Oh man, it's getting so much deeper now. So you're saying you work for free, and even claim to ask the coach to give your salary to someone who needs it more
At my last job, yes, I worked for free for a year. It was contingent (my declining a salary) on a certain salary for this year being given based on what the AD allegedly told the head coach would be approved. And after that promise (as well as others) were not kept, I left . . . as did two coordinators for inferior positions and pay elsewhere. So I worked for a year with no pay. At the job prior to that, I gave the majority of my salary back to two others (one who was both the DFO and equipment manager who wasn't earning a penny and one who was a young coach who just had his second child). For that year, I believe my 1080 from them was around $12,000. The year before that, I didn't coach.
So my earnings from coaching in 2015, 2016, 2017, and now 2018 were about $12,000. And no, I have not had any other job since 2012 outside of coaching. In other words, my coaching salary has been about $3000/year for the last four years . . . with no other job . . . starting to understand my claim about not having to work ever again if I don't want and being able to not take any coaching job just for a paycheck if I don't like it?
but at your last job you sued the head coach for not paying you?
.
Wrong again. I sued the school. The head coach, although the one mostly at fault, was not sued. There is no contradiction between that and me being thoughtful with my salary for others. You see, I have been consistent in my principle. If there is an agreement, I expect people to uphold their end. At my last job, I was promised housing, $65,000, and a coordinator position. The housing disappeared. Then, the $65K went to $55K, then to $45K . . . in the meantime, there was enough of a budget for them to hire an off-field personnel guy, so I left. Was it because I really needed that extra $20K they promised me? No. It's out of principle, something you sorely lack.
You wear "$3000 shirts" and "$7000 worth of diamonds" at any given time, carry designer bags . . . think of how much better that money could be used to help ailing children or immigrant families struggling to get by.
'
Oh, you've revised your lie. Weeks ago, it was a "$3000 t-shirt." Now, it's just a $3000 shirt.
I'm very comfortable in the amount of time and money I give to those in need. Being generous and charitable doesn't exclude me from buying expensive things that I like. Likewise, I'm not dropping off bags of thrift-store clothes to them. My last fun was buying Jordan brand backpacks (thanks, Marshall's) for each of the boys, putting new sneakers inside which had socks and knickknacks in each sneaker, some popular brand shirts/shorts rolled up in the bag, and a bunch of school supplies. The director told me they had five boys there and provided the sizes, but by the time I got around to getting that stuff, one of them had already been placed in a foster home, so there is an empty bag sitting around somewhere.
Oh, and not everything was from Marshall's. There are four orphans who have had a rough life who are wearing Prada and Gucci t-shirts to school. Now, is it important for kids to prioritize materialism? Nope. But when kids like that - poor, no parents - are in school, you damn well know they get picked on by others. Giving them some really nice things to have confidence going to school in and helping them feel good about themselves is important. Sometimes, things as meaningless as nice clothes does that for kids at that age.
. . . and at night, the TV they watch was due to me, the mattresses they sleep on was due to me, the paint on their walls was due to me, the drywall giving them some privacy was due to me.
Tell me, how many times has a store manager gotten wind of what your charitable endeavors and offered to reduce the price on the items you were buying to donate to those in need? It's happened twice to me since 2015. I think we both know the answer for somebody as morally bankrupt as you.
carry designer bags and other cringeworthy items . . .
.
Cringeworthy? What does your taste in clothes have to do with this? Luggage sets from these collections are hardly cringeworthy. They are done tastefully without saying "Hey, look at what I have." You should try it.
And of course you understand why I spelled it that way, it's the correct way. Only a retard would argue otherwise. You're just desperately trying to win an argument you lost weeks ago.
I thought you said you weren't hiding? Why do you continue to hide from your claim that the official Mercedes website calls it "G wagen"? You told me to check for myself. Well, I did. Back up your mouth, moron?
Why are you hiding from the month you were in Orlando? Don't want me to disprove another one of your allegations?
Why are you hiding from acknowledging that Business Insider and Gear Patrol are far more reputable than Wikipedia and The Verge?
Tell me where my job is (or has been for the last four years outside of the $12,000 in football), how I just have to have a boss.
You keep making these arguments, then when they are destroyed, you run away from them and make a different failed attempt.
You spend nearly $60k on a stripped-down Mercedes with less options than a loaded Kia or Hyundai just so you can say you drive a Mercedes,
.
It was $57K and some change with a ton of options. And it isn't so I can say I drive a Mercedes. I've owned one in the past. I like how that particular one looks. Somebody who was buying a third car doesn't need it to say "I drive a Mercedes."
The best part is that you have once again exhibited your moral bankruptcy. Over the last month, you have talked shit about my mother's old car, have talked shit about my clothes, have talked shit about my luggage, have talked shit about other materialistic things all because I have mocked you for a lack of intelligence and for saying incredibly stupid and selfish things.
You see, I mock you for your character, heart, and traits. You mock me for materialistic things. That pretty much proves my mocking of you.