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 00:14:30 -0400, Cheryl wrote:
>>
>>> On 6/16/2013 9:16 AM, wrote:
>>>
>>>> I hear her latest is she thinks she will sue the doctor because he
>>>> said before he would do a knee replacement she had to lose weight.
>>>
>>> When I needed back surgery, my surgeon said he wouldn't do it if I
>>> didn't quit smoking.
>>
>>Maybe you're glad he did, but I would have told him to get ****ed.
>>That's not exactly part of the Hippocratic oath to deamand the patient
>>do something that is unrelated to their ailment. Not to mention that
>>many people GAIN weight when they quit smoking. Which would have been
>>detrimental to your condition.
>>
>>-sw
>
> I would have considered that he had my best interests at heart -
> think would you prefer a spinal because it's too risky to give you a
> general ? Ask yourself how well will you recuperate after surgery
> while you are craving a cigarette you cannot have ?

There is a big difference between highly recommending someone quit smoking,
and refusing to perform a much needed procedure unless the demand is met.

And there is a big difference between advising the patient they will not be
able to smoke in the hospital and demanding they quit.

And there is a big difference between telling a patient they must not smoke
x hours before receiving anesthesia and demanding they quit.

If, in fact, the doctor behaved as stated, he was out of line.

having said all that, **** on smokers, too.

On 18/06/2013 8:49 AM, Pico Rico wrote:

>> I would have considered that he had my best interests at heart -
>> think would you prefer a spinal because it's too risky to give you a
>> general ? Ask yourself how well will you recuperate after surgery
>> while you are craving a cigarette you cannot have ?
>
> There is a big difference between highly recommending someone quit smoking,
> and refusing to perform a much needed procedure unless the demand is met.
>
> And there is a big difference between advising the patient they will not be
> able to smoke in the hospital and demanding they quit.
>
> And there is a big difference between telling a patient they must not smoke
> x hours before receiving anesthesia and demanding they quit.
>
> If, in fact, the doctor behaved as stated, he was out of line.
>
> having said all that, **** on smokers, too.
>
>

My brother had a cardiologist tell him that he would not take him on as
a patient unless he quit smoking.

I was thankful not to have been been a smoker when I had my heart
surgery. One of the side effects of having been under for a long time
and being bed ridden for a few days is that you get fluid in your lungs
and it has to be coughed up. Having had your sternum cut and your ribs
splayed open to allow access to the heart is leaved you very tender...
to say the least. They truss them back together with stainless steel
wire. Movement of any type hurts. Coughing is hell. One of the first
things they told me when I came to was that I was going to have to cough
at least once an hour and they taught me how to do it by holding a
pillow tight to my chest and squeezing it into my chest... to stop my
ribs from popping apart. Hole like hell that everything comes up on the
first cough because it hurts too much to do it a second time.

There were glass partitions between the rooms and the guy int he next
room looked like death warmed over. He was a smoker and he had the
smoker's cough. The dumb SOB was so desperate for a cigarette that he
checked himself out early so he could go home and have a smoke.

He wasn't the brights bulb in the tree. His wife brought in all sorts
of treats for him. One day she brought in a quart of chocolate milk, a
couple chocolate bars and two big bags of Doritos. The doctor came
around on his rounds and blew a gasket on him.

On 6/18/2013 1:15 AM, Sqwertz wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 00:14:30 -0400, Cheryl wrote:
>
>> On 6/16/2013 9:16 AM, wrote:
>>
>>> I hear her latest is she thinks she will sue the doctor because he
>>> said before he would do a knee replacement she had to lose weight.
>>
>> When I needed back surgery, my surgeon said he wouldn't do it if I
>> didn't quit smoking.
>
> Maybe you're glad he did, but I would have told him to get ****ed.
> That's not exactly part of the Hippocratic oath to deamand the patient
> do something that is unrelated to their ailment. Not to mention that
> many people GAIN weight when they quit smoking. Which would have been
> detrimental to your condition.
>
> -sw
>
Okay, TMI but here goes. Years ago I had a GYN refuse to renew my
prescription for "the pill" unless I quit smoking. That ticked me off.
My body, my choice. I said to her, "So, if I get pregnant you're
going to pay all the related costs and then adopt and raise the child?"
She looked a little shocked. I was well aware of the correlation
between age, smoking and the pill. It was not her decision to make.

