Giusi wrote:

> I have been to several civil partner ceremonies in the past couple of years.
> Most of them have been because without it a long term partner can have no
> rights in emergencies. One friend of a friend was forbidden to enter the
> hospital room where his partner lay dying by a bitter family who had not
> spoken to either of them in a decade.
> Then there are inheritance issues-- in some countries you cannot leave your
> estate away from family or spouse so it could be important that your partner
> be legally a spouse.
>
I know I've written on this here in the past but I'll repeat it for
those who never heard it before- In the US all one has to do is have an
Advanced Directive for Medical Care and a Durable Power of Attorney
drawn up with WHOMEVER they WISH as their representative and who will
have the legal right to make decisions. Of course this should be done
before you need it...but rarely is?
The inheritance issues need to be addressed separately in a will.
I've never once experienced a "partner" being denied full access to a
patient in my care, except (in the not unheard of cases) where a man has
a wife AND girlfriends! I've experienced plenty of infighting amongst
family members who disagree amongst themselves over the patient.

"Goomba" > ha scritto nel messaggio
...
> Giusi wrote:
>
>> I have been to several civil partner ceremonies in the past couple of
>> years. Most of them have been because without it a long term partner can
>> have no rights in emergencies.

> I know I've written on this here in the past but I'll repeat it for those
> who never heard it before- In the US all one has to do is have an Advanced
> Directive for Medical Care and a Durable Power of Attorney drawn up with
> WHOMEVER they WISH as their representative and who will have the legal
> right to make decisions. Of course this should be done before you need
> it...but rarely is?

Not the same elsewhere.

In many countries you cannot legally leave your estate away from family,
evenb a cousin has more right than your lover of 40 years. In Italy you
cannot leave your legal spouse all if there are kids or less than 1/3. You
must leave the children their legal part. There's really almost no choice
left by the time you take care of spouse and kids.

On Tue 17 Jun 2008 02:35:05p, Nancy Young told us...

> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>
>> Many *** people have very strong feelings about marriage because it's
>> something we're not allowed to have. As with many things, those that
>> are forbidden are the things that are wanted, and that's just from a
>> psychological perspective. There are other issues here, particular
>> the unique legal rights of a married couple.
>
> You hear horror stories (for both *** and straight couples) where
> one is injured or killed, and their family coming over and taking all
> of their possessions, including money, because legally they are
> next of kin.
>
> A scenario best avoided, however you have to do it.
>
> nancy
>

Exactly so. I have witnessed it first hand.

--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Tuesday, 06(VI)/17(XVII)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
DOS Tip #63: add BUGS=OFF to CONFIG.SYS
-------------------------------------------

On Tue 17 Jun 2008 02:37:11p, Giusi told us...

> "Wayne Boatwright" > ha scritto nel messaggio
> 6.120...
>> On Tue 17 Jun 2008 12:29:59p, Lou Decruss told us...
>> It it became "legal" for us to married in the state of Arizona, I know
>> if we would bother at this point. What would weigh heavily would not
>> be our emotional investment, but what other gains we might achieve
>> within the state's legal system.
>
> I have been to several civil partner ceremonies in the past couple of
> years. Most of them have been because without it a long term partner can
> have no rights in emergencies. One friend of a friend was forbidden to
> enter the hospital room where his partner lay dying by a bitter family
> who had not spoken to either of them in a decade.
> Then there are inheritance issues-- in some countries you cannot leave
> your estate away from family or spouse so it could be important that
> your partner be legally a spouse.

Yes, those are certainly important issues. In our case, I have no family
left, and David's apparently doesn't really care, and I'm fortunate that
they treat me as another son. We have made sure that our wills, living
wills, and powers of attorney are carefully drafted to exclude any
intervention from other parties. I suppose, however, if we had the chance
to make it a legal union, we would end up doing so.



--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Tuesday, 06(VI)/17(XVII)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
DOS Tip #63: add BUGS=OFF to CONFIG.SYS
-------------------------------------------

On Tue 17 Jun 2008 03:01:28p, Goomba told us...

> Giusi wrote:
>
>> I have been to several civil partner ceremonies in the past couple of
>> years. Most of them have been because without it a long term partner
>> can have no rights in emergencies. One friend of a friend was
>> forbidden to enter the hospital room where his partner lay dying by a
>> bitter family who had not spoken to either of them in a decade.
>> Then there are inheritance issues-- in some countries you cannot leave
>> your estate away from family or spouse so it could be important that
>> your partner be legally a spouse.
>>
> I know I've written on this here in the past but I'll repeat it for
> those who never heard it before- In the US all one has to do is have an
> Advanced Directive for Medical Care and a Durable Power of Attorney
> drawn up with WHOMEVER they WISH as their representative and who will
> have the legal right to make decisions. Of course this should be done
> before you need it...but rarely is?

Fortunately,, we have taken care of all that. We had wills drafted shortly
after we met and have kept them updated. Before David was to have his
quadruple bypass surgery, we made sure that we both had all the other
documents in good order.

> The inheritance issues need to be addressed separately in a will.
> I've never once experienced a "partner" being denied full access to a
> patient in my care, except (in the not unheard of cases) where a man has
> a wife AND girlfriends! I've experienced plenty of infighting amongst
> family members who disagree amongst themselves over the patient.

I knew of a male couple back in Cleveland where, due to a serious accident,
one partern was clinically brain dead. They had no documents in place, and
the parents would permit no visitation or intervention or decision making
by his partner. They had been together for nearly 30 years. It happens.



