the more i complain, the more she smokes.
just doesn't get it....
again:
i still don't know if they're going to follow through with this. what i
know is that i need an answer, so i can plan to leave if they aren't
going to.
Tuesday, April 10, 2018
what i'm learning from this is that the idea of "medical marijuana" should really be abolished.
it should be regulated like alcohol, and treated as a recreational drug that is mostly harmless in small dosages but potentially fatally toxic in large doses. daily smokers are drug addicts that need treatment, not patients that need access. doctors should not be prescribing this, and should not be normalizing it - and should be liable for negligence charges if they are. and, nobody should be getting subsidies for it.
the only exception i'm willing to allow for is people diagnosed with a terminal illness. in that case, nothing else really matters anymore.
but, the "doctors" that are prescribing this to healthy people and telling them it's ok to smoke all they want should be rounded up and shot. what a waste.
it should be regulated like alcohol, and treated as a recreational drug that is mostly harmless in small dosages but potentially fatally toxic in large doses. daily smokers are drug addicts that need treatment, not patients that need access. doctors should not be prescribing this, and should not be normalizing it - and should be liable for negligence charges if they are. and, nobody should be getting subsidies for it.
the only exception i'm willing to allow for is people diagnosed with a terminal illness. in that case, nothing else really matters anymore.
but, the "doctors" that are prescribing this to healthy people and telling them it's ok to smoke all they want should be rounded up and shot. what a waste.
at
12:52
the pothead appears to be basically retarded. i don't know what she
was like before they prescribed this to her, but she doesn't appear to
be mentally capable of comprehending the situation, as it is. she's
forty-something years old, but she's mentally comparable to a fourteen
year old child.
the only response anybody is going to get out of her is going to be something like "so what if i smoke", "it's ok if i smoke", "i have a card", "i'm allowed to smoke", etc.
the only thing she's going to understand is her own behaviour. she's going to be convinced everybody is judging her, that the issue at hand is the morality of her own behaviour, etc.
she's never going to understand the premise of her behaviour affecting others. this is just too abstract, too complicated.
so, it's maybe unfair of me to call her selfish; she's not capable of understanding this, no doubt as a consequence of the drug use.
if they could detox her and send her to rehab, she might get better after a few weeks and be able to get her head around it. right now? this is pointless. it's just beyond her mental capabilities.
the only response anybody is going to get out of her is going to be something like "so what if i smoke", "it's ok if i smoke", "i have a card", "i'm allowed to smoke", etc.
the only thing she's going to understand is her own behaviour. she's going to be convinced everybody is judging her, that the issue at hand is the morality of her own behaviour, etc.
she's never going to understand the premise of her behaviour affecting others. this is just too abstract, too complicated.
so, it's maybe unfair of me to call her selfish; she's not capable of understanding this, no doubt as a consequence of the drug use.
if they could detox her and send her to rehab, she might get better after a few weeks and be able to get her head around it. right now? this is pointless. it's just beyond her mental capabilities.
at
12:41
i can't get a clear answer from the property manager, so i've asked her to call her boss.
i suspect the truth may be something along the lines of the property owner wanting to kick the smokers out, and the property manager being on the side of the smokers. so, she's trying to stand in between and being obstructionist on purpose.
i mean, if i'm to take her at face value, she doesn't seem to understand her own job. and i don't think that's true; i think she's just playing stupid.
so, the manager is not a willing participant, here, and i may find myself with somewhat of a pyrrhic victory, as a result. but, it's not clear to me yet if they're going to follow through...
the owner may jump at it, while the manager drags her feet.
but, i need to be clear: i can't tolerate this situation. and, if i don't get a prompt response, i'm moving to the next step.
i suspect the truth may be something along the lines of the property owner wanting to kick the smokers out, and the property manager being on the side of the smokers. so, she's trying to stand in between and being obstructionist on purpose.
i mean, if i'm to take her at face value, she doesn't seem to understand her own job. and i don't think that's true; i think she's just playing stupid.
so, the manager is not a willing participant, here, and i may find myself with somewhat of a pyrrhic victory, as a result. but, it's not clear to me yet if they're going to follow through...
the owner may jump at it, while the manager drags her feet.
but, i need to be clear: i can't tolerate this situation. and, if i don't get a prompt response, i'm moving to the next step.
at
12:33
Request for Renovations in The Unit Below Me
this is a backup letter. she hasn't ruled out eviction, yet. i don't expect her to follow through, though....
===
In my previous letter, I identified four approaches to addressing the problem of continual plumes of second-hand marijuana smoke coming from the unit below me, which is making me sick/inebriated and rendering the unit uninhabitable.
