ropa vieja

Tara

skirt steak
crown roast with booties
pigs in blankets

Tara

ChattyCathy wrote:
> blake murphy wrote:
>
>> ohnoes!!! c.c. is ****ing the handyman!!!
>
> Yup. Every chance I get...
>
Ewww old fart sex
how unfortunate

On Fri, 28 May 2010 21:34:38 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> Cheryl wrote:
>
>
> > What she didn't say was if they had to pay off a mortgage or two or
> > three. Selling a house doesn't mean instant income.
>
>
> I hope that she is smarter than one of my former co-workers. When he
> retired, close to 10 years ago, he still owed $55,000 on his mortgage.
> He bought the house in the mid 70s and it was probably not worth more
> than $40,000 at the time, but he had taken out mortgages on it to pay
> for his daughters' weddings.

I've never understood the concept of taking out a loan to finance a
wedding.

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

Tara wrote:

> ropa vieja
>
> Tara

Thank you.

--
Dan Goodman
"I have always depended on the kindness of stranglers."
Tennessee Williams, A Streetcar Named Expire
Journal dsgood.dreamwidth.org (livejournal.com, insanejournal.com)

Tara wrote:

> skirt steak
> crown roast with booties
> pigs in blankets
>
> Tara

Thank you.

--
Dan Goodman
"I have always depended on the kindness of stranglers."
Tennessee Williams, A Streetcar Named Expire
Journal dsgood.dreamwidth.org (livejournal.com, insanejournal.com)

"sf" > wrote in
>
> I've never understood the concept of taking out a loan to finance a
> wedding.

The son of a friend of mine did. The loan terms were a year longer than the
marriage lasted too.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> "sf" > wrote in
>>
>> I've never understood the concept of taking out a loan to finance a
>> wedding.
>
> The son of a friend of mine did. The loan terms were a year longer
> than the marriage lasted too.

I think sometimes parents feel embarrassed if they can't throw
the wedding of their daughter's dreams so they make it look
like they can.

nancy

sf wrote:

>> I hope that she is smarter than one of my former co-workers. When he
>> retired, close to 10 years ago, he still owed $55,000 on his mortgage.
>> He bought the house in the mid 70s and it was probably not worth more
>> than $40,000 at the time, but he had taken out mortgages on it to pay
>> for his daughters' weddings.
>
> I've never understood the concept of taking out a loan to finance a
> wedding.


Some people feel it is important to treat their daughters like
princesses for a day. IMO, it is a damned shame to spend as much on a
few hours of festivities as it would cost for a good down payment on a
house.

Nancy Young > wrote:

>Ed Pawlowski wrote:

>> "sf" > wrote in

>>> I've never understood the concept of taking out a loan to finance a
>>> wedding.

>> The son of a friend of mine did. The loan terms were a year longer
>> than the marriage lasted too.

>I think sometimes parents feel embarrassed if they can't throw
>the wedding of their daughter's dreams so they make it look
>like they can.

I also believe that money is fungible. Borrowing money for
a wedding is no different than borrowing money for any other
non-absolutely-necessary expense. A high-end wedding costs the
same as a high-end motor vehicle, last I checked; neither
is a necessity, and each is likely to lose value unless
it's a classic.

Steve

On Fri, 28 May 2010 21:39:25 -0700, sf > wrote:

>On Fri, 28 May 2010 21:34:38 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:
>
>> Cheryl wrote:
>>
>>
>> > What she didn't say was if they had to pay off a mortgage or two or
>> > three. Selling a house doesn't mean instant income.
>>
>>
>> I hope that she is smarter than one of my former co-workers. When he
>> retired, close to 10 years ago, he still owed $55,000 on his mortgage.
>> He bought the house in the mid 70s and it was probably not worth more
>> than $40,000 at the time, but he had taken out mortgages on it to pay
>> for his daughters' weddings.
>
>I've never understood the concept of taking out a loan to finance a
>wedding.