--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Tuesday, 06(VI)/17(XVII)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
Interstellar Matter is a Gas
-------------------------------------------

George Shirley wrote:

> Let's see here. We got married on December 26, 1960. I spent $45.00 (a
> months rent on my apartment) for flowers for the church, gave the
> retired priest who conducted the ceremony $20.00 (my FIL sent me $15.00
> of it back as it was a "retired" priest), wife spent whatever her dress
> and my Robert Brooks suit cost her (didn't want me to get married in my
> old Navy uniform), suit I know was $15.00 at the discount store, she
> made the dress, plus the $10.00 for the marriage license, MIL made the
> refreshments for the wedding party at her house, probably another
> $10.00. Probably roughly $100.00 total. I was making $1.05 an hour plus
> a 1% commission at a Sears store so we didn't have a lot of money. We
> were very happy being married with family and friends around us though.
>
> Someone else will have to do the math to amortize cost of wedding versus
> 47 years of wedded bliss. <VBG>


Well, in 1960 dollars adjusted for inflation, your whole deal would come to
about $600.00 in today's dollars...

:-)

I grew up in a very rural area, church weddings were the norm, and more
often than not the reception was held in the church basement, with the
church ladies pitching in to help. If you wanted "fancy" you rented out
the local VFW hall for the reception...it's still that way for a lot of
folks.

--
Best
Greg

Michael "Dog3" wrote:
> George Shirley >
> : in rec.food.cooking
>
>> All I can say is that we haven't seen he and his family in five years
>> although we talk on the phone. He's willing to carry on a short
>> conversation if we call him. I don't understand his attitude and
>> neither does his mother. He and our daughter were great friends when
>> young but she now has nothing to do with him at all. I think many
>> families have social climbers in them that just want to forget the
>> family they came from. Oh well, it will all even out in the end.
>
> People are strange like that. People will drop other people like hot
> potatoes for no known reason. Maybe some real or imagined slight? Who knows
> but if ya' don't know what ya' did, ya' can't fix it I tend to try and
> find out what went awry and fix it on my end if I can. If the other party
> doesn't cooperate then so be it. I sure don't lose any sleep over it.
>
> Michael
>


And it may be the spouse's doing. There's a lot of that around.

gloria p

On Tue 17 Jun 2008 09:01:20a, Michael "Dog3" told us...

> George Shirley >
> : in rec.food.cooking
>
>> All I can say is that we haven't seen he and his family in five years
>> although we talk on the phone. He's willing to carry on a short
>> conversation if we call him. I don't understand his attitude and
>> neither does his mother. He and our daughter were great friends when
>> young but she now has nothing to do with him at all. I think many
>> families have social climbers in them that just want to forget the
>> family they came from. Oh well, it will all even out in the end.
>
> People are strange like that. People will drop other people like hot
> potatoes for no known reason. Maybe some real or imagined slight? Who
> knows but if ya' don't know what ya' did, ya' can't fix it I tend to
> try and find out what went awry and fix it on my end if I can. If the
> other party doesn't cooperate then so be it. I sure don't lose any sleep
> over it.
>
> Michael
>

Sometimes you will never ever know. My former partner and I were the
closest of friends with a married couple for the better part of 15 years.
We did many many things together and shared many confidences amongst the
four of us. In the blink of an eye one day, they would no longer take our
phone calls nor respond to short written notes, and least of all would
explain whatever they perceived to be the problem. I actually did lose
sleep over it for several years. I was finally determined to make at least
one last contact, and called their home. I was told by the husband to
never call there again or risk being reported for harrassment. To this day
I will never know what happened. For me it was a very sad parting of the
waves.

--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Tuesday, 06(VI)/17(XVII)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
Cats need to wake Mom up at 3:00 am by
chewing on her head.
-------------------------------------------

sf wrote:

>
> $28,000 is starting to look normal to me. DD is just starting to plan
> her wedding and it's already over $20,000. That's only the reception
> part. It's still minus minister, dress, tux, DJ, wedding party gifts
> & flowers.
>
>

Unfortunately once you say the word "Wedding" to any vendor the price of
everything goes up exponentially.

Sheet cake? $50
Wedding sheet cake? $7.50/serving

Party buffet? $25-30/person
Wedding buffet? $75/person

And the wedding magazines and wedding "consultants" spend all of their
energies turning brides into Bridezillas who must have it all.

Our son is getting married this weekend in the beautiful mountain ski
town of Breckenridge (luckily "out of season".) There's an old horse
and carriage in town that carries tourists around, quite quaint. It
costs something like $15 for a half hour. Son and fiancee looked into
hiring the carriage for the two block ride from the church to their
restaurant reception, two blocks away. The quote was $400. When asked
why, the company said "Oh, for weddings we wash the horse and the driver
wears a tux." The couple decided they'd walk with family and friends
instead.

It all depends on your tolerance for B.S.

;-)
gloria p

On Tue 17 Jun 2008 08:17:49p, Gloria P told us...

