You Know What Really Grinds My Gears? Now with 3x more gears...

[fotze2]

Originally Posted by Zary's-Mustache

Also eff the CRA.


Called in today to find out why I can't get into my CRA account and after an hour to get through they proceed to tell me because I haven't signed in for a "long time", they deactivated my account.

Like who just signs into their CRA account for fun? It's not a social media app...I literally use it once a year during tax season. So now have to make a habit of signing in for the heck of it.

It's the worst. Do they still have to mail your password?

[Zary's-Mustache]

Originally Posted by fotze2

It's the worst. Do they still have to mail your password?

No I have to re-register after she deleted my account. So you can't re-register unless you call in and they delete your old account first.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Zary's-Mustache

Also eff the CRA.


Called in today to find out why I can't get into my CRA account and after an hour to get through they proceed to tell me because I haven't signed in for a "long time", they deactivated my account.

Like who just signs into their CRA account for fun? It's not a social media app...I literally use it once a year during tax season. So now have to make a habit of signing in for the heck of it.

Indeed.

Originally Posted by fotze2

It's the worst. Do they still have to mail your password?

Yes.

Originally Posted by Zary's-Mustache

No I have to re-register after she deleted my account. So you can't re-register unless you call in and they delete your old account first.

And then you have to wait for your code in the mail.

Trust me, you 'normies' have it easy. Those bastards lean on me like crazy.

Last year? It was basically akin to Mafia extortion. They can make me pay whatever they want because they have leverage against me.

[Zary's-Mustache]

Oh that sounds like fun. Apparently I opted for paperless NOA so had her email me it instead. Won't even bother re-registering now.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Nufy

Who the heck makes a new vehicle with a 40 litre gas tank...

I have a Hyundai Kona as a rental currently and was heading to work with approx 1/4 of a tank left.

Drive is about 50kms one way.

Plenty of gas I thought...I'll fill up on the way back to the hotel...

Nope...gas light comes on about halfway there.

Find a gas Station and fill it up...with 38.7 litres...

No wonder it went through it so quickly...
Will be happy when I return this thing tomorrow for sure.

It's a 50 liter tank. Range should be around 600kms or more in mixed driving. Less if just city, but still a totally normal amount for a vehicle.

Maybe it wasn't full when you picked it up?

[you&me]

Originally Posted by Sliver

It's a 50 liter tank. Range should be around 600kms or more in mixed driving. Less if just city, but still a totally normal amount for a vehicle.

Maybe it wasn't full when you picked it up?

That wouldn't change anything in this case.

If it's on empty and he 'fills' it up, and only gets to put 38.7L in it, then it's the right assumption to think the tank's only ~40L.

If the tank is 50L like you say (and I'm not doubting you), then my guess would be something faulty with the vehicle's calculating of the range.

[Zary's-Mustache]

Originally Posted by you&me

That wouldn't change anything in this case.

If it's on empty and he 'fills' it up, and only gets to put 38.7L in it, then it's the right assumption to think the tank's only ~40L.

If the tank is 50L like you say (and I'm not doubting you), then my guess would be something faulty with the vehicle's calculating of the range.

Quarter tank is approx 12 liters so its everything in this case. 1.7 liters would be if fuel light was on for like 100km.

[you&me]

Originally Posted by Zary's-Mustache

Quarter tank is approx 12 liters so its everything in this case. 1.7 liters would be if fuel light was on for like 100km.

Well, not being full when he got it doesn't change the amount (38.7L) he puts in to fill it up, that was my point to Sliver.

I only mentioned 40L tank based on the assumption it was basically on empty when he filled up and rounded up.

But your point about the quarter tank being everything is bang on.

The misunderstanding seems to come from the OP... I just reread the GG and Nufy said it appeared have a quarter tank when he got in, he travelled approximately 25 kms (halfway to his destination) and the light came on... It was my mistake for assuming he stopped to fill up because the kms to empty got to an urgent range, and missing that he seemingly filled up when the light came on.

Let me tell you, from what I experience on a weekly basis, the light being on does not motivate some people to immediately fill up

[timun]

Where Nufy's going wrong is the base assumption that the fuel gauge is super-accurate: in reality they're calibrated to indicate a lower amount than what's actually remaining, so that dumb-dumb drivers have some reserve capacity before actually running out of fuel.

50 L is still fairly small. The only cars I can think of that I've ever driven with smaller tanks were Toyota Echos and Tercels (with about 45 L capacity), and a Ford Escape PHEV (~42 L). Even so, because of their economical consumption those vehicles had plenty of driving range.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Originally Posted by timun

Where Nufy's going wrong is the base assumption that the fuel gauge is super-accurate: in reality they're calibrated to indicate a lower amount than what's actually remaining, so that dumb-dumb drivers have some reserve capacity before actually running out of fuel.

50 L is still fairly small. The only cars I can think of that I've ever driven with smaller tanks were Toyota Echos and Tercels (with about 45 L capacity), and a Ford Escape PHEV (~42 L). Even so, because of their economical consumption those vehicles had plenty of driving range.