Jill

In article >, ost
says...
>
> On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 00:14:30 -0400, Cheryl wrote:
>
> > On 6/16/2013 9:16 AM, wrote:
> >
> >> I hear her latest is she thinks she will sue the doctor because he
> >> said before he would do a knee replacement she had to lose weight.
> >
> > When I needed back surgery, my surgeon said he wouldn't do it if I
> > didn't quit smoking.
>
> Maybe you're glad he did, but I would have told him to get ****ed.
> That's not exactly part of the Hippocratic oath to deamand the patient
> do something that is unrelated to their ailment.

Wrong. Part of the original Hippoctaric Oath , is

"I will apply dietetic measures for the benefit of the sick according
to my ability and judgment"
"I will prescribe regimens for the good of my patients according to
my ability and my judgment and never do harm to anyone."

Few medical schools use the Hippocratic today; more use the
Declarationo of Geneva which requires

"I will practice my profession with conscience and dignity;
The health of my patient will be my first consideration;".

The examples of the previous posters meet those promises.

There are some categories of patients for whom a long general
anaesthetic carries such a high risk of death or permanent injury in
theatre or post op (such as a stroke, or MI) that the risk of surgery
just isn't justified for some non-life-threatening condition.

Some heavy smokers and some obese people risk dying under
anaesthetic. A doctor would be negligent if he did not tell the patient
to lose weight, stop smoking, reduce their BP or BMI etc in order
to give them an acceptable shance of surviving the operation.

Janet UK

On 6/18/2013 7:59 AM, George Leppla wrote:
> On 6/18/2013 5:46 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 00:14:30 -0400, Cheryl wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 6/16/2013 9:16 AM, wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I hear her latest is she thinks she will sue the doctor because he
>>>>> said before he would do a knee replacement she had to lose weight.
>>>>
>>>> When I needed back surgery, my surgeon said he wouldn't do it if I
>>>> didn't quit smoking.
>>>
>>> Maybe you're glad he did, but I would have told him to get ****ed.
>>> That's not exactly part of the Hippocratic oath to deamand the patient
>>> do something that is unrelated to their ailment. Not to mention that
>>> many people GAIN weight when they quit smoking. Which would have been
>>> detrimental to your condition.
>>
>> Could he have been concerned about the effects of anaesthetic on a
>> smoker?
>>
>
> Absolutely... smokers heal slower than non-smokers. Here is one article
> but there are many other studies supporting this:
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1142504/
>
> For elective surgery, a Dr. has a duty to make sure that the patient is
> as healthy as possible to reduce the number of possible complications.
>
> Another problem is that you can not smoke in a hospital. Healing after
> an operation is stressful enough... you really don't need to add
> nicotine withdrawal to that.
>
Oddly, when I was in the hospital for a week I didn't go through
nicotine withdrawl. Maybe if you're a three-pack a day person...
<shrug> I was more concerned about when can I take a shower?

> FWIW... I never lecture people about quitting smoking. Grown-ups make
> their own decisions. I don't let them smoke in my house and if they are
> trying to quit, I do all I can to encourage them, but what people do
> with their own bodies is their business.
>
> George L
>
Your house, your rules. But as you say, grown-ups make their own
decisions. I'm glad Cheryl was motivated to quit. But I won't let
anyone, doctor or otherwise, tell me I *have* to. I know smoking is bad
for me.

Hell, I used to work with a doctor who, when he had the occasional
party, had a designated "smoking room" in his house. And I'm not just
talking about cigarettes.

