First story: How exactly was Karen supposed to determine if anything had been stolen? She'd have to know everything that the homeowner owned to determine if anything was gone.
Rich neighborhood. Probably had been there before with the previous owners. But given how she is, they probably didn't tell her they sold the house and left lol
Guess my story is relatable to the first, I dressed like a hobo really casual shirts and pants and living in one of the most expensive suburb in Australia, im considered as a multimillionaire. One night I locked myself out from my own place and had recently being binge watching the locksmith lock picking channels, have one of their kits in the storage shed, went in and got it out, picked my own home door lock, one of my closest neighbour dropped by and held the phone torch to help in the breakin🤣
@@NekoYuki Depends where you are at, in some states and provinces you can be charged with "Breaking and Entering" even without breaking an anything. You are still technically "breaking" security even if the physical security isn't damaged. Legal jargon is weird, but that is how it is legally.
Story 1: It is never a good idea to attack someone in front of the police, because when an police officer witnesses the attack the victim may not get a choice to drop charges. Depends on where you live, of course.
Especially since she was still holding onto that bat. Odds are she struck OP with that bat. So I can wager it was assault with deadly weapon with aggravated assault charges
@@Ragetiger1 That would depend on which country this took place. In the US the police wouldn't allow her to carry the bat around them and would have tased/shot her if she didn't drop it.
Some of the wealthiest people I know wear tattered clothes and drive 20 year old beater vehicles. Appearances aren’t everything. As Karen found out, sticking your nose where it doesn’t belong can have severe consequences.
After you established you were the owner you should have had her immediately arrested for home invasion and assault. Bc she was not given permission to enter. Even if it wasn't your house she had no right to enter
I almost accidentally did this as well. Fortunately, my Edward Jones advisor taught me about insider trading and recommended that I should not buy the stock right then.
insider trading IS illegal and this is the penalty for it Violation of the prohibition on insider trading can result in a prison sentence and civil and criminal fines for the individuals who commit the violation, and civil and criminal fines for the entities that commit the violation. The maximum prison sentence for an insider trading violation is 20 years in a federal penitentiary. The maximum criminal fine for individuals is $5,000,000, and the maximum fine for non-natural persons (such as an entity whose securities are publicly traded) is $25,000,000. The civil penalty for a violator may be an amount up to three times the profit gained or loss avoided as a result of the insider trading violation. The penalty for insider trading could range from a fine to jail time of up to 20 years
@@JohnH20111 Problems also arise due to statute of limitations. It's 10 years from when it happened, not when it was reported. another thing is that Prosecutors must prove that the defendant actually received information, that the information was both “material” and “nonpublic,” and that the information directly influenced the defendant's trade. The thing is. . . he didn't work for the tech company, but knew someone that did.
Story 1: Did Op just admit that he had Insider information and then followed up by doing insider trading? The same thing that Martha Stewart got arrested for because it's illegal? Dude.
Insider trading in the US is a crime punishable by monetary penalties and incarceration, with a maximum sentence of 20 years in a federal penitentiary. The maximum criminal fine for individuals is $5,000,000, and the maximum fine for non-natural persons is $25,000,000. Violation of the prohibition on insider trading can result in a prison sentence and civil and criminal fines for the individuals who commit the violation, and civil and criminal fines for the entities that commit the violation. The civil penalty for a violator is subject to "treble damages," which means they may be liable for an amount up to three times the profit gained or loss avoided as a result of the insider trading violation. Violation of the prohibition on insider trading can result in a prison sentence and civil and criminal fines for the individuals who commit the violation, and civil and criminal fines for the entities that commit the violation.
I missed this video first time round; and yeah, OP did just straight up admit to insider trading. And they were able to buy a million-dollar mansion with the proceeds? Absolutely wild. Don't do crime, kids.
I'm guessing the Karen in the first story was also the HOA president. The politician in the last story sounded very undeserving of any office, good thing she lost. Great stories, Ripe. 🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟
For what the commission on the sale was your realtor should return your call immediately if they miss your call. But a realtor should still be available at 9pm.
@notconvincedgranny6573 she was taking care of a baby that year. It isn't some in and out procedure. She needs time to heal. You just can't stick the kid on a shelf and so hold on buddy.
Have to wonder what is wrong with that Karen that she would attack a man who is obviously her new neighbor. When she gets out of jail, think she will find her neighbors consider her a criminal and a loon. Then she can see how being treated like that is. 2nd story - LOL, wonderful that stepfather and stepson bonded on such an artistic endeavor of comeuppance.
@lancerevell5979 you are right, it would be much more logical for it to be a job that is unpaid. We wouldn't get more rich/clueless or people paid by shady means when it's unpaid
id bring up she herself hopped over the fence/wall. she was really wanting to look around op's million dollar house to "see if anything was stolen".in a place she has never been in. id accuse her...she mustve planned on robbing or squatting. she caught op and called cops
Great stories Ripe. Especially the last story with the woman running for office showing what kind of a crappy politician she truly was. Hopefully she never runs for office again and if she does maybe OP can reveal what kind of candidate she is.
Aa for filling traffic cones with concrete and setting them up on a public road to damage to someone's vehicle (as was obviously what they wanted) is going to get you put in jail or at least in court ending up with you paying for the damage and a fine where I am from
First story, almost guaruntee its AMD stock. It was $3 about a year before the Ryzen chip was out, it shot up to $16 a share and about a year later it was 150ish a share. I had a chance to buy 300 shares before this boom. I knew it would happen, I thoguht it would only go up to $20 to 30 a share... and I decided to buy a Nintendo switch instead. Super expensive Switch in hindsight, followed by a lot of regrets and shattered dreams.