> sf wrote:
>
>>
>> $28,000 is starting to look normal to me. DD is just starting to plan
>> her wedding and it's already over $20,000. That's only the reception
>> part. It's still minus minister, dress, tux, DJ, wedding party gifts
>> & flowers.
>>
>>
>
> Unfortunately once you say the word "Wedding" to any vendor the price of
> everything goes up exponentially.
>
> Sheet cake? $50
> Wedding sheet cake? $7.50/serving
>
> Party buffet? $25-30/person
> Wedding buffet? $75/person
>
> And the wedding magazines and wedding "consultants" spend all of their
> energies turning brides into Bridezillas who must have it all.
>
> Our son is getting married this weekend in the beautiful mountain ski
> town of Breckenridge (luckily "out of season".) There's an old horse
> and carriage in town that carries tourists around, quite quaint. It
> costs something like $15 for a half hour. Son and fiancee looked into
> hiring the carriage for the two block ride from the church to their
> restaurant reception, two blocks away. The quote was $400. When asked
> why, the company said "Oh, for weddings we wash the horse and the driver
> wears a tux." The couple decided they'd walk with family and friends
> instead.
>
> It all depends on your tolerance for B.S.
>
> ;-)
> gloria p
>

One word: Rediculous

At the other end of the life spectrum, so is the cost of dying. God forbid
you should want an actual burial in a casket and a real funeral. We have
opted for private cremation, and a private memorial service some time
later.

--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Tuesday, 06(VI)/17(XVII)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
'Let's plunge ahead.' --Dr. Scratchensniff
-------------------------------------------

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 15:32:26 GMT, "Michael \"Dog3\""
> wrote:

>sf <.> : in
>rec.food.cooking
>
>> $28,000 is starting to look normal to me. DD is just starting to plan
>> her wedding and it's already over $20,000. That's only the reception
>> part. It's still minus minister, dress, tux, DJ, wedding party gifts
>> & flowers.
>
>Back in '77 I believe the tab for my wedding on the brides side was about
>$10,000 IIRC. On my side it was about 1/2 that. We paid for the rehersal
>dinner, groomsmen's gifts, tuxedos and flowers and hotel rooms for the out
>of town guests on my side. It was a considered a big wedding back then.
>With today's costs, the amount spent would probably be considered a modest
>wedding.
>
>Michael

You can't prove anything by me Michael. I got married in '73 and the
total cost was $1500. That included venue (free - because it was my
in-laws house), invitations, caterer, flowers (almost free), dress,
wedding party gifty thingies, photographer (major money, well spent)
and minister/church fees.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 14:29:59 -0500, Lou Decruss >
wrote:

>Some people don't feel a wedding is special. 50% fail. Our best
>friends got married last week in Mexico. They were gone for a week
>and came back with horror stories. After 72 hours of being back
>everyone was fighting. Everything changed. It's rather common.

That's sad to hear, Lou. I guess it's a roll of the dice. Some
people look at marriage as a commitment, others look at it as a
sentence.... sometimes you don't know how the other person thinks
until after the "I do".


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:28:14 -0500, George Shirley
> wrote:

>Someone else will have to do the math to amortize cost of wedding versus
>47 years of wedded bliss. <VBG>
>
>George

Congratulations, George! I hope you decide to go full steam ahead and
have a full on, blow out, 50th anniversary party. You deserve it!


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 19:44:40 -0500, "Gregory Morrow"
> wrote:

>I grew up in a very rural area, church weddings were the norm, and more
>often than not the reception was held in the church basement, with the
>church ladies pitching in to help. If you wanted "fancy" you rented out
>the local VFW hall for the reception...it's still that way for a lot of
>folks.


I'm quickly figuring out *that's* why $28,000 is "average".

What happened to barefoot on the beach (when it wasn't a "destination"
wedding)?

sf
looking back at "the good ole days" when weddings were more casual



--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 17:35:05 -0400, "Nancy Young" >
wrote:

>Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>
>> Many *** people have very strong feelings about marriage because it's
>> something we're not allowed to have. As with many things, those that
>> are forbidden are the things that are wanted, and that's just from a
>> psychological perspective. There are other issues here, particular
>> the unique legal rights of a married couple.
>
>You hear horror stories (for both *** and straight couples) where
>one is injured or killed, and their family coming over and taking all
>of their possessions, including money, because legally they are
>next of kin.
>
>A scenario best avoided, however you have to do it.
>

Nodding head in agreement!


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 00:14:10 +0200, "Giusi" >
wrote:

>In many countries you cannot legally leave your estate away from family,
>evenb a cousin has more right than your lover of 40 years. In Italy you
>cannot leave your legal spouse all if there are kids or less than 1/3. You
>must leave the children their legal part. There's really almost no choice
>left by the time you take care of spouse and kids.

Ahhh, so Italy... the land of "lovers", actually protects the family.
Good to hear.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 22:24:57 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:

>Fortunately,, we have taken care of all that. We had wills drafted shortly
>after we met and have kept them updated. Before David was to have his
>quadruple bypass surgery, we made sure that we both had all the other
>documents in good order.

DAMN, you're good! I'm x0 and still don't have a will. Of course,
the way the law would distribute my property is the way I'd do it
anyway... so I'm in no hurry to enrich some attorney with the prospect
of my death.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 22:21:03 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:

> I suppose, however, if we had the chance
>to make it a legal union, we would end up doing so.

come to california!


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 21:17:49 -0600, Gloria P >
wrote:

>Our son is getting married this weekend in the beautiful mountain ski
>town of Breckenridge (luckily "out of season".) There's an old horse
>and carriage in town that carries tourists around, quite quaint. It
>costs something like $15 for a half hour. Son and fiancee looked into
>hiring the carriage for the two block ride from the church to their
>restaurant reception, two blocks away. The quote was $400. When asked
>why, the company said "Oh, for weddings we wash the horse and the driver
>wears a tux." The couple decided they'd walk with family and friends
>instead.
>
>It all depends on your tolerance for B.S.