I need to reiterate that this tenant chain smokes marijuana for hours at a time. She must smoke upwards of 30 thick joints a day. This is not casual or occasional use, but sustained drug addiction on a level that I can barely comprehend. I can’t imagine what kind of negligent doctor would prescribe this; it seems cartoonish, truly. I’m repeatedly getting really, really high on nights that I want to be completely sober; trying to read when you’re baked is extremely unpleasant. It’s hard to focus; it’s hard to stay awake. I’m also finding myself with a smoker’s cough. I can only imagine her own cognitive state, or lack thereof. So, my claim that the unit is uninhabitable is in no way an exaggeration, unless, perhaps, you’re a Rastafarian. No sane person would merely accept this.
I also now suspect that she may smoke cigarettes, after all. It’s just hard to tell because she smokes so many drugs...
It is obvious that the first approach - a simple request to smoke elsewhere - is not viable, and will not be mentioned further. This tenant does not appear to understand the health hazards of second-hand marijuana smoke, and/or does not appear to be even remotely concerned about the well-being of the people around her. She simply doesn’t care if her habits are making the other tenants sick and/or inebriated when they don’t want to be. Sadly, she may even think that the smoke is healthy.
You initially decided upon the path of removing this tenant below me, but have since decided against that option. I frankly did not expect you to pursue this option in the first place and am not surprised that you’re not following through with it.
That leaves us with two further paths to attempt: we could try and renovate the unit, or you could agree to release me from the lease (with compensation). This letter outlines my perceptions around renovating the unit, in a last attempt to maintain my tenancy in this building. I have decided that I will not sue to force these renovations, that I would rather sue to end the tenancy, so this is up to your discretion to pursue in order to maintain the tenancy; if these renovations end before they are successful, i will move directly to the next option of asking the board to end the tenancy in a reasonable time frame, and with compensation.
My sole concern is my health. This is the most important thing in life - maintaining one’s health. And, I frankly don’t expect the renovations to be successful.
To begin with, I should point out that i have already gone to great lengths to try and keep the smoke out of this space, and that it has ultimately not been successful. It took me some time to understand what was happening, but I believe the situation is as follows: whenever I block an area, it merely moves the smoke to another one. So, I do believe that I was initially successful in blocking the smoke from entering my bedroom, but this ultimately just pushed it into the hallway. When I tried to stop the smoke from entering the hallway, i merely pushed it back into the bedroom. Now, the seal I created in the bedroom is broken, and the smoke is coming in both spaces, once again. I think you might want to imagine this like a balloon filling up from two separate directions, and then popping on both sides - leaving me no better off than when i started.
So, it seems to be the case that once the smoke has entered the subfloor, it has nowhere to go except out; any serious attempts to block the many holes in my space will merely create more holes, as the smoke forces itself out elsewhere. Caulking this unit could actually damage the flooring further, as the substantive amount of smoke being produced merely finds other ways to escape the subfloor, by enlarging existing holes or creating new ones. So, in order to prevent the smoke from entering this unit, it will need to be kept out of the subfloor altogether. Any renovations must consequently be done in the smokers’ unit, rather than in mine.
If we are to embark upon this process, I would expect a continuing conversation, as it will take several attempts to resolve the problem. I’m not going to be able to give you an easy request - this is going to go on for a long time. I cannot concern myself with how this might affect the other tenant, as that basic concept of respect is not being and will not be reciprocated. But, to begin with, we can look at the following actions:
1) caulking holes in the unit downstairs - especially in the bathroom, bedroom, kitchen, closets and shelving units.
2) the shelving units in the downstairs unit may need to be rebuilt altogether, as this is one of the worst sources
3) the ceilings below me badly need to be sealed.
4) i suspect that the water closet downstairs is a major source of smoke entering the subflooring, as it is then coming in through the bathroom fixtures. this will need to be sealed. note that caulking the bathroom in my unit will just force the smoke into my bedroom, and that fixing my own water closet will just push it back into the bathroom.
5) the tenant appears to enjoy “hotboxing” the closet, which is sending smoke into both my living room and my kitchen. her closet will likely need to be rebuilt.
more generally, i suspect that there is substantial smoke damage in the downstairs unit and that the only serious solution is going to be in fixing that, where it is found. all that caulking up here will do is push the problem around under the floor. and, i suppose that you’ll have to talk to the tenant about those costs, as they are ultimately of her creation - this problem is ultimately rooted in the damage she’s already done to her own unit.
i need to reiterate that i will not sue to force renovations, because i’ve come to realize that the damage to the subfloors is too great, from however many years of smoking however many different things. i will work with management to resolve the issue for as long as they would like to try to resolve it, but my next step will be to ask the board to let me out of the lease. reasonable compensation will be enough to cover the costs i’ve put into smoke-proofing the unit and the expenses required to allow me to move somewhere else.