"Homeless" Mansion Owner Story: If I were OP, the day after Karen slapped me, I'd be calling a Lawyer to File for a Restraining Order (No Contact, Stay Off My Property & Stay A Minimum Of 100 Feet Away From Me At All Times) and have Karen Served while still a Guest of the State Department of Corrections... 😄😁😆😅😂🤣
Story 3: There are several things wrong with the response to this story. 1) She is one of the OWNERS. She has no obligation to act like an ordinary employee. She has no legal reason to come back to work at any point beyond managerial tasks. 2) The surgery was NOT elective as she had a medical need for it. The one year period was due to needing to TAKE CARE OF THE BABY. 3) Employees are not automatically granted time off for simply being employees. They have to work for a minimum amount of time at a job before they may request time off. She should have been aware of this before she started trying to get pregnant. If it was an accidental pregnancy, that does not excuse her poor choices. 4) The department the employee worked in was understaffed. The owner has no obligation to the employees beyond the basic necessities of a reasonably safe work environment. The business comes first. In other words, he was NOT the a'hole here. The employee Karen was. Anyone who thinks otherwise does not understand how this sort of thing works.
We're close on this one. I agree that he is within his rights to do what he did. However he is an a*hole for doing it. The wife's original three months plus six weeks for surgery is understandable. However she took an additional SIX MONTHS. If the company can do without her for a year, then it shows that her position is meaningless and she is just collecting a check. Again, it's OP's company and his money, so he is allowed to do this. However to dlgo so far out of your way to give your wife special treatment and then not take care of an essential employee does make you an a*hole, and makes it likely that you'll lose employees.
@@spaceracer23 He gave her what she was entitled to, and then she basically bad mouthed his wife. Why should he reward that? What about Sandra? She had her baby last year and she didnt get extra time. Should she get an extra week off now? Did Op take paternity leave? His wife, by virtue of being his wife, is part owner. Owners have different responsibilities. He would be entirely within his rights to pay his wife whatever he wants for whatever he wants. She could never ever be in the office again and its nothing to do with the employee. There is also a difference between essential and irreplaceable. If you own McDonalds then having staff on the till is essential. The business cant run if noone is on till. However, that person could be replaced, it would create short term problems though. So the customer service position is essential, not the person in it.
@@spaceracer23 What the wife had was no different to an unpaid sabbatical, which is not something automatically granted. In addition, OP's wife's medical needs are no one else's' business. Period. She then badmouthed OP's wife which could be considered bullying, and is definitely not professional. She is lucky she gets to even have a job after that since she is creating a hostile work environment for OP's wife. Think about that. If you are so set on treating people fairly, even when circumstances are reasonably different, ask yourself why the other employee should not be fired or otherwise disciplined over that. As regarding his wife's position being 'meaningless', so what? IT IS HIS COMPANY. You are just as entitled as the other employee to not realise that. You are also foolish to not understand that some sections of a company may have more redundancy than others for reasons beyond anyone's right to question.
Not much against your thoughts, but the part about the employer having no obligations, while at the same time admitting he had an understaffed department kind of grates. He knew she was going to be on leave. "business comes first?" one of the rules of good business is to hire enough people, so you can function if one person is ill, or quits, or anything at all. I'm not defending Mary, and, bad as the US is on things like this, the company doesn't seem to be unusually harsh. But he's allowed people to pick up the slack for his wife for a year. It sounds like he could have had a trainee in the wings for all kinds of possibilities.
@@ihatemymeds giving someone what is legally required doesn't make you good or bad. It just makes you legal. This case is CLEAR nepotism. That's LEGAL, but still an a+hole thing to do.
Story 3: OP is NTA. No laws have been broken. Mary received the correct amount of leave allowed for the time she has been an employee with the company.
Last story: Would have been glorious if the OP had leaked the e-mails to the press about how this candidate fired her for being pregnant and committed wage theft. But it sounds like she lost anyway.
S3 yta. Your wife has a fake job with actual employees to cover her while your actual employees have to deal with a boss who cant properly staff the business
Last story: good thing the crooked and corrupt politician lost the election! We have enough crooked and corrupt politicians already in office, we certainly don’t need another!
Too small to be properly considered a mansion-mansions typically have at least one square chain (0.1 acres) of floor space, five bedrooms minimum and a yard area of several acres-one third of a square furlong (equivalency: 3 1/3 acres) would suffice.
to be fair...if i saw someone scale a wall to bypass a keypad locked gate....Id assume they might be breaking in.but id make sure before doing anything haste
Love your content my dude ,but that story wow that guy was an axxhole he fuelled that fire climbing over the wall on a bin then waving at her hope he gets robbed and the nieghbours says "yeah we saw some dude going in the property but he could of been the new owner"?
LOL reminds me of some loud mouthed tourists visiting a town near me they were moaning that the bistro allowed the "tramp" in ok he had a patched tweed jacket frayed at seams dirty safety boots and a knitted jumper with holes in the front on but it was Maurice who had been doing do repair work on the ramparts of the chateau Maurice is the local baron and he speaks good English we were both sniggering into out beers at every comment they made
First story. I find it amusing how so many people like to appear clever and jump on the 'Insider Trading' band wagon without understanding in the slightest what that involves. As some commenters have pointed out, the prosecution has more hurdles to jump over to prove there was insider trading and just getting a good tip about a product under development would not clear them. In such a case, it is no different from any other investor taking a gamble on the sales of a product. Now, if OP was already an investor, and heard that something only a privileged insider would know (say the CFO saying there is a major financial issue the board were discussing secretly), then that would definitely be insider trading, but I see few details that OP did anything wrong. As for the 'Karen', while her initial actions might have been OK, the first hint that her supporters are idiots is that she was carrying a bat. The second is that she ignored the fact that he had keys and did not break into the house. Third that she tried forcing her way in. Any one of these alone would make her an ahole. All together confirm it. After the assault, OP should be pushing very, very hard to have a restraining order taken out on her, with it being made extensive enough to keep her out of the area, and possibly move home, because of the intent shown by carrying a weapon that she used very inappropriately openly. OP should also be suing her into financial oblivion over the the injuries
Third story - YTA Your wife took extra time 0ff for elective, cosmetic surgery, after a year off. But, you couldn't have a bit of compassion for one of your employees who had given birth less than six weeks earlier.