Jill

On 6/17/2013 11:15 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 00:14:30 -0400, Cheryl wrote:
>
>> On 6/16/2013 9:16 AM, wrote:
>>
>>> I hear her latest is she thinks she will sue the doctor because he
>>> said before he would do a knee replacement she had to lose weight.
>>
>> When I needed back surgery, my surgeon said he wouldn't do it if I
>> didn't quit smoking.
>
> Maybe you're glad he did, but I would have told him to get ****ed.
> That's not exactly part of the Hippocratic oath to deamand the patient
> do something that is unrelated to their ailment. Not to mention that
> many people GAIN weight when they quit smoking. Which would have been
> detrimental to your condition.
>
> -sw
>

Buddy, you need to try come Nicorette and lay off the Laredo 100s...

On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 05:49:39 -0700, "Pico Rico"
> wrote:
>
>having said all that, **** on smokers, too.
>
Be nice to smokers. They don't have long to live.

On 6/18/2013 8:49 AM, Pico Rico wrote:
> There is a big difference between highly recommending someone quit smoking,
> and refusing to perform a much needed procedure unless the demand is met.
>
> And there is a big difference between advising the patient they will not be
> able to smoke in the hospital and demanding they quit.
>
> And there is a big difference between telling a patient they must not smoke
> x hours before receiving anesthesia and demanding they quit.
>
> If, in fact, the doctor behaved as stated, he was out of line.
>
> having said all that, **** on smokers, too.

He was right, though. Nicotine and tobacco impair the bones ability to
heal.

Here's just one article about it, and note the quote:

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-relea...190678191.html

"What do foot and ankle surgeons recommend for smokers facing surgery?
"It goes without saying that we'd prefer patients to quit smoking," says
Rubin. "There hasn't been a great deal of research on the topic, but
some preliminary findings indicate quitting smoking for even a few weeks
has a significant impact on bone healing." Surgeons who request that
patients stop smoking before surgery sometimes conduct pre-operative
tests to look for nicotine in the patient's system. If nicotine is
present, surgery is delayed."

--
CAPSLOCK–Preventing Login Since 1980.

On 6/16/2013 10:53 AM, Metspitzer wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 10:13:17 -0400, jmcquown >
> wrote:
>
>> On 6/16/2013 9:04 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 07:25:13 -0500, George Leppla
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Returns are a whole 'nother story.
>>>>
>>>> One guy would buy a lawnmower every April and return it every October.
>>>> Decided he didn't like it. I refused to give him a refund one year, he
>>>> took the mower home, drained the oil then ran it until it seized up...
>>>> then wrote a letter to the company and they authorized a full refund.
>>>> In my mind, he should have gone to jail for fraud.
>>>>
>>>> In May/June, we could count on multiple returns of prom dresses... AFTER
>>>> the local proms were over.
>>>
>> That's been going on for a long time. I appreciate a good, reasonable
>> return policy but that is such an *obvious* scam.
>>
>>> What ****es me off about it is, the store does not pay for it. We all
>>> do. I'd rather see more sensible policies and lower prices.
>>>
>> Yes, we all pay for it. But criminally minded people don't think about
>> things like that. Any way to get a freebie, that's what they're about.
>>
>> Getting back to the nutjob with the Dunkin Donuts rant... the policy of
>> getting your order free if you don't get a receipt doesn't make any
>> sense. Who the heck even notices if you don't get a receipt for fast
>> food? I'd be changing that policy toot sweet.
>>
>> Jill
> Giving a receipt keeps the employees from stealing. Without a
> receipt, the employee could pocket the cash.
>
> I used to stop on the way home from work and get Popeye chicken. One
> guy at the window would charge me 5.03 (without ringing it up) for the
> order. (That 5 bucks was going in his pocket) I bought the same thing
> enough times to know it was 6.30.
>
> After the 3rd time, I called and reported him.
>

A very dumb crooked cashier will steal just by taking money out of the
till. That may work once - but the second time the cash drawer is
short, the dumb crook is now a _former_ cashier.

The two simplest ways for a cashier to tap a till _without_ shorting
it is to collect the money from the customer without ringing up the
sale (then pocket the cash), and to withhold the receipt, then process
the receipt as a void (and pocket the cash).

