A person asked me recently where once myself and a few other people are successful in holding a specific individual accountable for lying and cheating people financially on whether or not the person can ever buy back my trust by financially compensating back more than the original amount. For example, it would be like someone stealing candy from a store and then having to pay for it while offering to pay more as well in an attempt to have a good standing record with them again.

My personal answer was definitely no to that. The one time so far where I can specifically remember where someone offered to financially compensate me to earn my trust again was actually for a job when I was younger. It was a pretty typical example too where I’m sure a lot of people have experienced as a person tells you how great you are and all that when it comes to work yet you find out that they are undercutting you in every way possible with some shady tactics.

Maybe it’s just me, but whenever people try to buy back trust with money especially after the fact that the damage has already been done that it usually feels like they are doing it to save their own face as oppose to genuinely changing.

For blog updates subscribe to our RSS feed.

So there is suppose to be this new game show debuting tonight called “The Moment of Truth” as a lot of people were telling me about it. Apparently, the way it works is that contestants are attached to a lie detector and are asked questions that could be embarrassing and even damaging to reveal. By telling the truth, the contestants can win money.

“The things people do for money” I was just thinking as there will be a lot of unhappy contestants even if they do end up winning money. One thing that doesn’t make too much sense to me is when it comes to the questions, what would be the point of lying anyways as wouldn’t not answering something automatically show that you are being untruthful to everyone? May as well just confess and win money as the truth will come out when you think about it.

For blog updates subscribe to our RSS feed.

A person was talking to me about a segment that appeared on the Oprah show that talked about how there was a lady that kept borrowing money from her family members to live on and as a result everyone was then suffering financially. I did go to the website to read a recap of it and it was definitely a precarious situation. The lady who was borrowing money decided to do things such as buying a new TV instead of using the money to pay for her rent.

I actually knew a person who did something similar as he constantly complained he was suffering financially with no money to live. Sure enough, when he was given thousands of dollars from friends and family members he decides to blow it on high tech electronic gizmos and other unnecessary things just to go back to others again to say he needed more.

From what I read in the recap, it was kind of interesting as the way they were trying to get through to the person was to make herself realize and admit that every time she didn’t pay people back or say her bills that she was simply lying her way through life. Seems like it was to a point where it was implied that how one handles money is a reflection of their character in general. Unfair assessment? Fair assessment?

One thing that I read from the recap was how some people would look at your FICO scores for more than just money loaning issues. It mentioned that it could also play a factor in a person’s employment chances. That was kind of interesting I thought as I have never personally seen an employer request for such information. I personally have a score of 800+ for the longest time, but that would still be kind of weird I think to use that information for purposes other than credit issues and such.

At the end the family members decided to stop supporting the person financially and to let her fend for herself. That’s the only way to do it based on the people I have met who consistently rely on others financially. When you think about it, there is a difference between helping a situation and encouraging it to continue.

For blog updates subscribe to our RSS feed.

I was just passed this story that revolved around a contestant named Denise Martin that was on the reality TV show Survivor. I actually did watch the finale this past Sunday and she wasn’t the winner. At the end they had interviews with the contestants as usual. Denise mentioned how being on the show has forced her to lose her original job as a lunch lady at a school to being demoted to a role as a janitor.

The producer of the show, Mark Burnett, felt bad about her situation and it was announced that she would be given $50,000 to help her out. Soon after this happened, the school’s superintendent mentioned how none of it was true as she was a full time custodian prior to participating in the show and that her janitor job was actually a promotion with a pay raise.

Initially, the superintendent received a hoard of negative responses from the public on how the school was being a “scrooge” so to speak among other things. Obviously, that created quite a spark. Eventually, Denise Martin admitted that it was a lie. It was basically a fake sob story to get support I guess you can say.

In general, this whole Survivor season seemed to have sprung up topics on how the best liars are the ones that make the money in the world. One thing I definitely learned when it comes to people who lie for money or support is that when someone’s story sounds a bit too dramatic to be real it probably isn’t. As a kid I always saw lying to others for financial gain as like a form of credit. Basically, you are going to have to pay it back somehow down the road and the longer you hold it off for the harsher the penalty will be. So, it’s better to just earn it honestly.

For blog updates subscribe to our RSS feed.

I was having a conversation with a person recently who was telling me about an experience he had on how there was a person whom he trusted a lot and as a result they had a mutual business agreement where he would aid the person in return for financial compensation that would be given to him down the road. Unfortunately, he ended up doing his part, but the other person got devious and attempted to weasel his way out from honoring his promises.

There was a lot of money involved too and I was kind of surprised that his decision was to move on while simply cutting contact with the person. His reasoning was a common one too though on how he could of spent his time to force the person to oblige to their agreement, but instead he felt that his time was better spent by recouping his losses through other means.

The other type of responses that I usually hear from people though in situations where there is a substantial amount of money involved is that they won’t allow the person to get away with it. A common reason is that it is the person’s intention to try and drag the situation on with as much drivel as possible so that you will hopefully just forget about it. So, they want to show that they mean business to prevent others from trying to do the same to them.

In my opinion, from a principles point of view, by not doing anything in these types of scenarios the person is essentially getting away with the damage they have done to you and thinking more long term that would increase the chances of them doing it to others as well. To me, that is usually the bigger motivator to do something as just thinking if they did that to someone else who is in a less fortunate position it would probably wreck a lot of people’s livelihoods.

I was told before that while obviously in a business you need to focus your time in doing what’s necessary to generate revenue, at the same time you shouldn’t forget about doing socially responsible things as well if possible.

For blog updates subscribe to our RSS feed.