The General Musings of Falkie2013 (George Senda, The Guy From Pittsburgh)

[HorrorRetro]

Some inspiration. It's never too late.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qX9FSZJu448#t=284

[chefist]

HONESTLY THE ONLY REASON I LOOK AT THE BELCHIE THREAD IS TO READ PALADIN'S COMMENTS! I KNOW YOU DON'T GET PAID BROTHER, BUT MORE OF YOUR ANALYSIS WOULD BE APPRECIATED! SEMPER FIDELIS!

[WhiteCrow]

Spayed my little shed cat today. She has a sad.

Who paid for it (spaying)? Is she a service cat?  What's her name? What's her favorite food? Does she purr?

[Yorkshire pud]

So which one is it again?
You have this loathsome ability to be able to contradict yourself in the same post.

You should run for office

Yeah; if you go back a page or so he says Noory knows nothing and is a troll; but goes on to say he'll be employed by Noory. Bearing in mind Noory paid for his glasses! Senda redefines lowlife.

[Yorkshire pud]

No, I don't even know what the show is about yet.

What??? Noory you said knew nothing and is a troll? He knows you said that about him?

[Daggit]

If Sendamemoney was capable of getting a manly erection then I would suggest that he be spayed. May all his mayo be sour.

[MV/Liberace!]

...the same day Noory's tv producer calls me to set things up for taping.

Can't wait.

[nextgen.fm]

No, I don't even know what the show is about yet.
And if I did play abbot and costello with Noory, I can do the " Hey, Abbott ! " line pretty well.
Tommy could play our landlord as we go on about our paranormal and comedic adventures.
And Kate could be our version of Dagmar.
My, how things and fashion have changed in 64 years.

kate viewed 7 times vs 4 for Dagmar! 

[ONeill]

Isn't ever going to happen.
She never apologized to me.
Enough said about her as far as I am concerned.
And I did apologize in the videos I did and complained that she never replied in any manner, so don't try to make it look like I didn't, Patho Jen.
But this is a reply to Aldous.
And I have enough to deal with as it with with trying to get Kathy into her new apartment anyway.
And one of the jerks on here said something to the effect of :

" Who ever heard of a fucking service cat ? "

Well, Kathy has the doctor's letter and the certificate.
And Boop is both a service cat for medical issues and an emotional needs cat and fits the criteria under the law for allowing a tenant with medical AND emotional needs to have a cat.

Please specify what Redacted would have to apologize for. For saying you're Dave's whore? That's true.

It's amazing, so every crazy cat lady can get a medical certificate if she likes to hug a cat. That's what it is, complete and utter insanity. If that's where we're heading, we are doomed. OK, i need to go and feed my service goldfish.

You are a missing link in evolution Bulkie, a hairless gorilla.

[WOTR]

It would be nice if our veterans could just stroll in and demand a service pet.

They just need the right doctors to get permanent disability and a service frog... Or dog, cat, or piranha.  Please fill in the type of animal preferred as a service pet on line 11.B and the paperwork will be filled out and signed for a small fee.

[ONeill]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbZt0DMd8p4

[nooryisawesome]

You are a missing link in evolution Bulkie, a hairless gorilla.

No way man, hairless gorilla's are ripped. Plus i am betting  "those" work.

[Yorkshire pud]

No way man, hairless gorilla's are ripped. Plus i am betting  "those" work.

Gorillas have better social skills and far more self aware.

[aldousburbank]

Who paid for it (spaying)? Is she a service cat?  What's her name? What's her favorite food? Does she purr?

I paid for it as I am her service human. Her name is Toloula but she answers to Fido. Her favorite food varies from day to day but must be properly paired with wine. She purrs when drunk. She loves (Redacted) and gets pissy when she catches me reading this thread. Here she comes, gots to sign off.

[3OctaveFart]

I am a cat freak and see no aspects of serviceability to housecats. The law is an ass.
As stated I am glad it will not go homeless, or that somebody won't be deprived of a great companion.

[onan]

I am a cat freak and see no aspects of serviceability to housecats. The law is an ass.
As stated I am glad it will not go homeless, or that somebody will be deprived of a great companion.

In some cases, usually with young children, small animals can help those that suffer physical, emotional, sexual, or some variation of abuse and often do respond well and are able to redevelop healthy relationships. Kathy and faulty are using a poorly planned policy to, once more, scam the system.

[PB the Deplorable]

Why shouldn't renters be able to have a dog or a cat?  If they have to 'scam' the system to do so, so be it

If a person living alone, especially an older person, is healthier emotionally due to having a pet - and I think they would be if they do want a pet - how much of a scam is it really?