Sure, there are other ways to steal, but those are the simplest, and
thus the most common. This policy forces the employee to ring every
sale and to hand over every receipt. Meaning, if they still are
determined to steal, they have to graduate to Employee Theft 201,
which involves having an accomplice going through the checkout line.
There's a number of ways to pull that con, but since they all involve
accomplices, there's a higher level of risk.

On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:57:23 -0500, Moe DeLoughan >
wrote:

> A very dumb crooked cashier will steal just by taking money out of the
> till. That may work once - but the second time the cash drawer is
> short, the dumb crook is now a _former_ cashier.
>
> The two simplest ways for a cashier to tap a till _without_ shorting
> it is to collect the money from the customer without ringing up the
> sale (then pocket the cash), and to withhold the receipt, then process
> the receipt as a void (and pocket the cash).
>
> Sure, there are other ways to steal, but those are the simplest, and
> thus the most common. This policy forces the employee to ring every
> sale and to hand over every receipt. Meaning, if they still are
> determined to steal, they have to graduate to Employee Theft 201,
> which involves having an accomplice going through the checkout line.
> There's a number of ways to pull that con, but since they all involve
> accomplices, there's a higher level of risk.

Another way is to pick the only cash register in the store without
camera surveillance and short-change the customer. It happened to me
and I had no recourse. It was my word against his. Of course, there
was no manager on duty at the time, no one stepped up to take charge
and I knew my written complaint went straight into the round file
after I left.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On 6/18/2013 9:39 AM, jmcquown wrote:
> Your house, your rules. But as you say, grown-ups make their own
> decisions. I'm glad Cheryl was motivated to quit. But I won't let
> anyone, doctor or otherwise, tell me I*have* to. I know smoking is bad
> for me.

I should have been clearer. You do not "have" to quit smoking. But
knee surgery is elective surgery... and the doctor does not "have" to
accept you as a patient.

Now if it were an emergency, all bets are off... but for elective
surgery, a doctor has the right to expect that his patient will do all
they can to limit surgical complications... or he can pass.

George L

On 6/18/2013 12:42 PM, sf wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:57:23 -0500, Moe DeLoughan >
> wrote:
>
>> A very dumb crooked cashier will steal just by taking money out of the
>> till. That may work once - but the second time the cash drawer is
>> short, the dumb crook is now a _former_ cashier.
>>
>> The two simplest ways for a cashier to tap a till _without_ shorting
>> it is to collect the money from the customer without ringing up the
>> sale (then pocket the cash), and to withhold the receipt, then process
>> the receipt as a void (and pocket the cash).
>>
>> Sure, there are other ways to steal, but those are the simplest, and
>> thus the most common. This policy forces the employee to ring every
>> sale and to hand over every receipt. Meaning, if they still are
>> determined to steal, they have to graduate to Employee Theft 201,
>> which involves having an accomplice going through the checkout line.
>> There's a number of ways to pull that con, but since they all involve
>> accomplices, there's a higher level of risk.
>
> Another way is to pick the only cash register in the store without
> camera surveillance and short-change the customer. It happened to me
> and I had no recourse. It was my word against his. Of course, there
> was no manager on duty at the time, no one stepped up to take charge
> and I knew my written complaint went straight into the round file
> after I left.

The problem is, if the employee pocketed the change, there will be no
way to determine what happened. At least if it is an honest mistake,
the drawer can be closed out and counted, in which case the extra
money will be in the drawer. But as you say, without surveillance
cameras, it's your word against the employee's. It then becomes a
store policy issue. Most stores won't take the customer's word for it
without evidence because this is actually one of the more common
customer scams. Another one is dropping one's payment as it is handed
to the cashier. While the cashier bends down to pick up the money, the
customer quickly dips from the open cash drawer. Those two ploys,
along with the price tag switch, are probably the most common customer
scams that don't involve returns. Returns scams are numerous. Customer
scams are very often pulled by pros who travel and work in groups.