Congratulations, Mom! I hope you know exposing the wedding in rfc
means you *have* to make an online album for us to view. Get on it,
Girl!






--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Tue 17 Jun 2008 11:23:08p, sf told us...

> On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 22:21:03 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> > wrote:
>
>> I suppose, however, if we had the chance to make it a legal union, we
>> would end up doing so.
>
> come to california!
>
>

A legal marriage in California would not be legal in Arizona courts, and I
can't bear the thought of moving again. Getting too old for that. :-)

--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Wednesday, 06(VI)/18(XVIII)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
Bumper sticker: 'All the parts falling
off this car are of the very finest
British manufacture'
-------------------------------------------

On Wed 18 Jun 2008 04:56:08a, Michael "Dog3" told us...

> Wayne Boatwright >
> 6.120: in
> rec.food.cooking
>
>> Sometimes you will never ever know. My former partner and I were the
>> closest of friends with a married couple for the better part of 15
>> years. We did many many things together and shared many confidences
>> amongst the four of us. In the blink of an eye one day, they would no
>> longer take our phone calls nor respond to short written notes, and
>> least of all would explain whatever they perceived to be the problem.
>> I actually did lose sleep over it for several years. I was finally
>> determined to make at least one last contact, and called their home.
>> I was told by the husband to never call there again or risk being
>> reported for harrassment. To this day I will never know what
>> happened. For me it was a very sad parting of the waves.
>
> I've always been of the mind set that if I gave it one last shot I've
> done my part. I figure if they don't want to discuss a problem, or work
> it out in some way, then it is their deal and not mine. It is what it is
> and I can't control someone else. I just let it go and get on with it.
> Let them harbor all the resentments. I don't want it.
>
> Michael
>
>
>

I finally reached that stage.

--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Wednesday, 06(VI)/18(XVIII)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
Bumper sticker: 'All the parts falling
off this car are of the very finest
British manufacture'
-------------------------------------------

sf wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:28:14 -0500, George Shirley
> > wrote:
>
>> Someone else will have to do the math to amortize cost of wedding versus
>> 47 years of wedded bliss. <VBG>
>>
>> George
>
> Congratulations, George! I hope you decide to go full steam ahead and
> have a full on, blow out, 50th anniversary party. You deserve it!
>
>
If I live long enough to make the next 2 1/2 years for a fiftieth we
intend to have a High wedding mass at our church in full kit and renew
our vows. Would be nice to have the great grands for flower girls and
ring bearers.

sf wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 22:24:57 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> > wrote:
>
>> Fortunately,, we have taken care of all that. We had wills drafted shortly
>> after we met and have kept them updated. Before David was to have his
>> quadruple bypass surgery, we made sure that we both had all the other
>> documents in good order.
>
> DAMN, you're good! I'm x0 and still don't have a will. Of course,
> the way the law would distribute my property is the way I'd do it
> anyway... so I'm in no hurry to enrich some attorney with the prospect
> of my death.
>
>
I did our wills, medical powers of attorney, and living wills using
Family Lawyer software. Would have cost me ten bucks to get them
notarized and file them with the clerk of court but our CPA did it for
free. Perfectly legal in many states.

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 10:29:29 -0500, George Shirley
> wrote:

>blake murphy wrote:
>> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 14:08:07 -0500, George Shirley
>> > wrote:
>>

>>> I probably should have added something to the effect that we were
>>> horrified by what he said. We're intensely private people and would
>>> never do anything like that ourselves. I guess we just wrote it off as
>>> youthful high jinks but I'm sure himself wouldn't do anything like that
>>> now. At about age 30 he turned into the quintessential yuppie.
>>
>> sounds like he went from bad to worse.
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>All I can say is that we haven't seen he and his family in five years
>although we talk on the phone. He's willing to carry on a short
>conversation if we call him. I don't understand his attitude and neither
>does his mother. He and our daughter were great friends when young but
>she now has nothing to do with him at all. I think many families have
>social climbers in them that just want to forget the family they came
>from. Oh well, it will all even out in the end.

How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is
To have a yuppie child!

your pal,
blake

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:28:14 -0500, George Shirley
> wrote:


>Let's see here. We got married on December 26, 1960. I spent $45.00 (a
>months rent on my apartment) for flowers for the church, gave the
>retired priest who conducted the ceremony $20.00 (my FIL sent me $15.00
>of it back as it was a "retired" priest), wife spent whatever her dress
>and my Robert Brooks suit cost her (didn't want me to get married in my
>old Navy uniform), suit I know was $15.00 at the discount store, she
>made the dress, plus the $10.00 for the marriage license, MIL made the
>refreshments for the wedding party at her house, probably another
>$10.00. Probably roughly $100.00 total. I was making $1.05 an hour plus
>a 1% commission at a Sears store so we didn't have a lot of money. We
>were very happy being married with family and friends around us though.
>
>Someone else will have to do the math to amortize cost of wedding versus
>47 years of wedded bliss. <VBG>
>
>George

sounds like you got the deal of the century, george.

your pal,
blake

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:05:02 -0400, Goomba >
wrote:

>Lou Decruss wrote:
>
>>> It adds up. Sure you can go cheaper, but IMO, you want food, drink and
>>> surroundings that are special (memorable, top quality) because the event
>>> is special!
>>
>> Some people don't feel a wedding is special. 50% fail. Our best
>> friends got married last week in Mexico. They were gone for a week
>> and came back with horror stories. After 72 hours of being back
>> everyone was fighting. Everything changed. It's rather common.
>
>That is sad. And I like to imagine that EVERYONE goes into a marriage
>*hoping* it will last.... and give it the respect and intention that
>such a decision warrants.

