undefined

points

[-]

My experience has been that it's easy to say, "oh, it's just me", but much harder to subject someone you care about to the same standard that you would yourself. I'm in a similar position with the thermostat, even though something we initially bonded over was that we both kept our thermostats at a low temperature that was outside the window of being socially acceptable.

by takinola8 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

In the winter, I keep the thermostat at frigid temperatures when I am home alone and jack it up to warm just before any one else gets home. My thinking is that it is wasteful to warm up the entire house when it's just me since I can put on a sweater but I don't want to subject others to my, shall we say, quirks.

I keep meaning to calculate how much I am actually saving by freezing my butt off. My guess is it'll work out to something like $0.75 a day or something equally trivial.

by adrianN8 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Depending on the kind of heating system you have and the temperature differences you talk about it can be cheaper to heat the house to a constant temperature (because your heating can run more efficiently under lower load).

by wallst074 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Correct, or the people doing this for environmental reasons... it's probably not better to do this. It would be better spending money on better insulation (assuming it isn't up to date).

by quickthrowman2 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

It probably costs more to do that than to maintain a constant temperature. When you turn the setpoint down, everything inside your house and also your house itself starts losing heat. When you turn the setpoint back up, the cooled off house and items inside of it will suck up most of the heat until the stuff is warm again, and then the air warms up.

This is much more noticeable when you go into a freezing cold building and turn on the thermostat, it takes almost an entire day to heat up the stuff and building.

by engineer_221 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

> A wife is a useful thing to have in this respect, not because they tend to profligacy, but because this kind of thing is much easier to detect and fix in someone close to you than in yourself.

I think what you mean is, a wife/spouse can help you see maladaptive patterns that you're blind to?

I don't think you propose that you can "fix" your spouse's behavior?

by 11 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

deleted

by xnx11 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

s/wife/spouse/

by catcowcostume11 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

[flagged]

by cheschire3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

While the underlying intent behind bringing awareness to microaggressions is likely pure, it has a tendency to promote a level of hypersensitivity which is a net negative for society.

It’s often more beneficial to bring an open mindedness to a conversation that allows for benign usage of words that could otherwise be intended to slight. Constantly worrying about if everyone is being sensitive enough can also just be exhausting. To everyone.

by letmevoteplease11 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

This usage is fine. "A dependable friend is a rare thing to find."

by kranner11 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

"... tend to profligacy" was really bothering me as well, until I figured OP probably meant "tend" as in 'take care of', and not 'inclined to have'.

by Terr_10 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

It's "incline", the subtext is: "Reader, you might start thinking of a certain common stereotype at this point, but don't do that, because my argument is very different, and that stereotype is irrelevant or possibly untrue."

Compare to: "A pick-up truck is a useful thing to have, not because you are insecure about your genitalia, but because you can take home bigger products from IKEA."

by kranner10 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Thanks, I misread entirely.

by letmevoteplease11 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

No, "tend" means "incline" here, but the normal grammatical reading of the sentence does not suggest wives have profligate tendencies.

by kranner10 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Ah, I misread. Thanks.