On 6/16/2013 11:22 AM, notbob wrote:
> On 2013-06-16, George Leppla > wrote:
>
>> The couple who returned their stereo system after 3 months bought an
>> expensive vacuum cleaner. Brought that back a week later.... and took
>> the refund and bought another stereo system.
>
> Not only common, but an ever escalating problem. So much so, Costco
> hadda totally revamp their return policies to deal with scammers who
> were returning video/computer gear every time there was a new model
> upgrade. They eventually completely refused any/all returns/refunds
> on all electronics gear. Totally ruined it for honest customers.
>
> Thanks, jerks!

I just returned a monitor to Costco with no trouble. I suspect you
have misremembered the returns policy change Costco was forced to
implement when flatscreen tv prices began to rapidly drop and their
features began to rapidly improve. Many customers realized they could
return their months-old set and replace it with a newer, better model
for a good bit less. Costco couldn't afford perpetual model upgrades,
so they shortened the return period for electronics.

On 6/18/2013 3:35 PM, Moe DeLoughan wrote:
> The problem is, if the employee pocketed the change, there will be no
> way to determine what happened. At least if it is an honest mistake,
> the drawer can be closed out and counted, in which case the extra
> money will be in the drawer. But as you say, without surveillance
> cameras, it's your word against the employee's

Back in the day when there were price tags on every item, the favored
way of ripping off the store would be an employee printing up price tags
with low prices and giving them to a friend or family member who would
then put them on expensive merchandise and purchased. Then, the item
could be returned (without receipt... say it was a gift) for a refund.

And I am not talking big ticket items all the time. A $9 tag on a $30
blouse... a $29 tag on a $79 pair of sneakers. The ones who weren't
greedy could run this scam a long time before someone caught on.

George L

On 6/17/2013 11:14 PM, Cheryl wrote:
> On 6/16/2013 9:16 AM, wrote:
>
>> I hear her latest is she thinks she will sue the doctor because he
>> said before he would do a knee replacement she had to lose weight.
>
> When I needed back surgery, my surgeon said he wouldn't do it if I
> didn't quit smoking. It actually was the motivation needed for me to
> quit after 35 years of smoking. I thank him for that. That woman
> should take the suggestion to lose weight before a knee surgery as a
> wake up call and appreciate it. It might be just as hard to quit
> smoking as to lose weight.

Glad you quit smoking, congratulations. I know 3 sisters who went to a
plastic surgeon to discuss facelifts. He told the two smokers they would
have to quit smoking and they made an appointment 3 months later. One of
them quit, but not the other one, and he refused to do surgery on her.

Becca

On 18/06/2013 7:13 PM, wrote:

>
> I am not judging, simply being realistic. When I moved here ten years
> ago it was stressful and when the moving men were gone and I let the
> cat out of the carrier, I confess my first thought was "I'd love a
> cigarette" and I had not smoked for 20 years then !
>
> Last year I was having a room painted and the painter left behind a
> half pack of cigarettes and lighter. I put them on the table in the
> hall for him on the Monday and they were there all weekend. It was
> only on the Monday that I realised that finally, after 30 years, it
> had not occurred to me to smoke one. I felt it spoke eloquently to
> the power of cigarettes. I gave them up then because our local
> government was going to increase the sin taxes on them and the thought
> that a carton was going to cost a few cents more than $10 was enough
> to cause this Scot to quit. Now I gather a packet costs nearly $14,
> so I'm glad I did it back then.
>

I had quit for 17 years. When my father was in the hospital dying of
cancer I used to go out with my brothers for a break. They all smoke. I
figured I could have one. I was bumming them regularly for a few weeks
when I figured I should just buy a pack. What the pack. I was only
having one a day. It wasn't like I was smoking. When we went overseas to
bury his ashes I didn't even buy duty free smokes. I spent two weeks
driving around Europe with 4 smokers and came back with a pack a day habit.
I quit again after a while. Then when I went to my mother's funeral I
thought I might need a cigarette so I bought a pack and was right back
to a pack a day. About a year later the government added another tax to
tobacco. That was it. I stopped. I have not had one, wanted one or
craved one since the day I quit.