I think they'll be ok. At least for now. The dynamics of their
relationship put them at a worse risk than the 50%.

>>> And I know that I have no problem paying a caterer to
>>> provide incredible food, generous drinks and *service* that frees me up
>>> to enjoy the day with family.
>>
>> IMO, the best way to free yourself up is to stay free and let things
>> remain a daily choice. I was watching the tube this morning about ***
>> people getting married in California. I have no idea why they feel
>> that's so important. Obviously we're straight and could get married
>> anytime we wanted, but we think our relationship will remain stronger
>> the way it is. And we've both been married. If someone wants to
>> spend 28 grand for a party, or if you want to pay for one that's fine.
>> But calling those who don't buy into the theater "stingy" rather
>> ****es me off.
>>
>> Just my $.02
>>
>> Lou
>
>No, what I find "stingy" is the attitude that weddings are doomed from
>the start so why waste money on such a "non-event" and that anyone that
>does is silly and frivolous??

Spending 28 grand on a party that so many need to take loans out for
is both silly and frivolous. And a young person who "expects" parents
to pay for it is a greedy idiot.

>I think I "hear" you say that it is
>"smarter" to pay for college instead of a wedding...assuming it has to
>be one or the other?

In the case I spoke of the parents could easily afford both. But
chose not to. I share the feeling if it's going to be $28,000 for a
wedding.

Remember the old saying, Give a person a fish and they will eat or a
day, teach them to fish and they will eat for a lifetime?

If they want that kind of event they can pay for it themselves.

Lou

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 22:21:03 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:

>On Tue 17 Jun 2008 02:37:11p, Giusi told us...
>
>> "Wayne Boatwright" > ha scritto nel messaggio
>> 6.120...
>>> On Tue 17 Jun 2008 12:29:59p, Lou Decruss told us...
>>> It it became "legal" for us to married in the state of Arizona, I know
>>> if we would bother at this point. What would weigh heavily would not
>>> be our emotional investment, but what other gains we might achieve
>>> within the state's legal system.
>>
>> I have been to several civil partner ceremonies in the past couple of
>> years. Most of them have been because without it a long term partner can
>> have no rights in emergencies. One friend of a friend was forbidden to
>> enter the hospital room where his partner lay dying by a bitter family
>> who had not spoken to either of them in a decade.
>> Then there are inheritance issues-- in some countries you cannot leave
>> your estate away from family or spouse so it could be important that
>> your partner be legally a spouse.
>
>Yes, those are certainly important issues. In our case, I have no family
>left, and David's apparently doesn't really care, and I'm fortunate that
>they treat me as another son. We have made sure that our wills, living
>wills, and powers of attorney are carefully drafted to exclude any
>intervention from other parties. I suppose, however, if we had the chance
>to make it a legal union, we would end up doing so.

i don't think you would be able to resist planning the menu for the
reception.

your pal,
blake

On Tue 17 Jun 2008 11:22:05p, sf told us...

> On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 22:24:57 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> > wrote:
>
>>Fortunately,, we have taken care of all that. We had wills drafted
>>shortly after we met and have kept them updated. Before David was to
>>have his quadruple bypass surgery, we made sure that we both had all the
>>other documents in good order.
>
> DAMN, you're good! I'm x0 and still don't have a will. Of course,
> the way the law would distribute my property is the way I'd do it
> anyway... so I'm in no hurry to enrich some attorney with the prospect
> of my death.

I have a close friend back in Ohio who is a top notch attorney and also
happens to be ***. He takes great pains in creating documents that are
virtually impossible to break by other individuals. At his suggestion, we
did this years ago.

My parents are both gone, I have no siblings, and the rest of my distant
family could care less, but David's family would circle like vultures. We
weren't about to have to deal with that.


--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Wednesday, 06(VI)/18(XVIII)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
Hell Hath No Pizza.
-------------------------------------------

On Wed 18 Jun 2008 01:28:52a, Janet Baraclough told us...

> The message >
> from sf <.> contains these words:
>
>> On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 22:24:57 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
>> > wrote:
>
>> >Fortunately,, we have taken care of all that. We had wills drafted
>> >shortly after we met and have kept them updated. Before David was to
>> >have his quadruple bypass surgery, we made sure that we both had all
>> >the other documents in good order.
>
>> DAMN, you're good! I'm x0 and still don't have a will. Of course,
>> the way the law would distribute my property is the way I'd do it
>> anyway... so I'm in no hurry to enrich some attorney with the prospect
>> of my death.
>
> YMMV, but here, NOT leaving a will is a good way to enrich lawyers.
> Wherever there is protective inheritance law, there is a lawyer who
> knows a way to cut the cake into smaller slices for inheritors and a
> big one for himself.
>
> We have protected inheritance here, and before we made wills I thought
> as you do. I was wrong. Legal terminology is just one reason why it's
> still hugely important to leave a properly constructed will. Not leaving
> a will leaves the estate wide open to valid claims I might not have
> anticipated by people I haven't even met yet and wouldn't wish to
> support . If such a challenge occurs, the people I intended the
> money/property for A) might get less or B) might have to spend a lot of
> my money on lawyers to fight off the other claimants and C) might have
> to raise the legal fees of dispute, by selling the property I want them
> to have.
>
> Janet.. (Scotland)
>
>
>

That is absolutely true in the US as well. We are not about to give up a
penny to an "outsider" if we don't have to.


