₦airaland Forum

Yes, if the majority share - more than half - of the company isn't in your control directly or indirectly. The day you lose grip of the skeleton of your company automatically marks the day you have one of your legs outside the company.

neyohh:
Lol libertarian disputes ni..

What Nigeria need's, is a focused iron fisted individual with a strong disposition towards industrialization and discipline.

Keep quiet; some of you that know nothing almost about governance are always quick to make noise. A simple dissection of your counter post has shown that you know nothing about the characteristics of a true libertarian leader, citing your almost counter and affirmation of my post at the same time, even though ignorantly done.

Hey! Don't expect me to give you further attention.

As good as changing the name seems; yet, it'll simply amount to a placebo. It'll not solve the main problem. Nigeria has a fundamental problem, and almost every Nigerian is guilty of it directly or indirectly. The country will experience stability in all of the areas the very moment a leader with a libertarian disposition takes over power at the center - that I know will happen someday soon.

People with liberal and conservative dispositions have failed the citizens in particular and the country in general.

His concept of God is poor. The same is also applicable to almost all of the religious proponents and practitioners.

I am yet to come to terms with the mentality that makes it hard or taboo for one to voluntarily and cheerfully spend (not pay to keep them, though) their resources on their intimate partner or anyone close to them. Anyway, it's either that people do pretentiously keep enemies and frenemies as intimate partners, which is nonsense, thus the reason why they find it hard to cheerfully spend on them, or they personify enemies and frenemies themselves.

sisisioge:
Haba, it's a business not a charity case fa. According to the story, this was her first apprentist and shes doing probono. No nau. The rent wasnt free, neither was the rest of the setup cost. She should at least get a chunk payment to repay one of her equipment back. That's how most tailors make money.


If her goal was to have a helping hand, she could have just told the guy that the opportunity cost of her apprenticeship is a maid/service girl. Equation balanced! A business is an entity fa, not a human. One of the reasons most startup dont make it beyond the first 5years is pure mismanagement.

As par the content of their fight, that one dey irritating. All the disrespect because they couldn't have a simple intelligent conversation. For the context though, the guy is within rights to demand accountability from the madam since he is the sole investor and she the executive director

Wonders shall never end. For almost the first time, you have made a sensible contribution - a contribution devoid of unsoundness and sentiment/self-interest. Kudos.

@OP, apart from threatening your wife, even though her action brought about it, every other of your action is justifiable. She was neither scrupulous nor shrewd in her actions and decisions.

Political-business assassination; his associates know what transpired and the real people behind the cause of his death.

One doesn't necessarily need to have a firsthand experience of your experience to advise you properly. Both the problem and solution lie in your hands:

- Always strive to do what you know is right at any given time, and stop giving a damn about what anyone you know that doesn't place principle above expediency thinks about you. Stay conscientious.

If you are someone that intrinsically craves and depends on bandwagonism and flattery for positive energy, however, the above will be impossible for you to achieve and maintain.

Provided that you are convinced that what you did is the right thing to do under the circumstance, then do not allow the thoughtless action and reaction of a healthy adult who failed to do what ought to be the right thing to do even without being told to weigh you down.

Ishilove:
Thanks dear. This confusion came from that useless LordKo individual who 'corrected' me when I used 'grammar', instead of 'grammar'. Since then I've been doubting myself

Show me where Lordko told you that grammar, which is the correct spelling, is spelled as "grammer" instead of the other way round and win USD1,500 within the next 24 hours. Do that fast, or bury your head in shame as always.

The following is the thread where it happened: https://www.nairaland.com/6423962/ive-never-seen-girl-dirty/10#99262925

@Pocohantas, it's obvious that you want to cry again.

This is a recycled story - more like a storyline. Anyway, only a man who has low self-esteem will deny his honest occupation or means of earning a living, or go to extra length to wear a garb of dishonesty with an intent to satisfy an insatiable woman.

That said, it's always appalling, yet irritating, how most of you are always bold to dish out misinformation, exude ignorance and dishonesty:

- Without intent to disparage car mechanics of any form and standard, it's ignorant and dishonest to say that a car mechanic makes more money/is more lucrative than a car dealer of the same level.

- Without intent to disparage brokers and non-professionals who are mainly into supply, but claim contractors or contracting firms who aren't doing well for one reason to another, it is ignorance and evil for anyone to use you as standard for what a professional/organization that handles contract is or disparage contractors because every topnotch professional/organization be it in the legal profession, fintech, financial, O&G, sector, etc, has always done everything possible to handle contracts for the governments and other businesses, and by extension, are contractors to an extent, even when they aren't contracting firms. So, a successful professional/organization that handles a contract for governments and other businesses can never be in the league of any salary earner; it doesn't matter whether such a salary earner is the CEO of BP, not to mention mere white or blue-collar salary earners.

