The Very-Many-Questions-Not-Worth-Their-Own-Thread Thread ΛΕ

[Commodore]

Everybody would prefer receiving money instead of a gift card but we can't simply give money as it would somewhat defeat the purpose of a gift.

Of course, but if we are talking about whether or not gift cards or cash are a more thoughtful gift, I'm going to say cash is more thoughtful. And I would say a lot of people would agree with me since everyone gets that slight look of disappointment in their eyes when they get a gift card. I've never seen anyone get that look when getting straight up cash though.

The only time you can really get away with giving a gift card is if there is another, real, gift that goes along with it.

 

[Synobun]

Gift cards are fine if they are to a location you actually frequent. A $50 gift card to Outback Steakhouse is pointless and kind of insulting if you've never gone to an Outback and the nearest one is two hundred miles away.

 

[Hrothbern]

Money feels more impersonal.
But if you are short in money, a nice birthday card with some money inside, is the most practical thing you can get.
And a gift for people that have already "everything" can be difficult.
A book or if I cannot come up with a nice book for that person within the budget, a gift card for books is nice for people that enjoy books.
But not everyone does.
I did and do give a lot of flowers. But that is perhaps typical Dutch.

 

[Morty]

County councils.

Working for one, i'd have to agree with @Broken_Erika on this one!!

 

[warpus]

People have been conditioned to think that gift card are a classy enough gift, but money isn't.

When you give somebody a gift card it's like you're saying: "Here, you go buy yourself this gift. I don't have that sort of time to waste on you. Oh and you can only shop at Kinkos"

 

[rah]

I only usually use them as stocking stuffers.

 

[Synobun]

People have been conditioned to think that gift card are a classy enough gift, but money isn't.

When you give somebody a gift card it's like you're saying: "Here, you go buy yourself this gift. I don't have that sort of time to waste on you. Oh and you can only shop at Kinkos"

Or it's like you're saying: "You haven't given a lot of insight on what you want this year, or maybe I just don't have enough money to get you the things you do want. But, I know you shop here a lot, and I know you'll put it to good use. Here's a gift card to [Store]."

Just money is useful but lacks target. Money for a specific purpose shows attention. If you buy a random, irrelevant gift card for someone then yeah, it's a display of uncaring. But ideally you'll be buying one that is pertinent to their life.

 

[warpus]

Or it's like you're saying: "You haven't given a lot of insight on what you want this year, or maybe I just don't have enough money to get you the things you do want. But, I know you shop here a lot, and I know you'll put it to good use. Here's a gift card to [Store]."

While true, the only redeeming quality of this gift is that you know where this person shops. Giving them money instead would be like saying: "I know you really like to shop at Forever 21, but instead of limiting you to that one store, here's $30 you can spend on whatever you want, wherever".

The only reason people think gift cards are a good gift is because you have to leave the house to buy them. Plus they look nice and proper.

If somebody gets me an actual gift, it shows me that they actually tried to buy me something I will use and/or like. It shows a thought process behind it, consideration, and time taken out of their day to find that particular gift. A gift card is more like: "Eh, this is too much work, you figure it out".

It can be a good and useful gift, yes, but I expect to get something like that from somebody who doesn't really know me that well. A colleague at work who knows I like to hike so they got me a MEC/REI gift card. From close friends and family I would appreciate gift cards as gifts, but they feel so "I don't really care enough about you to put more effort into this, you figure this out"

Just money is useful but lacks target.

In some cultures giving money is pretty standard, which I have never been able to get used to. In Germany you would often get a chocolate bar with a 10 mark bill taped to it for your birthday. I got used to that, but I could never get used to what Italians do, for instance. At Christmas time everyone just gets everyone else money, except for the little kids I think. So.. You give out money, you get money, and in the end you end up back at $0. Seems like a worthless exercise to me.

 

[Synobun]

I'll be honest, I've never thought a person was lazy or uncaring if they gave me a gift card.

Then again, I grew up being given dollar store socks and body wash for birthdays and Christmases.

 

[rah]

Giving money to kids is fine. I loved getting money when I was a kid over socks or other things I needed but didn't particularly want at the time.
I'll give the wife a gift card from amazon for her to buy ebooks. I used to buy her books straight up but now that she just does ebooks, I can't look at the shelf to see what she's reading. I may also get starbucks ones for my daughter but usually as a side gift.

 

[Snerk]

Actual footage of kiddo Syns

 

[Synobun]

I don't think the grocery store where I grew up even sold avocados, let alone at a dollar store price tag.

 

[The_J]

Quick history question (I hope):
Why did Quebec not join the 13 states during the independence war?
Wiki says they got invited, but did not respond.
Was the situation up there not as bad as in the south, another reason, or is it just not known?

 

[warpus]

Quick history question (I hope):
Why did Quebec not join the 13 states during the independence war?
Wiki says they got invited, but did not respond.
Was the situation up there not as bad as in the south, another reason, or is it just not known?

I had some time during lunch and was curious, and found this:

Acceptance of British Rule: When New France fell in 1760, the defeated armies, French officials, some seigneurs, and some merchants returned to France. British credit, currency, and markets such as London was what mattered--not Paris or America. The British successfully implemented representative government in Quebec through respecting the religious freedoms of Catholics and recognizing the political value of the Catholic Church, which was backed by a dutiful French populace that contrasted sharply with the restive 13 American colonies.

and

The Quebec Act of 1774 satisfied Quebec and angered the American colonies. It allowed English criminal law to exist in parallel with French civil law and the entrenched seigneurial system. Quebec even had a (legal) mandatory tithe to the Catholic Church, which only concerned Catholics.

The Quebec Act also expanded the province of Quebec to include Labrador in the East and extended the Western boundary to the junction of the Ohio and Mississippi rivers all the way north to Rupert's Land. This expansion had the obvious intent of funneling the fur-trading areas serviced through the St. Lawrence into the jurisdiction of Quebec. The land was mainly Indian territory (where the Indians were allied with the French) that was exploitable for the fur trade without endangering Indian land rights and risking war.

American colonists desired to settle these native lands, and therefore listed the Quebec Act as one of the "Insufferable Acts."

 

[Takhisis]

And don't forget that there were many loyalists back in the day and that they did flee to what is now Canada.

 

[Zkribbler]

"Egyptian archeologists have uncovered a new sphinx in Kom Ombo, an ancient temple near the country's southern city of Aswan. The sphinx is believed to be older than 2,000 years."

It would be ~contemporaneous with Cleopatra.

 

[Arakhor]

Cool, but what's the question?

 

[Takhisis]

Maybe he meant to post that in TIL?

 

[Synobun]

Cool, but what's the question?

How whelmed are you after learning this?

 

[Zkribbler]

Cool, but what's the question?

I think: Why the heck did I post it here?