Pay attention to the actual story. The Karen had not worked there long enough to qualify for FMLA. She got maternity leave, period. Also, her job was in an area which was short-staffed already during a busy time. OP had his business to look out for and couldn't afford for her to be gone even longer. It wasn't just him being a meanie, for Pete's sake. Maybe Karen should have waited until she was entitled to more leave before getting herself knocked up. Pregnancy is a choice, not an illness.
@nadinesharp9766 first, she wasn't asking for paid time off, and second FMLA doesn't cover a tummy tuck after the kid's first birthday. The only thing the employee did wrong was to not ask her MD for a note. Any OB/GYN would give her one at 5 weeks postpartum.
If she wasn't a nut job I'm sure you would have said I'm glad that you were watching out for my home and the neighborhood but as you can see i own the house
s@@ghost656metal8 Amusing how you, yourself, come across as a Karen for your rant. You do realise that the OP wrote this after the events unfolded revealing her to be a Karen? That he would have known she was one when he wrote this meaning he was correct to call her that, as well as reasonably in his rights.
“I heard from an inside source in a major tech firm that they were getting ready to release something big.” IANAL, but that sounds like the definition of insider trading to me. I know insider trading has to do with using “non-public” information… now I am going to have to take a trip down the rabbit hole of securities regulation. To the Internet! 🤓
I liked how the snow wall story was told. How could you possibly work for a political campaign where you only agree with 10% of the candidate's policies? That to me is almost the definition of doing evil.
if i had seen someone doing what op in the first story did i would have called the police to but i would have kept my distance untill the police arrived because you will never know how a intruder, if it is an intruder would react. but i would not have done any of the other things the karen did and afther the situation was cleared i would have said sorry to the neighbor. if all karen did was calling the police it wouldent have even been a karen story in that incident but a conserned neighbor
Insider trading in the US is a crime punishable by monetary penalties and incarceration, with a maximum sentence of 20 years in a federal penitentiary. The maximum criminal fine for individuals is $5,000,000, and the maximum fine for non-natural persons is $25,000,000. Violation of the prohibition on insider trading can result in a prison sentence and civil and criminal fines for the individuals who commit the violation, and civil and criminal fines for the entities that commit the violation. The civil penalty for a violator is subject to "treble damages," which means they may be liable for an amount up to three times the profit gained or loss avoided as a result of the insider trading violation. Violation of the prohibition on insider trading can result in a prison sentence and civil and criminal fines for the individuals who commit the violation, and civil and criminal fines for the entities that commit the violation.
The guy who gave his wife preferential treatment is wrong you cannot treat one employee one way and another a different way it's just wrong he is a giant jerk
Wrong. He is running a business that has an understaffed department. He has the right to deny leave to an employee if granting that leave would adversely affect the business.
@protoborg intentionally understaffed while his wife's department has enough normal employees to cover her indefinite leave shows preference. His wife needs to officially leave and just collect profits rather than putting them in jeopardy to pretend she works.
@@DisneyChar You're rather entitled to lie and say, without evidence, that it is deliberately understaffed. There is nothing in the story to even suggest that this is the case so you are fabricating this. There are many reasons why a department may not be able to obtain the staff it requires.
@@mpmansell did the story not say his wife duties have been covered by backup employees for a year while he just hired the new lady and her department is still understaffed? In rare cases a business is understaffed because "nobody wants to work" this didn't sound like that, this just sounded like it's not a priority for this boss.
@@DisneyChar So what if her department had back up employees? What on earth is your point? Frankly, I don't see have have any relevant point at all. Regarding the other department, maybe you need to actually think and apply some logic to it. Her department is understaffed. She is a new employee, thus OP is trying to staff the department. Maybe OP has not been able to find other suitable candidates to staff that department to the point that it has redundancy built in. You seem to be rather foolishly assuming that OP is doing this deliberately for which there is no suggestion, and is dishonest to claim there is. It is extremely likely that the skills required for the new department are not available locally. It is also possible that the department is understaffed through no fault of OP (retirements, death, other health related sabbaticals, resignations, etc). For you to say it doesn't sound like a priority for this boss is entitled and, not only has no basis, but is weakened by the fact he recently employed the complainer.
Story 3. OP is not thr asshole, if someone doesn't qualify for time off they don't qualify for time off. If the baby was planned that's on the woman for poor foresight. This decision frankly has nothing to do witu his wife's situation as it'd be comparing apples to oranges with position and complications that were mentioned. Even if she wasn't the wife she still would have been entitled to more time off and likely had the money to support herself with it paid or unpaid
story 2, if the other woman didnt work there long enough to qualify for maternity leave, and his wife had actual legitimate reasons for needing time off then i'd say not the a-hole story 4, its a good thing she lost the election, who would want someone like that in any kind of power
Ripe RUclips have removed the channel Tabs across all channels, I could understand if they were empty but yours was not. You'll need to go back and re-enable and put the channels back in if you want to premote your co channels, friends channels and those you think your viewers may like. Dumbass decision by RUclips beancounters!
The business story is how businesses in America work and it sucks. Morally yeah he's an ahole for not giving the woman another week off just because he'd rather keep low staff and work his employees harder. But he's completely within his rights to do what he did. Making sure a business makes a profit at all costs to the individual is exactly how American capitalism works.
Story 3 just makes me sad for all Americans and their shitty system with maternity leave and workers rights :( For example in Germany 6 weeks prior to due date + 8 weeks after are mandatory paid maternity leave. You can't get less than that. You get paid in part by your health insurance, and the rest is from your employer (you get your regular salary). Also you and your partner can request up to 3 years of "Elternzeit" (= parent time) per child. That is unpaid leave from your job. They HAVE to give you this time off. The parents can split the 3 years among them (like one gets one year off, and the other gets two for example). But you can get back to work earlier if you want to. That's why the US would at most be a holiday destination for me, but never a place to live...
First story: If it's true--and it sound suspicious--the "Karen" was a concerned, if overzealous neighbor. OP's appearance and behavior were pretty suspicious! Third story: OP, you are a MAJOR a-hole!!!!!