Absolutely every driver in existence has been that "dumb dumb" at least once or twice while driving.

Running out or running on fumes to a pump is a rite of passage for driving. It's human nature to test the boundaries of stuff, on purpose or not on purpose.

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by Locke

Indeed.



Yes.



And then you have to wait for your code in the mail.

Trust me, you 'normies' have it easy. Those bastards lean on me like crazy.

Last year? It was basically akin to Mafia extortion. They can make me pay whatever they want because they have leverage against me.

The GCKey stuff and level 2 vs level 3 stuff is greeting to be a pain in the ass too.

"I authorized you to talk to the CRA, you can do it."
"Umm... Actually I can't anymore."

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Zary's-Mustache

Oh that sounds like fun. Apparently I opted for paperless NOA so had her email me it instead. Won't even bother re-registering now.

Everyone should check their communication preferences (if they can manage to log in). Apparently I was all paperless and missed a single request for more info to validate the child tax benefit last year...6 months later they simply did a reassessment and billed me like $5k. I immediately submitted the necessary info and 5 months later it is finally resolved.

Of course it was on me for missing the first message, but I can't think of anything else like this where there would be no follow up attempt. I've gone back to paper for everything other than the regular NOA

[GGG]

Why don’t people just use their Alberta digital id or their bank for CRA login?

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by GGG

Why don’t people just use their Alberta digital id or their bank for CRA login?

Didn't exist when I made my CRA account so I still log in the old-fashioned way for them, but I do use my bank for Transport Canada and Service Canada. Way easier than waiting for you stupid password to come in the mail

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Everyone should check their communication preferences (if they can manage to log in). Apparently I was all paperless and missed a single request for more info to validate the child tax benefit last year...6 months later they simply did a reassessment and billed me like $5k. I immediately submitted the necessary info and 5 months later it is finally resolved.

Of course it was on me for missing the first message, but I can't think of anything else like this where there would be no follow up attempt. I've gone back to paper for everything other than the regular NOA

You get an email whenever they send you a message. Of course it wouldn't surprise me if that was broken

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Brendone

Some what along that concept, there are several words and phrases people use here in arguments that I never hear in “in person” situations. Not saying they’re not used correctly, they just come across as something learned in a “management for d-bags” seminar.

False narrative
False dichotomy
Straw man
Whataboutism
Confirmation Bias

You really use these in “normal” conversations or just when you’re winning at internet.

Bingo!

Originally Posted by rubecube

Yay! A true example of begging the question and combined with an ad populum fallacy. Good job, Cliff.

[DoubleF]

EDIT: Posted in wrong thread

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by btimbit

You get an email whenever they send you a message. Of course it wouldn't surprise me if that was broken

Yup, though at the time they weren't sorting into my primary inbox, but rather the 'Updates' tab in Gmail. At this point I barely keep up with my primary tab, let alone the other three.

It's on me, but I simply didn't know I had things set up that way (and for months/years I had trouble logging in to begin with).

It would seem reasonable to me that the system could send a reminder email(s) if you have unread 'important' messages on your account (ie. other than NOAs and carbon tax rebate messages)

[Locke]

Originally Posted by DoubleF

The GCKey stuff and level 2 vs level 3 stuff is greeting to be a pain in the ass too.

"I authorized you to talk to the CRA, you can do it."
"Umm... Actually I can't anymore."

Yup.

Originally Posted by GGG

Why don’t people just use their Alberta digital id or their bank for CRA login?

The short answer? They dont want to and they shouldnt have to.

In the past I'd just do all of this for my clients, and thats what they wanted and thats what I wanted.

Because giving non-accountants Carte Blanche to start monkeying around with their tax returns is a disaster waiting to happen.

The worst is my Corporate Clients. You want to know why? Because these people are very good at a certain selection of things, the things that make them money! They dont want to concern themselves with the books or the slips or the taxes or the GST or whatever, thats my job.

But CRA have effectively stepped in and decided to throw up barriers to prevent me from doing it.

And its frustrating as hell for the client, and its frustrating as hell for me. And when the client is upset who do you think they focus and direct that anger towards?

[OutOfTheCube]

The shameless gall of some my in-laws right now...

So, my mother-in-law is a wonderful woman and helps out with watching her grandchildren all the time, ours included. She recently had a very serious health / infection scare and spent around seven weeks in the hospital, had to have multiple surgeries on her leg, etc. Was pretty dice-y for a while and still has a long way to recover.

She's only just got home from the hospital finally on Wednesday and our in-laws are already dropping off their kids for free babysitting. The woman is exhausted and can barely walk again yet but she's too nice to say to no to them.

I'm just flabbergasted that anyone could think it's in any way appropriate to even ask to drop off their kids in this situation. So now my wife is upset about this too and trying to help out, bring them over to our house instead (so we get to do the free babysitting for them on top of our own three kids). It's way too much, she should be in bed recovering for weeks still.

[timun]

"Treat people in your debt like family: exploit them."

— Rule of Acquisition 111