===
In my previous letter, I identified four approaches to addressing the problem of continual plumes of second-hand marijuana smoke coming from the unit below me, which is making me sick/inebriated and rendering the unit uninhabitable.
I need to reiterate that this tenant chain smokes marijuana for hours at a time. She must smoke upwards of 30 thick joints a day. This is not casual or occasional use, but sustained drug addiction on a level that I can barely comprehend. I can’t imagine what kind of negligent doctor would prescribe this; it seems cartoonish, truly. I’m repeatedly getting really, really high on nights that I want to be completely sober; trying to read when you’re baked is extremely unpleasant. It’s hard to focus; it’s hard to stay awake. I’m also finding myself with a smoker’s cough. I can only imagine her own cognitive state, or lack thereof. So, my claim that the unit is uninhabitable is in no way an exaggeration, unless, perhaps, you’re a Rastafarian. No sane person would merely accept this.
I also now suspect that she may smoke cigarettes, after all. It’s just hard to tell because she smokes so many drugs...
It is obvious that the first approach - a simple request to smoke elsewhere - is not viable, and will not be mentioned further. This tenant does not appear to understand the health hazards of second-hand marijuana smoke, and/or does not appear to be even remotely concerned about the well-being of the people around her. She simply doesn’t care if her habits are making the other tenants sick and/or inebriated when they don’t want to be. Sadly, she may even think that the smoke is healthy.
You initially decided upon the path of removing this tenant below me, but have since decided against that option. I frankly did not expect you to pursue this option in the first place and am not surprised that you’re not following through with it.
That leaves us with two further paths to attempt: we could try and renovate the unit, or you could agree to release me from the lease (with compensation). This letter outlines my perceptions around renovating the unit, in a last attempt to maintain my tenancy in this building. I have decided that I will not sue to force these renovations, that I would rather sue to end the tenancy, so this is up to your discretion to pursue in order to maintain the tenancy; if these renovations end before they are successful, i will move directly to the next option of asking the board to end the tenancy in a reasonable time frame, and with compensation.
My sole concern is my health. This is the most important thing in life - maintaining one’s health. And, I frankly don’t expect the renovations to be successful.
To begin with, I should point out that i have already gone to great lengths to try and keep the smoke out of this space, and that it has ultimately not been successful. It took me some time to understand what was happening, but I believe the situation is as follows: whenever I block an area, it merely moves the smoke to another one. So, I do believe that I was initially successful in blocking the smoke from entering my bedroom, but this ultimately just pushed it into the hallway. When I tried to stop the smoke from entering the hallway, i merely pushed it back into the bedroom. Now, the seal I created in the bedroom is broken, and the smoke is coming in both spaces, once again. I think you might want to imagine this like a balloon filling up from two separate directions, and then popping on both sides - leaving me no better off than when i started.
So, it seems to be the case that once the smoke has entered the subfloor, it has nowhere to go except out; any serious attempts to block the many holes in my space will merely create more holes, as the smoke forces itself out elsewhere. Caulking this unit could actually damage the flooring further, as the substantive amount of smoke being produced merely finds other ways to escape the subfloor, by enlarging existing holes or creating new ones. So, in order to prevent the smoke from entering this unit, it will need to be kept out of the subfloor altogether. Any renovations must consequently be done in the smokers’ unit, rather than in mine.
If we are to embark upon this process, I would expect a continuing conversation, as it will take several attempts to resolve the problem. I’m not going to be able to give you an easy request - this is going to go on for a long time. I cannot concern myself with how this might affect the other tenant, as that basic concept of respect is not being and will not be reciprocated. But, to begin with, we can look at the following actions:
1) caulking holes in the unit downstairs - especially in the bathroom, bedroom, kitchen, closets and shelving units.
2) the shelving units in the downstairs unit may need to be rebuilt altogether, as this is one of the worst sources
3) the ceilings below me badly need to be sealed.
4) i suspect that the water closet downstairs is a major source of smoke entering the subflooring, as it is then coming in through the bathroom fixtures. this will need to be sealed. note that caulking the bathroom in my unit will just force the smoke into my bedroom, and that fixing my own water closet will just push it back into the bathroom.