Story 3, it’s a 50/50 thing. Yeah morally you’re being the a**, but if it was spelled out that she didn’t qualify for fmla time. Then that’s not fully on you
Story with wife getting more time off yes a hole because you can't be like that with the wife and not other that's favoritism even though you are married that stop at the doorat work cause now you are coworkrs
First Story: While I feel Karen needed to go to jail for assault, she was correct in her actions up until the police were satisfied. OP has a nasty attitude and, after confessing to insider trading, should be in jail with her.
Story 3: UM! NTJ! is easier to see the reason. SHE IS THE OWNER'S WIFE! FFS!!. Also Karen just got knocked knowing she has an important job and just in the middle of a busy moment and when she is just green as grass too. Again ... there is not any laws broken at all either. This comments probably are cherry picked or probably people who are literally miserable in a job and want to trauma dump into Reddit. this is why i said Reddit is full of man hating karens, specially subreddits like Relationshipsadivce and AITA. I'm ban from AITA for call out the blatant favoritism too. Going back to the story, she can request FMLA but ... she can't ask for time extra at all because ... and again i repeat, the other was the owner's wife, so i believe the owner pick up for her work in the absence. AND on top Karen is new in the job even if has already months from start. Also she bad mouthed OP's wife too in the same verbose. SO , her not getting this as a punishment for not zip her mouth about the remarks about OP's wife is correct too. I even see people getting fired because of this things, but that will give legs for her to had a demand for wrongful termination.
The bad mouthing could, and possibly should, form grounds for termination for bullying and creating a hostile workplace. Ironically, possibly grounds for her to be seen as discriminating against an employee with health issues that no one else in the company has a right to know about.
Story 3, there isn't special treatment going on here, ops wife is an owner of the business, Mary is an employee, they are very different positions... it might not seem fair but life isn't fair...
If they don't have an employee handbook and specifically a part about disability, it's preferential treatment. Anyone else could not take off for more than a year due to childbirth and if OP's wife's position is such that she isn't even a critical employee and her duties can be easily done by others, it emphasizes the special treatment.
He owns the company, she works there, kinda, sometimes, when he doesn't have backup staff for her. It's risky mixing family and work like that. Depending on their location he could be in big trouble if Mary decides to talk to a lawyer.
Third story: OP is the butthole. He is so buiest with his wife. In a company, family member or not, one must be proffesional so family members don't exist there before preferencial treatment generates a toxic work enviroment.
First, the word is spelled "biased". Second, no shit, stupid! That's his wife! Third, co-owner does NOT need to follow the same behaviors as the employees. Fourth, it was NOT preferential as the EMPLOYEE did not yet have the tenure to qualify for medical leave beyond the basic "you just had a kid" leave. Finally, if you are going to play the "maintain professionalism" card then you cannot expect a NEW employee working in an UNDERSTAFFED department to have the same allowances as the CO-OWNER of the busy has. Bottom line: you, sir, are an idiot!
First story: How exactly was Karen supposed to determine if anything had been stolen? She'd have to know everything that the homeowner owned to determine if anything was gone.
That's what I thought too.
No no, see, she obviously thinks "anything of value on you must be stolen if you're homeless"
That was my first thought too. Also found it hilarious that she was trying to act all high and mighty while repeatedly using the word “ain’t” 😂
Rich neighborhood. Probably had been there before with the previous owners. But given how she is, they probably didn't tell her they sold the house and left lol
I'd bet she thought she had a chance to pocket some small valuables, later blaming "homeless" OP for the theft. Doom on her. 😂
You need to get a restraining order ASAP against that bat carrying Karen
Guess my story is relatable to the first, I dressed like a hobo really casual shirts and pants and living in one of the most expensive suburb in Australia, im considered as a multimillionaire.
One night I locked myself out from my own place and had recently being binge watching the locksmith lock picking channels, have one of their kits in the storage shed, went in and got it out, picked my own home door lock, one of my closest neighbour dropped by and held the phone torch to help in the breakin🤣
[MISSION PASSED]
Respect +
It's not breaking and entering if you're not breaking. It's just "unlawful entry" and "trespass". but yes, the *ahem* alternative method of entry
@@NekoYuki Depends where you are at, in some states and provinces you can be charged with "Breaking and Entering" even without breaking an anything. You are still technically "breaking" security even if the physical security isn't damaged. Legal jargon is weird, but that is how it is legally.
Story 1: It is never a good idea to attack someone in front of the police, because when an police officer witnesses the attack the victim may not get a choice to drop charges. Depends on where you live, of course.
Also not a good idea to admit potential insider trading in a public forum but I guess he covered himself for that.
@@joshduthie3401 It really isn't, but the question is would the LEO bother to put forth resources to track down an anonymous profile on Reddit?
Especially since she was still holding onto that bat. Odds are she struck OP with that bat. So I can wager it was assault with deadly weapon with aggravated assault charges
@@Ragetiger1 That would depend on which country this took place. In the US the police wouldn't allow her to carry the bat around them and would have tased/shot her if she didn't drop it.
@joshduthie3401 except it's not really insider trading lol
Some of the wealthiest people I know wear tattered clothes and drive 20 year old beater vehicles. Appearances aren’t everything. As Karen found out, sticking your nose where it doesn’t belong can have severe consequences.
As can assaulting someone in front of cops. 😂
Buy cheap, stay rich.
While I can understand the Karen calling the cops in the first story, that should have been all she did.
While that’s true, since when have Karens have been rational enough to something smart or logical? They don’t know when to quit.
She wanted to be there to smugly cackle when "the homeless guy" gets arrested. Joke's on her. 😂
After you established you were the owner you should have had her immediately arrested for home invasion and assault. Bc she was not given permission to enter. Even if it wasn't your house she had no right to enter
0:55 Careful there OP. That's insider trading and depending on laws, may be illegal.
I almost accidentally did this as well.