Nairaland gets funnier each passing day, a place where people will openly do everything possible to get abroad based people as husband or wife, yet once they are used and dumped or didn't succeed in making it happen for one reason or another, you will see them making up false stories on how they do not like to marry abroad based people or relocate abroad; a place where conceited people want to be automatically seen as intelligent people; a place where people with low self-esteem who are greedy for power/control do everything to appear supreme to naive people; a place where people who are greedy for material things disguise opportunism as wisdom; a place where weak ethical people promote and equate perfidy for cleverness; a place where haughty people want to be seen as confident people.

A perfidious spouse deserves no mercy, and meting out the worst form of revenge she has in her arsenal will help bring him to reality, assuming it's the kind of revenge he can survive, provided that she has been fair to him from the inception.

I wager the thread was deliberately created to achieve two main objectives:

- To give some sense of belonging and tactical support to hypocritically crass and opportunistic women, and by extension, to promote female cruelty and encourage male servility.

- To make naive men believe that a servile man, like the character the OP is playing in the thread through his disposition and responses, is the definition of a "real man." He is playing well the character of a man hypocritically crass and opportunistic women (or men, if the genders are reversed) do like to have in their lives, provided that he equally has long money, or is youthful if a girl is playing the OP's character.

Well, servility is as bad as cruelty; say no to them regardless of your gender. A wannabe kind and wannabe libertarian man will always be different from the true kind and libertarian man, just as the true emancipated/confident woman will always be different from an oppressive/haughty woman.

Bobbyjay001:
Which type of cruelty/trauma do you suggest he put her to? I want to learn one or two things pls.

Calm down. Don't be cruel to a woman who hasn't deliberately and continually meted out pernicious acts on you directly or indirectly.

Bhus21:
Certainly allowing people who've done bad things to eat their cake and have it is not a good thing. Being cruel deliberately on the other hand is not a good thing either. I'm by nature a kind person that hates wahala. I also recognize that because of our kids we will always have a connection. So while cruelty may be temporarily soothing, it will have long-term negative effects for everyone involved such that it's not worthwhile.

Several people here have rushed to suggest divorce. The challenge with divorce is that you are just replacing one problem with another problem that's potentially more complex and difficult. So divorce may be the ultimate answer but it doesn't come without its challenges so the decision must not be taken lightly.

Her offense is definitely not a dealbreaker for you, so forgive her or better still try worshipping her. Both of you deserve each other. Now stop goading people.

Don't tell me that you'll grant her a divorce just like that without first subjecting her to severe cruelty that will last her for a lifetime - this should be the way, unless you haven't been fair to her from the inception, thus her action now. When you allow people to continually have their cake and eat it, you automatically become an enabler of their inhumaneness in particular and evil in general.

Balderdash. One's inability to see when another person is online/was last seen online doesn't automatically mean that hir has been blocked.

You are obviously a disingenuous pseudo-libertarian because you cannot tell me that you did not notice during the dating or courting period that she has a best friend but feign comfortable with it because of your low self-esteem/unscrupulousness, which you obviously glossed with the garb of a libertarian.

Anyway, one sure way to get her to put a stop to the nonsense by herself, provided that she is still interested in the union or you will not mind losing her in principle is by abhorring peace and togetherness achieved on servility with her. Put an ethical philosophy that is humane in place - one should always have this in place before going into any form of relationship - and let it serves as a bond to hold the both of you in the union, with far-reaching consequences against either of you who fails to live by it or within its limit.

With that in place, everything with the relationship will be on autopilot without you needing to control her or dictate for her what to always do, and vice versa, while mutually enjoying peace occasioned from everyone doing what is right/taking delight in doing what is right at almost any given time. Her action has nothing to do with her age; it has everything to do with her weak ethical leanings.

Until you reach the height where you will not feel perturbed losing anything or anybody on principle, no matter who and what, you have not conquered yourself and have not started living a healthy and worthy life.

cococandy:
If you love your children, they will know. The moms don’t turn them against you. As a matter of fact, some moms try to salvage the relationship between y’all and your kids but you don’t make it easy.

It’s not their mother’s job to make them love you same as it’s not your job to make them love their mother. If you don’t hold yourself responsible for the relationship between them and their mother, why do you think it’s fair to hold their mother’s accountable for your relationship with the children?