[onan]

Why shouldn't renters be able to have a dog or a cat?  If they have to 'scam' the system to do so, so be it

If a person living alone, especially an older person, is healthier emotionally due to having a pet - and I think they would be if they do want a pet - how much of a scam is it really?

That is a completely different issue. If you want to debate pet ownership superseding property ownership, fine. Using a policy that is meant to help with emotional therapy for other uses erodes the already "looked down upon" credibility of mental heath issues.

I have been a pet owner for more than 35 years and rescue animals all the time. I have a soft spot for almost all animals. As, Albrecht mentioned in a post elsewhere, I too often stop my car and help animals get across the road.

However, if I own property and am renting it to others,  and if I make a rule of no pets, then it is no pets. If one doesn't like that they can rent or purchase elsewhere.

And honestly, pets are expensive. Faulty doesn't need another reason to panhandle on the forum.

[nooryisawesome]

Why shouldn't renters be able to have a dog or a cat?  If they have to 'scam' the system to do so, so be it

If a person living alone, especially an older person, is healthier emotionally due to having a pet - and I think they would be if they do want a pet - how much of a scam is it really?

With you on this.

[ONeill]

Why shouldn't renters be able to have a dog or a cat?  If they have to 'scam' the system to do so, so be it

If a person living alone, especially an older person, is healthier emotionally due to having a pet - and I think they would be if they do want a pet - how much of a scam is it really?

It is a total scam.

My parents rent out a flat. We never had any pet other than a goldfish and they don't want any animals in there. For example because there is furniture in that flat that they may want to use in the future. It is their property and their decision. If someone doesn't like it, they can rent a flat from someone else.

[PB the Deplorable]

... It is their property and their decision. If someone doesn't like it, they can rent a flat from someone else.

Yeah, great.  And most other landlords would prefer no pets as well, which makes it hard for a renter to even have a pet in a lot of places.  That's not fair, property rental is not just another business - it's also someone's home.  How about just get a bigger deposit?

Landlords would prefer to not have kids there either.  Or low income people.  Or anyone not like them.  Which is why we have some of the laws we have, including the service animal 'scam'

Maybe some of these landlords are in the wrong business

[ONeill]

Yeah, great.  And most other landlords would prefer no pets as well, which makes it hard for a renter to even have a pet in a lot of places.  That's not fair, how about just get a bigger deposit. 

Landlords would prefer to not have kids there either.  Or low income people.  Or anyone not like them.  Which is why we have some of the laws we have, including the service animal 'scam'

Maybe some of these landlords are in the wrong business

Sorry to ask, aren't you so much about protection of private property normally?

So a pet owner has a problem - yes. What you are saying would make it the flat owner's problem. For example, I am allergic to dog fur. Another example, I can smell if a cat lives in a flat. It may be cleanest cat in the world, if I walk around an apartment I will know if the owner keeps a cat and I would be bothered to live in such a flat myself not ever having a pet. So now I rent out a flat to a dog owner and I want to move in myself when he/she moves out. Should I be forced to have allergic reactions for half a year?

[Yorkshire pud]

Yeah, great.  And most other landlords would prefer no pets as well, which makes it hard for a renter to even have a pet in a lot of places.  That's not fair, property rental is not just another business - it's also someone's home.  How about just get a bigger deposit?

Landlords would prefer to not have kids there either.  Or low income people.  Or anyone not like them.  Which is why we have some of the laws we have, including the service animal 'scam'

Maybe some of these landlords are in the wrong business

This is very unlike your normal tack on such matter PB. Oh well. The fact is Senda is using a facility that wasn't intended for what he's using it for but because (presumably) it was badly thought out and worded, he's taking advantage of it. The other fact worth mentioning (again) is if he'd not wasted god knows how much on crap over the years, he'd be in position whereby he could put a decent deposit down on a new apartment for Kathy.  Naturally he'll bleat that if he gives her his money, he'll be broke, but if I loved someone as much as he claims to love her, I'd give as much as I was able. Senda thinks of himself, and only himself, and to that end, he's so far up his own arse he could see the inside of his colon.