Fortunately, my Edward Jones advisor taught me about insider trading and recommended that I should not buy the stock right then.
insider trading IS illegal and this is the penalty for it
Violation of the prohibition on insider trading can result in a prison sentence and civil and criminal fines for the individuals who commit the violation, and civil and criminal fines for the entities that commit the violation. The maximum prison sentence for an insider trading violation is 20 years in a federal penitentiary. The maximum criminal fine for individuals is $5,000,000, and the maximum fine for non-natural persons (such as an entity whose securities are publicly traded) is $25,000,000. The civil penalty for a violator may be an amount up to three times the profit gained or loss avoided as a result of the insider trading violation. The penalty for insider trading could range from a fine to jail time of up to 20 years
@@JohnH20111 Problems also arise due to statute of limitations. It's 10 years from when it happened, not when it was reported. another thing is that Prosecutors must prove that the defendant actually received information, that the information was both “material” and “nonpublic,” and that the information directly influenced the defendant's trade. The thing is. . . he didn't work for the tech company, but knew someone that did.
Insider trading IS illegal. Highly unlikely they actually qualify for insider trading. There is a lot more that goes into it than getting a good tip.
@@JohnH20111 Insider trading may not be illegal in other countries and I can't guarantee that OP isn't in one of those countries.
Story 1: Did Op just admit that he had Insider information and then followed up by doing insider trading? The same thing that Martha Stewart got arrested for because it's illegal? Dude.
Insider trading in the US is a crime punishable by monetary penalties and incarceration, with a maximum sentence of 20 years in a federal penitentiary. The maximum criminal fine for individuals is $5,000,000, and the maximum fine for non-natural persons is $25,000,000. Violation of the prohibition on insider trading can result in a prison sentence and civil and criminal fines for the individuals who commit the violation, and civil and criminal fines for the entities that commit the violation. The civil penalty for a violator is subject to "treble damages," which means they may be liable for an amount up to three times the profit gained or loss avoided as a result of the insider trading violation. Violation of the prohibition on insider trading can result in a prison sentence and civil and criminal fines for the individuals who commit the violation, and civil and criminal fines for the entities that commit the violation.
@@JohnH20111 Right, and he admitted to doing that.
Madame Pelosi does it on the regular. Works for her! 🤨
I missed this video first time round; and yeah, OP did just straight up admit to insider trading. And they were able to buy a million-dollar mansion with the proceeds? Absolutely wild.
Don't do crime, kids.
I'm guessing the Karen in the first story was also the HOA president.
The politician in the last story sounded very undeserving of any office, good thing she lost.
Great stories, Ripe. 🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟
For what the commission on the sale was your realtor should return your call immediately if they miss your call. But a realtor should still be available at 9pm.
A tummy tuck bc your ab muscles separated bc a child bearing is legit medical and needed surgery. It is not about vanity
It is when you wait for a year to have it done.
@notconvincedgranny6573 she was taking care of a baby that year. It isn't some in and out procedure. She needs time to heal. You just can't stick the kid on a shelf and so hold on buddy.
Have to wonder what is wrong with that Karen that she would attack a man who is obviously her new neighbor. When she gets out of jail, think she will find her neighbors consider her a criminal and a loon. Then she can see how being treated like that is. 2nd story - LOL, wonderful that stepfather and stepson bonded on such an artistic endeavor of comeuppance.
...which is why people WHO WANT TO BE POLITICIANS...should in NO WAY be politicians! (heard this reddit post before...but its worth stating this)
The first worse thing We The People ever did was to allow political office to become a paid profession. 🤨
@lancerevell5979 you are right, it would be much more logical for it to be a job that is unpaid. We wouldn't get more rich/clueless or people paid by shady means when it's unpaid
I can understand a neighbor calling the police in the first story however that is ALL she should have done.
id bring up she herself hopped over the fence/wall. she was really wanting to look around op's million dollar house to "see if anything was stolen".in a place she has never been in. id accuse her...she mustve planned on robbing or squatting. she caught op and called cops
Story 3: NTA
see how that first commentor retracted their statement 😅😂😂
Great stories Ripe. Especially the last story with the woman running for office showing what kind of a crappy politician she truly was. Hopefully she never runs for office again and if she does maybe OP can reveal what kind of candidate she is.
Aa for filling traffic cones with concrete and setting them up on a public road to damage to someone's vehicle (as was obviously what they wanted) is going to get you put in jail or at least in court ending up with you paying for the damage and a fine where I am from
Agreed. No problem putting them on your own property, but not on a public street.
First story, almost guaruntee its AMD stock. It was $3 about a year before the Ryzen chip was out, it shot up to $16 a share and about a year later it was 150ish a share. I had a chance to buy 300 shares before this boom. I knew it would happen, I thoguht it would only go up to $20 to 30 a share... and I decided to buy a Nintendo switch instead. Super expensive Switch in hindsight, followed by a lot of regrets and shattered dreams.
"Homeless" Mansion Owner Story: If I were OP, the day after Karen slapped me, I'd be calling a Lawyer to File for a Restraining Order (No Contact, Stay Off My Property & Stay A Minimum Of 100 Feet Away From Me At All Times) and have Karen Served while still a Guest of the State Department of Corrections...
😄😁😆😅😂🤣
If I were OP, I'd be more careful about admitting to insider trading... That's far more years behind bars.
Story 3: There are several things wrong with the response to this story.
1) She is one of the OWNERS. She has no obligation to act like an ordinary employee. She has no legal reason to come back to work at any point beyond managerial tasks.
2) The surgery was NOT elective as she had a medical need for it. The one year period was due to needing to TAKE CARE OF THE BABY.
3) Employees are not automatically granted time off for simply being employees. They have to work for a minimum amount of time at a job before they may request time off. She should have been aware of this before she started trying to get pregnant. If it was an accidental pregnancy, that does not excuse her poor choices.
4) The department the employee worked in was understaffed. The owner has no obligation to the employees beyond the basic necessities of a reasonably safe work environment. The business comes first.
In other words, he was NOT the a'hole here. The employee Karen was. Anyone who thinks otherwise does not understand how this sort of thing works.
We're close on this one.
I agree that he is within his rights to do what he did.
However he is an a*hole for doing it.
The wife's original three months plus six weeks for surgery is understandable.
However she took an additional SIX MONTHS.
If the company can do without her for a year, then it shows that her position is meaningless and she is just collecting a check.