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 06:59:23 -0500, George Leppla wrote:
>
>> On 6/18/2013 5:46 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 00:14:30 -0400, Cheryl wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 6/16/2013 9:16 AM, wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I hear her latest is she thinks she will sue the doctor because he
>>>>>> said before he would do a knee replacement she had to lose weight.
>>>>>
>>>>> When I needed back surgery, my surgeon said he wouldn't do it if I
>>>>> didn't quit smoking.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe you're glad he did, but I would have told him to get ****ed.
>>>> That's not exactly part of the Hippocratic oath to deamand the patient
>>>> do something that is unrelated to their ailment. Not to mention that
>>>> many people GAIN weight when they quit smoking. Which would have been
>>>> detrimental to your condition.
>>>
>>> Could he have been concerned about the effects of anaesthetic on a
>>> smoker?
>>>
>>
>> Absolutely... smokers heal slower than non-smokers. Here is one article
>> but there are many other studies supporting this:
>> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1142504/
>
> And I'm sure there are plenty of things that can slow recovery after
> surgery. And smoking is just one of a million. That study only
> counted the number of people who were OFFERED counseling and nicotine
> replacement therapy - it didn't even say if anyone abstained from
> smoking (what kind of scientific study is that?).
>
> I'm not arguing that smoking can possibly delay recovery - there are
> all sorts of reasons that it MIGHT. But if a doctor is going to
> refuse to do surgery unless they lose quit smoking, get a new hairdo,
> or adopt a cat and the patient refuses, then he better be prepared to
> refund all the money he has been paid so far, plus reimbursement for
> time spent at all the consultations and tests, and further
> responsibility for damaged incurred by making the patient seek out
> another service provider.
>
> This is not a question of the surgery not being successful unless
> prerequisites are met. It's your body, and you decide.

yep. Is the patient better off without the surgery, or with the surgery
even if he continues to smoke?

On 18/06/2013 7:55 PM, wrote:

>> I had quit for 17 years. When my father was in the hospital dying of
>> cancer I used to go out with my brothers for a break. They all smoke. I
>> figured I could have one. I was bumming them regularly for a few weeks
>> when I figured I should just buy a pack. What the pack. I was only
>> having one a day. It wasn't like I was smoking. When we went overseas to
>> bury his ashes I didn't even buy duty free smokes. I spent two weeks
>> driving around Europe with 4 smokers and came back with a pack a day habit.
>> I quit again after a while. Then when I went to my mother's funeral I
>> thought I might need a cigarette so I bought a pack and was right back
>> to a pack a day. About a year later the government added another tax to
>> tobacco. That was it. I stopped. I have not had one, wanted one or
>> craved one since the day I quit.
>
> I think that's it, when the time is right, you will quit. I don't
> preach, don't even mind if someone smokes in here though I like them
> to see to the ash tray afterwards


I think they put something in tobacco these days to make it smell worse.
When I was young I liked the smell of tobacco burning. Now I find it
stinky. Quite frankly, I would prefer that people smoke in my house or
in bars, restaurants and offices because I find the smell of the smoke
to be much nicer than the stench of a person who comes back in from a
power smoke. I also hate the smell of the doorways where they have been
doing it.


>
> I do know, or strongly feel, if I smoked one, I would want more. I am
> just glad I quit, I feel healthier for it and what you say confirms
> for me I could easily find myself smoking.

I never viewed it as an addiction. It was just a bad habit, maybe
something more easily picked up by someone with an addictive
personality. Look at the way some people try to quit by suing a
substitute, like gum or candies. The time that I quit for 17 years I
combined it with going on a diet.
>

On 6/18/2013 7:13 PM, wrote:
> sin taxes

Sin taxes? I love that term! Might as well tax having any kind of fun
while you're at it. Seems to me the US tried that with a little thing
called Prohibition in the 1920's. <G>

I'm not sure how this thread drifted from a rude customer at Dunkin
Donuts to smoking cigarettes.

