My understanding is that when they bite you, they also inject a bit of anticoagulant to prevent clotting as they suck blood out. The foreign material creates an allergic reaction that itches.

I don’t think there would be much of an evolutionary advantage to irritating your victim until they start a pesticidal war against you and your kind.

In my line of work, it’s a legal thing and a balancing the books thing. The business can’t legally keep the money because it is being held in trust for that particular person, and only that person is allowed to get those funds (unless they die, then it becomes part of their estate). We can’t just wait a certain number of years and say ha! you didn’t get your funds in time, and now they’re mine!

While we have the funds in trust, the case isn’t fully closed as far as our accounting department is concerned. Accounting doesn’t want uncashed checks out there and doesn’t like the idea of holding onto client funds indefinitely because they have to keep track of all of that, and we’ve had something like 40,000 clients in the last 30-40 years. Their goal is to get that account down to zero so there are no funds for that client left in their account.

At a certain point, if we can’t hunt that person down, we have to get this money off our books. Otherwise, if it was legally allowed, we could be stuck holding these funds for decades and having to manage them that whole time. In my particular state, businesses legally have to submit it as unclaimed property after 5 years. The goal was to have all these funds in one location so people don’t have to search at a bunch of different places to find unclaimed funds. Really, it’s a benefit to both the business and the people searching for their funds. We get to clear it off the books, and they have a one-stop shop for receiving any unclaimed funds. It sounds like different types of funds have different waiting periods. I believe the department of revenue also makes efforts to find the owner of those funds.

Lots of different businesses use this system. Say you have a savings account out there somewhere that you completely forgot about, so it’s been sitting there with no activity for years. Since then, maybe you’ve moved or gotten a new phone number. If the bank sends you letters and emails and calls you but still can’t get in contact after 5 years, they are going to close the account and send those funds to the state. It could be submitted by an insurance company who has settlement funds or reimbursement funds for ending a policy. It could be that you overpaid on something, and the business is trying to return the difference to you, but can’t find you. Basically, if some business owes you money in any way, but can’t for some reason get it to you, they have to submit it to the state. I’m assuming it works the same if the next of kin can’t be found for an estate.

I’m not sure how the business to business funds would work, but businesses here are required to have a registered agent who is responsible for receiving subpoenas or whatever else for the business, so hunting down the owner seems like it’s a bit easier, but I’ve never worked on that side, so I don’t really know.

I’ve never had unclaimed funds, but I have been the person who submits funds that have been unclaimed to the state. I work at a law firm that handles a lot of settlements, and sometimes, people are issued a large portion of the settlement while we wrap up a few other things on the case. Once those are taken care of, I reach out to our client to give them whatever funds remain.

But sometimes, I can’t find that person no matter how hard I search. Sometimes, our client disagrees with the additional amount that they are receiving and refuses to cash their check. After a certain number of years, and after every possible attempt to give our client their money has been made, I have it sent to the state.

AOC wouldn’t win Harris the swing vote. I love AOC, don’t get me wrong, but with two women on the ticket, it’s too easy for conservatives to paint the duo as “crazy” or “radical.” Sexism remains alive and well here. People still believe the stereotypes and are easily influenced by dog whistles, especially here in the Midwest.

I hope that we get to the point where this isn’t a concern, but as it stands now, we have never had a woman in charge, and a lot of people are afraid of the unknown, so they wouldn’t like the idea of something new on both the presidential front as well as the VP front.

That’s on top of the fact that AOC is from NY and Harris is from CA. We are already irritated that a majority of people in office (and the country) ignore the “flyover” states even though we do a lot for the country (and have really cool cultural and fun places to visit, but this addendum is clearly biased). It really does matter a lot that Walz is one of us. He gets us in a way that people from the coast states don’t. That will influence a lot of votes, and two midwestern states are considered swing states - i.e. states that Harris absolutely NEEDS on her side.

Swing voters here don’t care as much about deploying the national guard. In fact, it’s lauded by a lot of people, including liberals/democrats. Midwesterners are okay with civil disobedience, but only if it’s not unnecessarily destructive or if there isn’t an attempt to gain simply for yourself (ex: looting). I’m not saying that that is what happened when the guard was deployed or that it’s a realistic or correct belief, but in reality, the media painted it that way, so people believe what they were told. So, very few here are holding something like that against him.

I don’t know of anyone in my region who would consider Walz to be truly controversial, and certainly, they think of him as way less controversial than AOC. They might disagree with Walz’s policies or opinions, but they don’t think he’s controversial. Here, AOC’s painted as a pot stirrer and a crazy lady. To reiterate, I don’t agree with this view of AOC, and I respect her immensely, but it would be foolish to ignore the fact that a lot of other people do agree with it. Walz, because of his race, age, cultural background, and experience, is a thousand times more electable than AOC when you’re looking at it from a national perspective.

Yes! Exactly this!

I am running into this problem at work all the time! I am a Millennial who does corporate training for new recruits in a field that we will almost completely train you on. I.e. you don’t have to have a specific degree or certification because we’ll train you on the job.

I have found that almost all of the Gen Z hires don’t have more than a basic level of computer literacy. They didn’t learn the hard way in middle school that if you don’t save your essay, it will be deleted. They had auto-save. They don’t how to ctrl+alt+delete to get to their task manager to force shut down a frozen program because they (often) used chromebooks or phones/tablets where it was basically an internet machine that could be restarted if need be, but didn’t have more involved software. They have never had to troubleshoot issues with burning data onto a CD (archaic, I know, but our job requires it). They don’t know how to format a lot of things in Word because Google docs does a lot of it for you (or doesn’t even have the option). Hell, they don’t always know what a proper address on a letter looks like because they don’t send snail mail - although this only relates to tech in the formatting and printing of letters.

So now I’m training them on the new material they have to learn for the job, but also computer intricacies that I learned in middle school on my Gateway computer with like 1 gig of ram and floppy disks. When you needed to format something perfectly for school, but nothing was user friendly, you had to learn a lot of weird tricks and workarounds.

They are generally still better at using the computer than Gen X or Boomers, but the Millenials get computers on a different level because we grew with the tech. Gen Z can pick up new software quicker, but still don’t always get how things actually work.

I also thought that as true digital natives, they would know a lot more than they actually do. I agree with the likelihood that we will more than likely have to translate for our elders and the younger generation as well.

Exactly!

I think it’s that you don’t feel older mentally. I though I would feel a certain maturity once I reached an age where I had a solid, advancing career and owned a house. Turns out, I feel pretty much the same and am just better at dealing with things that arise and pretending that I’m mature. My body hurts more and my face looks older, but I don’t feel all that different. I’m sure I’ve mentally changed to some extent, and I notice it more when I talk to younger people, but I still feel the same.