Again, it's OP's company and his money, so he is allowed to do this.
However to dlgo so far out of your way to give your wife special treatment and then not take care of an essential employee does make you an a*hole, and makes it likely that you'll lose employees.
@@spaceracer23 He gave her what she was entitled to, and then she basically bad mouthed his wife. Why should he reward that? What about Sandra? She had her baby last year and she didnt get extra time. Should she get an extra week off now? Did Op take paternity leave? His wife, by virtue of being his wife, is part owner. Owners have different responsibilities. He would be entirely within his rights to pay his wife whatever he wants for whatever he wants. She could never ever be in the office again and its nothing to do with the employee.
There is also a difference between essential and irreplaceable. If you own McDonalds then having staff on the till is essential. The business cant run if noone is on till. However, that person could be replaced, it would create short term problems though. So the customer service position is essential, not the person in it.
@@spaceracer23 What the wife had was no different to an unpaid sabbatical, which is not something automatically granted. In addition, OP's wife's medical needs are no one else's' business. Period. She then badmouthed OP's wife which could be considered bullying, and is definitely not professional. She is lucky she gets to even have a job after that since she is creating a hostile work environment for OP's wife. Think about that. If you are so set on treating people fairly, even when circumstances are reasonably different, ask yourself why the other employee should not be fired or otherwise disciplined over that.
As regarding his wife's position being 'meaningless', so what? IT IS HIS COMPANY. You are just as entitled as the other employee to not realise that. You are also foolish to not understand that some sections of a company may have more redundancy than others for reasons beyond anyone's right to question.
Not much against your thoughts, but the part about the employer having no obligations, while at the same time admitting he had an understaffed department kind of grates. He knew she was going to be on leave. "business comes first?" one of the rules of good business is to hire enough people, so you can function if one person is ill, or quits, or anything at all. I'm not defending Mary, and, bad as the US is on things like this, the company doesn't seem to be unusually harsh. But he's allowed people to pick up the slack for his wife for a year. It sounds like he could have had a trainee in the wings for all kinds of possibilities.
@@ihatemymeds giving someone what is legally required doesn't make you good or bad. It just makes you legal.
This case is CLEAR nepotism.
That's LEGAL, but still an a+hole thing to do.
Story 3: OP is NTA. No laws have been broken. Mary received the correct amount of leave allowed for the time she has been an employee with the company.
Last story: Would have been glorious if the OP had leaked the e-mails to the press about how this candidate fired her for being pregnant and committed wage theft. But it sounds like she lost anyway.
The realtor should have provided the gate code and maybe this mess would not in the place.
S3 yta. Your wife has a fake job with actual employees to cover her while your actual employees have to deal with a boss who cant properly staff the business
lol... "fake job". Maybe Mary should have got a real job that offers more perks
Good evening from London Ontario Canada
Isn't that guy guilty of insider trading in the 1st story????
My house is in L.A. It's not a mansion, but it's worth more than a million. Where can 1 million still buy you a mansion?
Dubai, maybe
Iowa or anywhere else the midwest/rust belt/bible belt/fly over states.
Unless the floor space is at least 1 square chain, 6 bedrooms minimum and a yard space of at least 1/3 square furlongs, it's definitely not a mansion.
Repair to separated abdominal muscles is not a tummy tuck, it's called an abdominoplasty. It is also not a cosmetic procedure.
Howdy Hi Ripe & Disnii,, great stories as always, these people are all Crazy,,😹😹😹⭐⭐⭐
Disnii looks Bored,,,lol
Last story: good thing the crooked and corrupt politician lost the election! We have enough crooked and corrupt politicians already in office, we certainly don’t need another!
I'd bet she'll be a House Representitive in the Capitol before long. Corruption is an important prerequisite for the job! 🙄
Good morning Ripe! GREAT stories! Thank you for starting my week off right 😊
In San Diego a million bucks will only get you a 3 bedroom 2 bath mansion.
Too small to be properly considered a mansion-mansions typically have at least one square chain (0.1 acres) of floor space, five bedrooms minimum and a yard area of several acres-one third of a square furlong (equivalency: 3 1/3 acres) would suffice.
to be fair...if i saw someone scale a wall to bypass a keypad locked gate....Id assume they might be breaking in.but id make sure before doing anything haste
I'd call the cops, but stay well out of it. Let The Boys in Blue do their job.
Love your content my dude ,but that story wow that guy was an axxhole he fuelled that fire climbing over the wall on a bin then waving at her hope he gets robbed and the nieghbours says "yeah we saw some dude going in the property but he could of been the new owner"?
I think it might have been more about the physical assault...and possibly the pushy nosiness.
♾🌟s and 😻🤗s for Ripe, JB and Disney!
LOL reminds me of some loud mouthed tourists visiting a town near me they were moaning that the bistro allowed the "tramp" in ok he had a patched tweed jacket frayed at seams dirty safety boots and a knitted jumper with holes in the front on but it was Maurice who had been doing do repair work on the ramparts of the chateau
Maurice is the local baron and he speaks good English we were both sniggering into out beers at every comment they made
So, the Karen neighbor in the rich neighborhood can't speak in proper English? Yeah, she's doing a dang good job of deflecting.
A million dollars? Wow. That buys you a 2 bedroom house on a quarter acre plot here in the Okanagan
First story. I find it amusing how so many people like to appear clever and jump on the 'Insider Trading' band wagon without understanding in the slightest what that involves. As some commenters have pointed out, the prosecution has more hurdles to jump over to prove there was insider trading and just getting a good tip about a product under development would not clear them. In such a case, it is no different from any other investor taking a gamble on the sales of a product. Now, if OP was already an investor, and heard that something only a privileged insider would know (say the CFO saying there is a major financial issue the board were discussing secretly), then that would definitely be insider trading, but I see few details that OP did anything wrong.
As for the 'Karen', while her initial actions might have been OK, the first hint that her supporters are idiots is that she was carrying a bat. The second is that she ignored the fact that he had keys and did not break into the house. Third that she tried forcing her way in. Any one of these alone would make her an ahole. All together confirm it.