Jill

On 18/06/2013 8:49 PM, jmcquown wrote:
> On 6/18/2013 7:13 PM, wrote:
>> sin taxes
>
> Sin taxes? I love that term! Might as well tax having any kind of fun
> while you're at it. Seems to me the US tried that with a little thing
> called Prohibition in the 1920's. <G>

Prohibition was not a sin tax. It was an outright ban on alcohol, all
alcohol; beer, wine and liquor. When it Prohibition was repealed they
slapped on the sin tax. The unfortunate thing is that it has blossomed
into a luxury tax. Alcohol is cheap to produce. To discourage people
from drinking (too much) they slapped a tax on, forcing drinkers to
consider the price if not the problems of consumption. Being more
expensive because of the sin taxes it becomes a luxury, then people
figure that since it is a luxury, anyone who can afford it can afford to
pay more. The non drinkers don't care because someone else is paying.





> I'm not sure how this thread drifted from a rude customer at Dunkin
> Donuts to smoking cigarettes.

Sin taxes... should be applied to donuts too ;-)

In article >, ost
says...

> A doctor can't FORCE you to eat healthy - never eat fast food or
> processed food - any more than he can force you to quite smoking.
> He can educate you about it and bitch and moan, but it's ultimately
> YOUR decision.

You're entirely missing the point, which is that no patient can force
a surgeon to operate on them against medical safety.

Janet

"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
...
> On 18/06/2013 8:49 PM, jmcquown wrote:
>> On 6/18/2013 7:13 PM, wrote:
>>> sin taxes
>>
>> Sin taxes? I love that term! Might as well tax having any kind of fun
>> while you're at it. Seems to me the US tried that with a little thing
>> called Prohibition in the 1920's. <G>
>
> Prohibition was not a sin tax. It was an outright ban on alcohol, all
> alcohol; beer, wine and liquor. When it Prohibition was repealed they
> slapped on the sin tax. The unfortunate thing is that it has blossomed
> into a luxury tax. Alcohol is cheap to produce. To discourage people from
> drinking (too much) they slapped a tax on, forcing drinkers to consider
> the price if not the problems of consumption. Being more expensive because
> of the sin taxes it becomes a luxury, then people figure that since it is
> a luxury, anyone who can afford it can afford to pay more. The non
> drinkers don't care because someone else is paying.
>
>

Alcohol was heavily taxed before Prohibition. Prohibition brought us the
income tax. That, in turn, has driven a lot of us to drink.

"Janet" > wrote in message
t...
> In article >, ost
> says...
>
>> A doctor can't FORCE you to eat healthy - never eat fast food or
>> processed food - any more than he can force you to quite smoking.
>> He can educate you about it and bitch and moan, but it's ultimately
>> YOUR decision.
>
> You're entirely missing the point, which is that no patient can force
> a surgeon to operate on them against medical safety.
>

nowhere was it authoritatively stated that not quitting smoking would lead
the surgery to be unsafe.

On 6/18/2013 6:56 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> Sin taxes... should be applied to donuts too ;-)

You Canadians are real enemies of free will, aren't you?

On 6/18/2013 9:19 PM, Janet wrote:

> In article >, ost
> says...
>
>> A doctor can't FORCE you to eat healthy - never eat fast food or
>> processed food - any more than he can force you to quite smoking.
>> He can educate you about it and bitch and moan, but it's ultimately
>> YOUR decision.
>
> You're entirely missing the point, which is that no patient can force
> a surgeon to operate on them against medical safety.
>
> Janet
>
I heard all of the warnings of smoking and having a spinal fusion and my
surgeons "demand" that I quit smoking before he'd operate was the kick
in the ass I needed to stop doing something I already knew I needed to
stop. Do I doubt he'd operate if I didn't quit? No. He was that
adamant. He (and I) wanted it to be successful. So far it isn't, but I
can't blame smoking now.