--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Wednesday, 06(VI)/18(XVIII)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
Cats must lick the cheese from the
grater when the human's back is turned.
-------------------------------------------

On Wed 18 Jun 2008 05:55:18a, George Shirley told us...

> sf wrote:
>> On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 22:24:57 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Fortunately,, we have taken care of all that. We had wills drafted
>>> shortly after we met and have kept them updated. Before David was to
>>> have his quadruple bypass surgery, we made sure that we both had all
>>> the other documents in good order.
>>
>> DAMN, you're good! I'm x0 and still don't have a will. Of course, the
>> way the law would distribute my property is the way I'd do it anyway...
>> so I'm in no hurry to enrich some attorney with the prospect of my
>> death.
>>
>>
> I did our wills, medical powers of attorney, and living wills using
> Family Lawyer software. Would have cost me ten bucks to get them
> notarized and file them with the clerk of court but our CPA did it for
> free. Perfectly legal in many states.
>

The main thing is that you have them. Curious, is the Family Lawyer
software state specific? COnsidering that state inheritance laws do vary.

--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Wednesday, 06(VI)/18(XVIII)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
Cats must lick the cheese from the
grater when the human's back is turned.
-------------------------------------------

On Wed 18 Jun 2008 07:22:48a, blake murphy told us...

> On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 22:21:03 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> > wrote:
>
>>On Tue 17 Jun 2008 02:37:11p, Giusi told us...
>>
>>> "Wayne Boatwright" > ha scritto nel messaggio
>>> 6.120...
>>>> On Tue 17 Jun 2008 12:29:59p, Lou Decruss told us...
>>>> It it became "legal" for us to married in the state of Arizona, I know
>>>> if we would bother at this point. What would weigh heavily would not
>>>> be our emotional investment, but what other gains we might achieve
>>>> within the state's legal system.
>>>
>>> I have been to several civil partner ceremonies in the past couple of
>>> years. Most of them have been because without it a long term partner
can
>>> have no rights in emergencies. One friend of a friend was forbidden to
>>> enter the hospital room where his partner lay dying by a bitter family
>>> who had not spoken to either of them in a decade.
>>> Then there are inheritance issues-- in some countries you cannot leave
>>> your estate away from family or spouse so it could be important that
your
>>> partner be legally a spouse.
>>
>>Yes, those are certainly important issues. In our case, I have no family
>>left, and David's apparently doesn't really care, and I'm fortunate that
>>they treat me as another son. We have made sure that our wills, living
>>wills, and powers of attorney are carefully drafted to exclude any
>>intervention from other parties. I suppose, however, if we had the
chance
>>to make it a legal union, we would end up doing so.
>
> i don't think you would be able to resist planning the menu for the
> reception.
>
> your pal,
> blake
>

You're probably right, but if I go first, David will probably provide hot
dogs and macaroni salad. :-) He is tragically cuilinarily impaired.

--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Wednesday, 06(VI)/18(XVIII)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
Cat philosophy - when in doubt, cop an
attitude!
-------------------------------------------

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 19:44:40 -0500, "Gregory Morrow"
> wrote:

>
>
>George Shirley wrote:
>
>> Let's see here. We got married on December 26, 1960. I spent $45.00 (a
>> months rent on my apartment) for flowers for the church, gave the
>> retired priest who conducted the ceremony $20.00 (my FIL sent me $15.00
>> of it back as it was a "retired" priest), wife spent whatever her dress
>> and my Robert Brooks suit cost her (didn't want me to get married in my
>> old Navy uniform), suit I know was $15.00 at the discount store, she
>> made the dress, plus the $10.00 for the marriage license, MIL made the
>> refreshments for the wedding party at her house, probably another
>> $10.00. Probably roughly $100.00 total. I was making $1.05 an hour plus
>> a 1% commission at a Sears store so we didn't have a lot of money. We
>> were very happy being married with family and friends around us though.
>>
>> Someone else will have to do the math to amortize cost of wedding versus
>> 47 years of wedded bliss. <VBG>
>
>
>Well, in 1960 dollars adjusted for inflation, your whole deal would come to
>about $600.00 in today's dollars...

Sounds a little more reasonable than 28 grand. Probably more fun too.

>I grew up in a very rural area, church weddings were the norm, and more
>often than not the reception was held in the church basement, with the
>church ladies pitching in to help.

I've been to a few of those. When I was six my aunt had one that way.
I remember it like it was yesterday. A great time even for a kid.
That marriage didn't last either.

> If you wanted "fancy" you rented out
>the local VFW hall for the reception...it's still that way for a lot of
>folks.

Been to a few of those too. Some were fun, some turned into brawls.
The food was always better in church "cellars"

Lou

On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 07:52:52 -0500, George Shirley
> wrote:

>sf wrote:
>> On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:28:14 -0500, George Shirley
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Someone else will have to do the math to amortize cost of wedding versus
>>> 47 years of wedded bliss. <VBG>
>>>
>>> George
>>
>> Congratulations, George! I hope you decide to go full steam ahead and
>> have a full on, blow out, 50th anniversary party. You deserve it!
>>
>>
>If I live long enough to make the next 2 1/2 years for a fiftieth we
>intend to have a High wedding mass at our church in full kit and renew
>our vows. Would be nice to have the great grands for flower girls and
>ring bearers.

Good for you George. I think you'll make it!!!