His main consideration on any thing involving money is 'And what crap can I buy with this?' Not 'How can I make it better for all concerned'

[ONeill]

This is very unlike your normal tack on such matter PB. Oh well. The fact is Senda is using a facility that wasn't intended for what he's using it for but because (presumably) it was badly thought out and worded, he's taking advantage of it. The other fact worth mentioning (again) is if he'd not wasted god knows how much on crap over the years, he'd be in position whereby he could put a decent deposit down on a new apartment for Kathy.  Naturally he'll bleat that if he gives her his money, he'll be broke, but if I loved someone as much as he claims to love her, I'd give as much as I was able. Senda thinks of himself, and only himself, and to that end, he's so far up his own arse he could see the inside of his colon.


His main consideration on any thing involving money is 'And what crap can I buy with this?' Not 'How can I make it better for all concerned'

This pet stuff can't be such a big deal. Sendamemoney himself mentioned some time ago that his landlord agreed to him keeping cats after he offered an increased deposit. That's the way to solve this. You want to keep a pet, gather the money for a larger deposit. Landlords will agree, especially if they are renting out shitholes like Falkie's apartment. Abusing a law for that purpose is just despicable. But since so many people do it, why can't Falkie!

[PB the Deplorable]

Sorry to ask, aren't you so much about protection of private property normally?

So a pet owner has a problem - yes. What you are saying would make it the flat owner's problem. For example, I am allergic to dog fur. Another example, I can smell if a cat lives in a flat. It may be cleanest cat in the world, if I walk around an apartment I will know if the owner keeps a cat and I would be bothered to live in such a flat myself not ever having a pet. So now I rent out a flat to a dog owner and I want to move in myself when he/she moves out. Should I be forced to have allergic reactions for half a year?

Yes, I'm in favor of individual rights, including property rights (I'm also in favor of reasonable accommodations of others, and trying to get along without government mandates).  Individual and property rights also apply to someone who rents a home - they don't have the full rights someone buying it would have - to make major alterations, etc, but paying rent gives them rights to the place for the agreed term, and they ought to be able to enjoy normal lives while living there.  To me that includes having a pet or two if they want

A landlord can call references to find out if the dog has been aggressive, or if the tenant has allowed an animal to be messy, and then not rent to them.  Or get a larger deposit to cover any pet damage, or to do a more intensive cleaning when they move out.

As far as your specific question about dog allergies when moving in afterward - I think that's unfortunate but a renter ought to be able to have a dog while someone is collecting rent from them.  They are paying good money for a place to live, that should include a pet if they want one

[PB the Deplorable]

This is very unlike your normal tack on such matter PB...

Is it?

Signing a lease and paying the rent conveys the rights to normal use of the place, or should

[HorrorRetro]

I think that's unfortunate but a renter ought to be able to have a dog while someone is collecting rent from them.  They are paying good money for a place to live, that should include a pet if they want one

I'm an animal lover. I have three dogs, two cats, three hens, and four frogs. I also own my own home, and I'm a landlord. I own a rental home down in the Southwest. I always believed in providing my renters the PRIVILEGE of having a pet. It's not a right. Some renters are responsible and take care of the property. Others, like my last one, destroyed my property. People say, "Just charge them a pet deposit." In the real world, a $300 or even $500 pet deposit does not come close to covering pet-caused damages. I could have charged them $1000 pet deposit, and it still would not have come close to covering damages. Before I owned my own homes, I was a renter. I had to follow the landlords' rules. If no pets were allowed, then no pets were allowed. I either found another place or I followed the rules.

It would be nice if all pet owners were responsible and considerate when living in other people's property, but a large number are not.

Back on the service pet issue. When someone like Falkie or Kathy abuse the service pet system, it only causes legitimate cases to be ridiculed or ignored. It's already hard enough for those with legitimate needs to obtain and keep a service pet.

[ONeill]

They are paying good money for a place to live, that should include a pet if they want one

In the flat my parents rent out we have a family with two little kids. In my personal opinion they aren't paying good money, I am very disappointed about the amount of money we are getting, but that's what demand and supply gave us.

Actually I will move in there when I come back from a foreign contract in a year or two. I am sure the sliding closets will be a mess after those years with little kids living there. Also the floor will require smoothing. And I have no problem with that, because it was our decision to rent out the flat to these people. Saying this, I would never agree for a dog to live in there. Please explain how I should be treated. Should it be forbidden for me to rent out a flat at all? Or should dog owners be able to sue me for discrimination?

[ONeill]

Is it?

Signing a lease and paying the rent conveys the rights to normal use of the place, or should

Normal use is what an owner and a renting party negotiate before signing a deal. You contradict your usual opinions on these matters.

[GeorgieForPresident2216]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbZt0DMd8p4

That's one of the most f'd up things I've ever seen.