--
CAPSLOCK–Preventing Login Since 1980.

On 6/18/2013 9:55 PM, Pico Rico wrote:

> "Janet" > wrote in message
> t...
>> In article >, ost
>> says...
>>
>>> A doctor can't FORCE you to eat healthy - never eat fast food or
>>> processed food - any more than he can force you to quite smoking.
>>> He can educate you about it and bitch and moan, but it's ultimately
>>> YOUR decision.
>>
>> You're entirely missing the point, which is that no patient can force
>> a surgeon to operate on them against medical safety.
>>
>
> nowhere was it authoritatively stated that not quitting smoking would lead
> the surgery to be unsafe.
>
>
The medical authorities only have anecdotal evidence at this point and
no clear reason why. They have studies, but are unsure why tobacco use
leads to delay in bone healing.


--
CAPSLOCK–Preventing Login Since 1980.

In article >, says...
>
> "Janet" > wrote in message
> t...
> > In article >, ost
> > says...
> >
> >> A doctor can't FORCE you to eat healthy - never eat fast food or
> >> processed food - any more than he can force you to quite smoking.
> >> He can educate you about it and bitch and moan, but it's ultimately
> >> YOUR decision.
> >
> > You're entirely missing the point, which is that no patient can force
> > a surgeon to operate on them against medical safety.
> >
>
> nowhere was it authoritatively stated that not quitting smoking would lead
> the surgery to be unsafe.

You need to get better at searches.

http://www.frca.co.uk/Documents/221%...naesthesia.pdf

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2149030/

ww.anzca.edu.au/patients/frequently-asked-questions/smoking-and-
anaesthesia.html

and millions more.. all saying the same thing, Smokers are at
increased risk from general anaesthesia.

Janet

In article >, ost
says...
>
> On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 02:19:57 +0100, Janet wrote:
>
> > In article >, ost
> > says...
> >
> >> A doctor can't FORCE you to eat healthy - never eat fast food or
> >> processed food - any more than he can force you to quite smoking.
> >> He can educate you about it and bitch and moan, but it's ultimately
> >> YOUR decision.
> >
> > You're entirely missing the point, which is that no patient can force
> > a surgeon to operate on them against medical safety.
>
> But I argue that it's not a safety issue. Or at least an
> insignificant one.

Smoking is a highly significant risk during GA, post surgery etc.
Worldwide medical research to prove it. See my other post for links or
google "smoking general anaeshesia".


Janet UK

On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 18:34:03 -0500, Sqwertz >
wrote:

>On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 20:13:39 -0300, wrote:
>
>> Now I gather a packet costs nearly $14, so I'm glad I did it back then.
>
>Not that high. I don't know where they get these prices, as I pay
>$4.75 (L&M Red or Newport Red, twice a week). The prices quoted on
>this website seem to be exaggerated - at least in the case of Texas.
>They must be buying the Natural American Spirits - the most expensive
>smokes out there.
>
>http://www.theawl.com/2012/06/pack-of-cigarettes-cost

$14 is NYC prices- $11+ tax + 'because we can'.

See the comment way down on your page;
"Yeah, this is perfect for scale and trending, but basically to get
the REAL cost of cigarettes, subtract 75 cents at the cheaper states
(because: Walgreen's) and add a couple bucks or so in the more
expensive states (because: deli surcharge, gas charges, etc.). So the
real cost of cigarettes in Florida for instance is $4.65 and the real
cost of cigarettes in New York City is $13 or $14."

That's funny that American Spirit is expensive in TX. My neighbor
smokes them because they are the cheapest here. [upstate NY] I think
$8 or so last time I got some for him.

Jim

Dave Smith > wrote:

-snip-
>> I'm not sure how this thread drifted from a rude customer at Dunkin
>> Donuts to smoking cigarettes.
>
>Sin taxes... should be applied to donuts too ;-)

Our Gov called that one a 'Fat tax' when he proposed it 3-4 years ago.
http://www.moneycrashers.com/how-do-...out-a-fat-tax/

Jim