Lou

On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 14:16:34 GMT, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:28:14 -0500, George Shirley
> wrote:
>
>
>>Let's see here. We got married on December 26, 1960. I spent $45.00 (a
>>months rent on my apartment) for flowers for the church, gave the
>>retired priest who conducted the ceremony $20.00 (my FIL sent me $15.00
>>of it back as it was a "retired" priest), wife spent whatever her dress
>>and my Robert Brooks suit cost her (didn't want me to get married in my
>>old Navy uniform), suit I know was $15.00 at the discount store, she
>>made the dress, plus the $10.00 for the marriage license, MIL made the
>>refreshments for the wedding party at her house, probably another
>>$10.00. Probably roughly $100.00 total. I was making $1.05 an hour plus
>>a 1% commission at a Sears store so we didn't have a lot of money. We
>>were very happy being married with family and friends around us though.
>>
>>Someone else will have to do the math to amortize cost of wedding versus
>>47 years of wedded bliss. <VBG>
>>
>>George
>
>sounds like you got the deal of the century, george.

And they lived within their means. Actually the deal was hooking up
with the right person.

Lou

Our ( church ) wedding was simple,
limited guest list, reception at the local VFW hall.

I don't think my bride or I ever gave a thought
to the "Grandeur of the Wedding".......

It was always the marriage...the marriage...the marriage.
Forty+ years later, it's still "the marriage".

--
<rj>
"blake murphy" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:28:14 -0500, George Shirley
> > wrote:
>
>
>>Let's see here. We got married on December 26, 1960. I spent $45.00 (a
>>months rent on my apartment) for flowers for the church, gave the
>>retired priest who conducted the ceremony $20.00 (my FIL sent me $15.00
>>of it back as it was a "retired" priest), wife spent whatever her dress
>>and my Robert Brooks suit cost her (didn't want me to get married in my
>>old Navy uniform), suit I know was $15.00 at the discount store, she
>>made the dress, plus the $10.00 for the marriage license, MIL made the
>>refreshments for the wedding party at her house, probably another
>>$10.00. Probably roughly $100.00 total. I was making $1.05 an hour plus
>>a 1% commission at a Sears store so we didn't have a lot of money. We
>>were very happy being married with family and friends around us though.
>>
>>Someone else will have to do the math to amortize cost of wedding versus
>>47 years of wedded bliss. <VBG>
>>
>>George
>
> sounds like you got the deal of the century, george.
>
> your pal,
> blake

Lou Decruss wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:05:02 -0400, Goomba >

>> That is sad. And I like to imagine that EVERYONE goes into a marriage
>> *hoping* it will last.... and give it the respect and intention that
>> such a decision warrants.
>
> I think they'll be ok. At least for now. The dynamics of their
> relationship put them at a worse risk than the 50%.
>
I hope they surprise you <shrug> You never know, eh?

>
> Spending 28 grand on a party that so many need to take loans out for
> is both silly and frivolous. And a young person who "expects" parents
> to pay for it is a greedy idiot.

Right. If the parents can't afford it, they pay for it themselves, AND
do it in a manner they can afford. But 28K *is* what some can afford and
in that case I say more power to 'em!

> Remember the old saying, Give a person a fish and they will eat or a
> day, teach them to fish and they will eat for a lifetime?
>
> If they want that kind of event they can pay for it themselves.
>

Yup, they can. And then again many families consider weddings to be good
family reunions, a reason to get together with old friends, business
partners, the kids college friends and a way to share the celebration
and joy in the event with many and generously. I don't begrudge them that.

"Michael "Dog3"" wrote

> I've always been of the mind set that if I gave it one last shot I've
> done my part. I figure if they don't want to discuss a problem, or work
> it out in some way, then it is their deal and not mine. It is what it is
> and I can't control someone else. I just let it go and get on with it.
> Let them harbor all the resentments. I don't want it.

Same here. Sent an Xmas card to the SIL. Came back with her handwriting
'refused sender'. Not much more to say and no clue why really.

The only thing we can do is 'guess'. Executor of MIL's estate and Don isnt
sure but thinks she took advantage to take a very high cut (max state
allowed) and now feels guilty. Guilty people sometimes take that out on the
ones they 'abused'.

We will never know, and have no intention of asking. I'm still upset that
she didnt bother to call her uncle that her Mom had died. We had to tell
him a year later and are upset at ourselves for 'assuming' he knew so
skipping the price of a call from Japan. I felt and still feel horrible
about that. Uncle however is vociferous that it was not our fault. Man, it
would have been an easy call except he was caught up in Katrina and we didnt
have his new phone number yet. We *did* have his address and could have
sent a card.

"Michael "Dog3"" wrote
> "cshenk" in

>> Guilty people sometimes take that out on the ones they 'abused'.
>
> That's an interesting concept I hadn't thought of. The people in your
> case are snubbing you because *they* wronged you and you are not aware of
> it. So they take it out on you yet a second time by snubbing you. It
> makes sense.

Silly but yes, happens. A person who wrongs another then makes 'excuses'
for why it was ok. It doesnt resolve. Read on.

>> We will never know, and have no intention of asking.
>
> Why bother? Life is too short to sweat it IMO.

I agree. Wrote the SIL off an would have hidden the letter so Don didnt
know except he saw it first. Here's a fellow living in Japan who's sister
(a medical doctor married to a medical doctor) is too cheap to call and tell
him his mother died. Gosh, might cost a whole 78 cents a minute.

Excuse me MS Doctor but your MOTHER died and you didnt bother to call your
BROTHER? The more I think of it the more stupid i realize we were to not
call our uncle right away. We made very bad assumptions. We fessed up
right away to the uncle and he's forgiving. Thank the Lord for that. We
didnt 'mean' bad and were just stupid.