After the assault, OP should be pushing very, very hard to have a restraining order taken out on her, with it being made extensive enough to keep her out of the area, and possibly move home, because of the intent shown by carrying a weapon that she used very inappropriately openly. OP should also be suing her into financial oblivion over the the injuries
Third story - YTA
Your wife took extra time 0ff for elective, cosmetic surgery, after a year off. But, you couldn't have a bit of compassion for one of your employees who had given birth less than six weeks earlier.
Pay attention to the actual story. The Karen had not worked there long enough to qualify for FMLA. She got maternity leave, period. Also, her job was in an area which was short-staffed already during a busy time. OP had his business to look out for and couldn't afford for her to be gone even longer. It wasn't just him being a meanie, for Pete's sake. Maybe Karen should have waited until she was entitled to more leave before getting herself knocked up. Pregnancy is a choice, not an illness.
It was NOT elective. The wife is co-owner. The employee was not there long enough to earn full medical leave. In other BUTT OUT!!!
Big difference between an executive and a peon. Want special treatment? Earn it.
@nadinesharp9766 first, she wasn't asking for paid time off, and second FMLA doesn't cover a tummy tuck after the kid's first birthday. The only thing the employee did wrong was to not ask her MD for a note. Any OB/GYN would give her one at 5 weeks postpartum.
@@TheWeakMinded that wasn't just privilege, that was nepotism.
The guy in the first story just admits to insider trading 😂
If she wasn't a nut job I'm sure you would have said I'm glad that you were watching out for my home and the neighborhood but as you can see i own the house
Thanks for the heart
@@ghost656metal8 Make all the bets you want, but I personally would doubt that - simply because in that case this video literally wouldn't exist ;)
s@@ghost656metal8 Amusing how you, yourself, come across as a Karen for your rant. You do realise that the OP wrote this after the events unfolded revealing her to be a Karen? That he would have known she was one when he wrote this meaning he was correct to call her that, as well as reasonably in his rights.
AITA story….. yes you are the AH you did give your wife special treatment.
Well, one is an executive and one is a peon. Get a job that aligns with your desires or suck it up
“I heard from an inside source in a major tech firm that they were getting ready to release something big.” IANAL, but that sounds like the definition of insider trading to me. I know insider trading has to do with using “non-public” information… now I am going to have to take a trip down the rabbit hole of securities regulation. To the Internet! 🤓
Depends when it was done and if they filed all the proper paperwork
I liked how the snow wall story was told.
How could you possibly work for a political campaign where you only agree with 10% of the candidate's policies? That to me is almost the definition of doing evil.
It's just a job, like being a defense attorney for someone you know darned well is guilty.
@@lancerevell5979 No it is not just a job, it is a choice, even lawyers can decide not to defend someone they find 90% offensive.
if i had seen someone doing what op in the first story did i would have called the police to but i would have kept my distance untill the police arrived because you will never know how a intruder, if it is an intruder would react. but i would not have done any of the other things the karen did and afther the situation was cleared i would have said sorry to the neighbor. if all karen did was calling the police it wouldent have even been a karen story in that incident but a conserned neighbor
So you practice insider trading?
Insider trading in the US is a crime punishable by monetary penalties and incarceration, with a maximum sentence of 20 years in a federal penitentiary. The maximum criminal fine for individuals is $5,000,000, and the maximum fine for non-natural persons is $25,000,000. Violation of the prohibition on insider trading can result in a prison sentence and civil and criminal fines for the individuals who commit the violation, and civil and criminal fines for the entities that commit the violation. The civil penalty for a violator is subject to "treble damages," which means they may be liable for an amount up to three times the profit gained or loss avoided as a result of the insider trading violation. Violation of the prohibition on insider trading can result in a prison sentence and civil and criminal fines for the individuals who commit the violation, and civil and criminal fines for the entities that commit the violation.
story 2: Dude was about his own night's watch
Story 1: OP admits to insider trading.
I wonder if the person in story 1 knows they just admitted to insider trading? 😂
First story.... So insider trading is good. Understood.
The guy who gave his wife preferential treatment is wrong you cannot treat one employee one way and another a different way it's just wrong he is a giant jerk
Wrong. He is running a business that has an understaffed department. He has the right to deny leave to an employee if granting that leave would adversely affect the business.
@protoborg intentionally understaffed while his wife's department has enough normal employees to cover her indefinite leave shows preference. His wife needs to officially leave and just collect profits rather than putting them in jeopardy to pretend she works.
@@DisneyChar You're rather entitled to lie and say, without evidence, that it is deliberately understaffed. There is nothing in the story to even suggest that this is the case so you are fabricating this. There are many reasons why a department may not be able to obtain the staff it requires.
@@mpmansell did the story not say his wife duties have been covered by backup employees for a year while he just hired the new lady and her department is still understaffed?
In rare cases a business is understaffed because "nobody wants to work" this didn't sound like that, this just sounded like it's not a priority for this boss.
@@DisneyChar So what if her department had back up employees? What on earth is your point? Frankly, I don't see have have any relevant point at all.
Regarding the other department, maybe you need to actually think and apply some logic to it. Her department is understaffed. She is a new employee, thus OP is trying to staff the department. Maybe OP has not been able to find other suitable candidates to staff that department to the point that it has redundancy built in.
You seem to be rather foolishly assuming that OP is doing this deliberately for which there is no suggestion, and is dishonest to claim there is. It is extremely likely that the skills required for the new department are not available locally. It is also possible that the department is understaffed through no fault of OP (retirements, death, other health related sabbaticals, resignations, etc).
For you to say it doesn't sound like a priority for this boss is entitled and, not only has no basis, but is weakened by the fact he recently employed the complainer.
⭐️🌟❤️Ripe Hype❤️🌟⭐️
⭐️🌟❤️Disnii Love❤️🌟⭐️
😎👍
⭐️⭐️⭐️
Isn’t the first guy admitting to insider trading if his friend tipped him off that worked for the company?