Think better. Do better

You haven't been honest here, but the reason isn't far-fetched. OP erred with his advice by making a generalization, yes. However, it's a fact that all women who have low self-esteem/inordinate penchants for power and control have always done everything possible to turn their children against their fathers covertly and mildly or overtly and severely depending on their relationship with their male partners, and some feeble-minded children do succumb even while it's evident the fathers love them. Evidence abounds.

In summary, there are both men and women who do wittingly or unwittingly take delight in humiliating/oppressing/suffering their partners. Cruelty and subjugation are real.

Ishilove:
Sweet Jesus, you see me for dream?? Her comment was directed at people denigrating the couple's happiness and I am concurring with her. Wetin consine me with you?

Wo abeg don't be unfortunate and carry your bullshit waka before I decend on you.

You and bravado, one day you might make someone who doesn't know that you have got no stamina vex send you a very hot e-slap.

Ishilove:
Misery loves company, that's why.

I know that it is always hard for you to avoid your momentary shallowness. I don't see how her posts or my commendation of her disposition all this while showed aversion to the OP's beautiful family. And to think that you of all people hold an illusion that you could be a minute happy, fulfilled, and accomplished than me in any area of life is the wonder of the year, lol. Now stop projecting your condition towards me.

Hathor5:
I do not see how my position here is stand-alone.

That a position is stand-alone doesn't mean that it can't be in harmony with others which are reasonable; it simply means that it's devoid of denigration in particular biases in general where and when applicable. So, it's all about the overall connotation of your position, maybe of recent, and not necessarily just here alone.

Only a foolish male child would allow any person, loving mother or not or any other mortal, misleads him into not giving his best to his beloved father at old age or not. Perhaps, you think that everyone is from your kind of family and that all male children are foolish like you want me to believe is the case from where you are coming as your post connotes. Boy, if my father were to turn to a god today, I will gladly worship him - that's how dear he's to my heart - without any other mortal, no matter how dear to me stopping me from doing so.

[quote author=Hathor5 post=101952831][/quote]If only you see how you always sound and appear polished whenever you take a stand-alone/independent position, unlike when you take to bandwagonism. Lol. Eschew herd mentality and see wonders happen in your life.

Up to 90% of the people, almost all of them men anyway, I have helped or lifted from almost nothing to something have paid me back with one kind of evil or another. When most of you make it seems as if only women can do evil, I just laugh, because I know that as men, most of us are the true personifications of evil. Anyway, each one of them that has betrayed my confidence in them, I took solace in the fact that I saw it from the inception and before they happened; more so, I have one of the best vengeance mechanism and package around.

Yes. If you can't trust your wife and friend, or if they can't justify your confidence in leaving them, up to the extent of living together in an apartment for such duration in your absence, then they do not merit the wife and friend tags and your closeness.

Anyway, thank God for my aversion for perfidious people, be you a relation or outsider, because the very moment I observe an atom of it in you, I rock your boat and damn the attack or condemnation of every element who may support you.

This is recycled fiction. That said, a responsible man in his position who has the best interest of his family at heart needn't be told before he extends such a helping hand to the business in particular and wife in general.

On the other hand, the slap could be justifiable or not depending on how she communicated the plea to him. If she did it crassly or haughtily with an obvious intention to prove a point and embarrass him, it's justifiable as far as I'm concerned - even though he could have done better.

Gamophobia is likely the cause. He's likely not a weakling as some might assume, so he's consciously and voluntarily benevolent to you. You likely did not violate any of his relationship dealbreak while the relationship lasted until he called it a quit. So, as much as he is not emotionally connected to you, he, however, admires you mentally.

Wannabe decent people, I wager. One can never be decent and lack quality choices and options to choose from (and vice versa), except where the choice to stay single is deliberate or unordinary, which is usually rare. It doesn't matter whether one is an extrovert or introvert.

Every wannabe kind and libertarian man will always convinced himself that he's decent, just as every wannabe reasonable woman will convinced herself that she's decent.

Not telling him beforehand and personally and have him decide whether to continue with the arrangement or not is one of those unpronounced provocatives that usually make some men subject their wives to physical abuse in particular and cruelty in general in marriage after finding out in the cause of the union. It's the same with lying about age.

One who comes into equity should always come with clean hands to avoid stories that touches and actions that are unfavorable and unimaginable. Perfidy isn't cleverness.

Quit eating fatty and oily foods in particular and much food in general in the morning. Also, give coffee and bitter kola some trial; abuse them at your peril, though.