5) the tenant appears to enjoy “hotboxing” the closet, which is sending smoke into both my living room and my kitchen. her closet will likely need to be rebuilt.
more generally, i suspect that there is substantial smoke damage in the downstairs unit and that the only serious solution is going to be in fixing that, where it is found. all that caulking up here will do is push the problem around under the floor. and, i suppose that you’ll have to talk to the tenant about those costs, as they are ultimately of her creation - this problem is ultimately rooted in the damage she’s already done to her own unit.
i need to reiterate that i will not sue to force renovations, because i’ve come to realize that the damage to the subfloors is too great, from however many years of smoking however many different things. i will work with management to resolve the issue for as long as they would like to try to resolve it, but my next step will be to ask the board to let me out of the lease. reasonable compensation will be enough to cover the costs i’ve put into smoke-proofing the unit and the expenses required to allow me to move somewhere else.
at
03:53
so, you shouldn't be surprised to learn that the high-speed rail plan in ontario isn't what the tory media is presenting it as.
unfortunately, it isn't really what i want it to be, either.
i look at the expanding toronto megacity, which is expanding quickly to it's west, and the most immediately pressing issue to me is in trying to figure out how we get all these cars off the road. downtown toronto has a large, successful & rather popular electric transit system (that doug ford seems to not like so much...). how do we expand that system to the rest of the mega-city?
& that's really the crux of the reality, here - that london is being absorbed into a suburb of toronto, and that the city needs expanded inter-city transit options.
what i'd like to see is consequently a kind of expansion of the subway system, with the purposes of easing congestion - and reducing emissions. a high speed rail system could in theory do that, by convincing people to take the train to work instead of driving.
and, i'm all in favour of that.
but, it seems a little pricey, for that end, and that seems to be the problem that these systems are facing, elsewhere: it just costs too much.
i'd be willing to see the province subsidize that. but, it seems to be pitching it as an economic driver instead of as a climate change plan, and the whole thing is consequently existing in this imaginary narrative - it's being pitched as something it won't be, and then deconstructed on terms it shouldn't be aspiring towards.
another aspect that is being overlooked is that, if the train is successful, it could conceivably help lower electricity costs. remember: electricity prices are high because the transition to electric vehicles never happened. at this point, it may be easier to get people to take the electric train than it is to get them to buy an electric car, but the effect should be more or less the same, if we can shift generation away from freeways and into windfarms.
we're currently just wasting all this generation, and then paying for it through higher rates. but, you won't see this discussion in the tory media, either - nor will you see it from the government, which doesn't want to talk about it.
so, i do support the rail line expansion - but i support it on climate grounds, not economic ones. and, i'd even like to see the province subsidize it to get it going, and ultimately treat it less like an exclusive cab system for the wealthy and more like an expansion of the subway system.
unfortunately, it isn't really what i want it to be, either.
i look at the expanding toronto megacity, which is expanding quickly to it's west, and the most immediately pressing issue to me is in trying to figure out how we get all these cars off the road. downtown toronto has a large, successful & rather popular electric transit system (that doug ford seems to not like so much...). how do we expand that system to the rest of the mega-city?
& that's really the crux of the reality, here - that london is being absorbed into a suburb of toronto, and that the city needs expanded inter-city transit options.
what i'd like to see is consequently a kind of expansion of the subway system, with the purposes of easing congestion - and reducing emissions. a high speed rail system could in theory do that, by convincing people to take the train to work instead of driving.
and, i'm all in favour of that.
but, it seems a little pricey, for that end, and that seems to be the problem that these systems are facing, elsewhere: it just costs too much.
i'd be willing to see the province subsidize that. but, it seems to be pitching it as an economic driver instead of as a climate change plan, and the whole thing is consequently existing in this imaginary narrative - it's being pitched as something it won't be, and then deconstructed on terms it shouldn't be aspiring towards.
another aspect that is being overlooked is that, if the train is successful, it could conceivably help lower electricity costs. remember: electricity prices are high because the transition to electric vehicles never happened. at this point, it may be easier to get people to take the electric train than it is to get them to buy an electric car, but the effect should be more or less the same, if we can shift generation away from freeways and into windfarms.
we're currently just wasting all this generation, and then paying for it through higher rates. but, you won't see this discussion in the tory media, either - nor will you see it from the government, which doesn't want to talk about it.
so, i do support the rail line expansion - but i support it on climate grounds, not economic ones. and, i'd even like to see the province subsidize it to get it going, and ultimately treat it less like an exclusive cab system for the wealthy and more like an expansion of the subway system.
at
00:21
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)