Story 3. OP is not thr asshole, if someone doesn't qualify for time off they don't qualify for time off. If the baby was planned that's on the woman for poor foresight. This decision frankly has nothing to do witu his wife's situation as it'd be comparing apples to oranges with position and complications that were mentioned. Even if she wasn't the wife she still would have been entitled to more time off and likely had the money to support herself with it paid or unpaid
story 2, if the other woman didnt work there long enough to qualify for maternity leave, and his wife had actual legitimate reasons for needing time off then i'd say not the a-hole
story 4, its a good thing she lost the election, who would want someone like that in any kind of power
Pet the kitty!
⭐️❤️⭐️❤️⭐️❤️⭐️
Well you are in the old saying your between a rock and a hard place
Thanks again
Did dude just admit to insider trading?? Lol not sure that's why I ask
story 1...isnt that insider trading?
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️😎
Ripe RUclips have removed the channel Tabs across all channels, I could understand if they were empty but yours was not. You'll need to go back and re-enable and put the channels back in if you want to premote your co channels, friends channels and those you think your viewers may like. Dumbass decision by RUclips beancounters!
The business story is how businesses in America work and it sucks. Morally yeah he's an ahole for not giving the woman another week off just because he'd rather keep low staff and work his employees harder. But he's completely within his rights to do what he did. Making sure a business makes a profit at all costs to the individual is exactly how American capitalism works.
Story 3 just makes me sad for all Americans and their shitty system with maternity leave and workers rights :(
For example in Germany 6 weeks prior to due date + 8 weeks after are mandatory paid maternity leave. You can't get less than that. You get paid in part by your health insurance, and the rest is from your employer (you get your regular salary).
Also you and your partner can request up to 3 years of "Elternzeit" (= parent time) per child. That is unpaid leave from your job. They HAVE to give you this time off. The parents can split the 3 years among them (like one gets one year off, and the other gets two for example). But you can get back to work earlier if you want to.
That's why the US would at most be a holiday destination for me, but never a place to live...
Money talks
Wealth whispers
💫🌟⭐✨
🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟😁👍
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
❤❤ DISNII ❤❤
Nta. Mary hasn't been there long enough
🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟
geez 1st story ,admits to insider trading ,hope its a bs story like most of them are.
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
⭐️🌟⭐️🌟⭐️🌟⭐️🌟⭐️🌟😊
Beep
⭐😎⭐
Hmm it’s hard
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
⭐💫🌟✨🧙🏻♂
💫✨🌟⭐️🐈⭐️🌟✨💫
Story 4 nta
Hello Ripe these stories were amazing and I enjoyed them very much.
⭐⭐⭐😺
First story: If it's true--and it sound suspicious--the "Karen" was a concerned, if overzealous neighbor. OP's appearance and behavior were pretty suspicious!
Third story: OP, you are a MAJOR a-hole!!!!!
Story 3, it’s a 50/50 thing. Yeah morally you’re being the a**, but if it was spelled out that she didn’t qualify for fmla time. Then that’s not fully on you
🌟🌟🌟 O 🌟🌟🌟
🌟🌟🌟 O 🌟🌟🌟
Story with wife getting more time off yes a hole because you can't be like that with the wife and not other that's favoritism even though you are married that stop at the doorat work cause now you are coworkrs
First Story: While I feel Karen needed to go to jail for assault, she was correct in her actions up until the police were satisfied. OP has a nasty attitude and, after confessing to insider trading, should be in jail with her.
Story 3: UM! NTJ! is easier to see the reason. SHE IS THE OWNER'S WIFE! FFS!!. Also Karen just got knocked knowing she has an important job and just in the middle of a busy moment and when she is just green as grass too. Again ... there is not any laws broken at all either. This comments probably are cherry picked or probably people who are literally miserable in a job and want to trauma dump into Reddit. this is why i said Reddit is full of man hating karens, specially subreddits like Relationshipsadivce and AITA. I'm ban from AITA for call out the blatant favoritism too.
Going back to the story, she can request FMLA but ... she can't ask for time extra at all because ... and again i repeat, the other was the owner's wife, so i believe the owner pick up for her work in the absence. AND on top Karen is new in the job even if has already months from start. Also she bad mouthed OP's wife too in the same verbose. SO , her not getting this as a punishment for not zip her mouth about the remarks about OP's wife is correct too. I even see people getting fired because of this things, but that will give legs for her to had a demand for wrongful termination.
The bad mouthing could, and possibly should, form grounds for termination for bullying and creating a hostile workplace. Ironically, possibly grounds for her to be seen as discriminating against an employee with health issues that no one else in the company has a right to know about.
*********
Story 3, there isn't special treatment going on here, ops wife is an owner of the business, Mary is an employee, they are very different positions... it might not seem fair but life isn't fair...
If they don't have an employee handbook and specifically a part about disability, it's preferential treatment. Anyone else could not take off for more than a year due to childbirth and if OP's wife's position is such that she isn't even a critical employee and her duties can be easily done by others, it emphasizes the special treatment.
@@notconvincedgranny6573No, dipshit! The owner can take off as much time as they choose! It's NOT preferential treatment!
Nobody cares. The girl did not work there long enough for specific benefits. Pregnancy is a choice.
He owns the company, she works there, kinda, sometimes, when he doesn't have backup staff for her. It's risky mixing family and work like that. Depending on their location he could be in big trouble if Mary decides to talk to a lawyer.
Third story: OP is the butthole. He is so buiest with his wife. In a company, family member or not, one must be proffesional so family members don't exist there before preferencial treatment generates a toxic work enviroment.
First, the word is spelled "biased". Second, no shit, stupid! That's his wife! Third, co-owner does NOT need to follow the same behaviors as the employees. Fourth, it was NOT preferential as the EMPLOYEE did not yet have the tenure to qualify for medical leave beyond the basic "you just had a kid" leave. Finally, if you are going to play the "maintain professionalism" card then you cannot expect a NEW employee working in an UNDERSTAFFED department to have the same allowances as the CO-OWNER of the busy has. Bottom line: you, sir, are an idiot!
⭐️⭐️⭐️
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