>> I'm still upset
>> that she didnt bother to call her uncle that her Mom had died. We had
>> to tell him a year later and are upset at ourselves for 'assuming' he
>> knew so skipping the price of a call from Japan. I felt and still
>> feel horrible about that. Uncle however is vociferous that it was not
>> our fault. Man, it would have been an easy call except he was caught
>> up in Katrina and we didnt have his new phone number yet. We *did*
>> have his address and could have sent a card.
>
> That whole situation is mind boggling to me.

MIL house sold for 175,000$ and our 'percent' at end was 3,214$. Kinda
tells you something when we know it was left evenly to the 2 kids. It costs
more than we had to hire a lawyer and SIL well knew this. Being out of the
country when it happened, well, not possible to persue it.

I'm not a complete idiot. I checked and it would have cost us 50,000$ to
take them to court which was equal to the amount probably we'd get back.
That not counting plane fair to get back and forth as one 'delayed' to wait
us out.

Charlotte's inheritance is now putting one of the kids of the 2 Doctors
through college and Charlotte is looking at military service in 4 years to
match our 100$ a month we are putting aside for her. I am sure my FIL is in
heaven watching on in dismay with his wife, but proud of *us*.

And now? Letters politely written to SIL, just wishing happy holiday
seasons come back.

Want the real kicker? SIL had MIL's dog put to death instead of adopted
out. He was 'too much trouble'. Had we only gotten back a year
earlier..... He was a great dog.

cshenk wrote:

> I'm not a complete idiot. I checked and it would have cost us
> 50,000$ to take them to court which was equal to the amount probably
> we'd get back. That not counting plane fair to get back and forth as
> one 'delayed' to wait us out.
>
> Charlotte's inheritance is now putting one of the kids of the 2
> Doctors through college and Charlotte is looking at military service
> in 4 years to match our 100$ a month we are putting aside for her. I
> am sure my FIL is in heaven watching on in dismay with his wife, but
> proud of *us*.

It's enough to make your blood boil, but best to let it go, as you
already seem to have. My uncle did the same thing, took all
my great aunt's money and put his kids through college with it.
It was supposed to be for all the neices and nephews.

He got his in the end.

> Want the real kicker? SIL had MIL's dog put to death instead of
> adopted out. He was 'too much trouble'. Had we only gotten back a
> year earlier..... He was a great dog.

There's a special place in hell. Damn.

nancy

"Nancy Young" wrote
> cshenk wrote:

>> I'm not a complete idiot. I checked and it would have cost us
>> 50,000$ to take them to court which was equal to the amount probably
>> we'd get back. That not counting plane fair to get back and forth as
>> one 'delayed' to wait us out.
>>
>> Charlotte's inheritance is now putting one of the kids of the 2
>> Doctors through college and Charlotte is looking at military service
>> in 4 years to match our 100$ a month we are putting aside for her. I
>> am sure my FIL is in heaven watching on in dismay with his wife, but
>> proud of *us*.
>
> It's enough to make your blood boil, but best to let it go, as you already
> seem to have. My uncle did the same thing, took all
> my great aunt's money and put his kids through college with it.
> It was supposed to be for all the neices and nephews.

Specifically by will, Charlotte was to be taken care of. The 2 Doctor's
kids were assumed to be covered by the 2 Doctors and fees for any 'stuff'
was to come out of their share. It's over though, and we never made our
arrangements on other than our own incomes.

As MIL needed care, they charged the estate full time professional nursing
24/7 rates while actually showing up every 3-4 days to 'check on her' til
the last month. This amassed a bill for their 'care' equal to almost
everything she had. It can not be disproven now that they did not 'provide
care' but the neighbors gave us the straight story.

Oh they sorta took care of her. Not like I would have, but they dropped off
food every few days and talked for 30 mins or so with her. There's a 15,000
fee for 'cleaning up her house' which if you read between the lines is the
sort of squalor they did NOT tend to while she could not, yet charged 6000$
a month 'nursing and caretaker' fees.

I wash my hands of these people. Folks worry about how 'gauche' a money
tree is and I think of this. There are far worse things than voluntarily
asking for a little starter help.

> He got his in the end.
>
>> Want the real kicker? SIL had MIL's dog put to death instead of
>> adopted out. He was 'too much trouble'. Had we only gotten back a
>> year earlier..... He was a great dog.
>
> There's a special place in hell. Damn.

Bear was his name. Bear was about 100 lbs of 'please train me'. My biggest
problem with him as a little short person was he'd lick me in the face til I
fell over giggling then glommer me all over. Ok, he was bigger than me but
I loved that dog. I look at my backyard now with my 'rescue pet' and wish
Bear was there sunning in his corner and laughing at my hound-dog.

I took Bear for a walk last trip back before she died ,though and all we had
was a cat collar and thin cat-like walker lead. He got ahead of me and i
yelled at him (Bear! Back!) and he just sorta snuckered back to my heels.
That little grin, 'gee Mom, had tro try you at least once' on his lips. So
you got a 100 lb dog on a cat level leash and he's cool.

Bear did not need to die. He should at least have been provided a chance at
a kill facility if not a no-kill one. He was not given that option. We
were *told* he was or we would have flown Don back home early for that last
6 months. Came back, nope, they lied about that and had him killed without
a chance at adoption. Whats really bad is 2 neighbors had their names on
lists as wanting him at the local places.

Grr. Nuff.