A perfect indicater that the couple can't afford marriage. I think
that nowadays especially in order to qualify for a marraige licence a
couple should have to place $50,000 into an endowment fund that
neither can touch until their 25th wedding anniversary... if they
divorce it goes to the State.

On 5/29/2010 6:40 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> "sf" > wrote in
>>
>> I've never understood the concept of taking out a loan to finance a
>> wedding.
>
> The son of a friend of mine did. The loan terms were a year longer than
> the marriage lasted too.

I borrowed ten bucks from my wife to pay for the marriage license. Does
that count?

On 5/29/2010 8:48 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> sf wrote:
>
>>> I hope that she is smarter than one of my former co-workers. When he
>>> retired, close to 10 years ago, he still owed $55,000 on his
>>> mortgage. He bought the house in the mid 70s and it was probably not
>>> worth more than $40,000 at the time, but he had taken out mortgages
>>> on it to pay for his daughters' weddings.
>>
>> I've never understood the concept of taking out a loan to finance a
>> wedding.
>
>
> Some people feel it is important to treat their daughters like
> princesses for a day. IMO, it is a damned shame to spend as much on a
> few hours of festivities as it would cost for a good down payment on a
> house.
>
I've a friend whose wife insisted he spend tons of money on their
daughters wedding. My friend spoke to the daughter about it and offered
her ten grand to elope. She did and used the money to put a down payment
on their first house. The young couples first child will be thirty in
June and they live in a paid for house. I wish someone had made me such
an offer.

Of course our wedding was very simple and cost very little. Makes more
sense than spending a ton for something that might not last nowadays.

George Shirley > wrote:

>I've a friend whose wife insisted he spend tons of money on their
>daughters wedding. My friend spoke to the daughter about it and offered
>her ten grand to elope.

This sounds like a real... collaborative process your friend
and his wife use to decide how to spend their money.

I hope there wasn't too big a fight afterwards.


Steve

On 5/29/2010 10:47 AM, Steve Pope wrote:
> George > wrote:
>
>> I've a friend whose wife insisted he spend tons of money on their
>> daughters wedding. My friend spoke to the daughter about it and offered
>> her ten grand to elope.
>
> This sounds like a real... collaborative process your friend
> and his wife use to decide how to spend their money.
>
> I hope there wasn't too big a fight afterwards.
>
>
> Steve

No divorce but a helluva big fight. I think the momma was disappointed
she couldn't one up her friends and their daughters weddings. We went to
one of those at the diocesan cathedral and then to a large rental hall.
Father of that bride told me later it was $26K for everything and he was
really ****ed. I'm different, I would not have paid for a thing at that
price.

Our daughter paid for her own wedding, made her own dress, arranged
everything. We were against her marrying the man she divorced eight
years later and refused to pay for anything. We did go to the wedding
though. No dinner, no dancing, bride and groom drove off to the mobile
home they had rented and went back to work and school the next day.

George Shirley > wrote:

>On 5/29/2010 10:47 AM, Steve Pope wrote:

>> George > wrote:

>>> I've a friend whose wife insisted he spend tons of money on their
>>> daughters wedding. My friend spoke to the daughter about it and offered
>>> her ten grand to elope.

>> This sounds like a real... collaborative process your friend
>> and his wife use to decide how to spend their money.

>> I hope there wasn't too big a fight afterwards.

>No divorce but a helluva big fight. I think the momma was disappointed
>she couldn't one up her friends and their daughters weddings.

Well, that could be, or it could be the mother of the bride
felt a simple desire for the social enjoyment of a big wedding and
was willing to pay for it, and was hoping this was possible rather
than having the dude bribe his way out of it.

Really, people can conduct their marriages (almost) however they
want, but in many relationship it's very important to come
to agreement on any such items of major spending; and not
subvert and manipulate which it sounds like what your friend did.

Steve

On Sat, 29 May 2010 09:16:32 -0400, "Nancy Young"
> wrote:

> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> > "sf" > wrote in
> >>
> >> I've never understood the concept of taking out a loan to finance a
> >> wedding.
> >
> > The son of a friend of mine did. The loan terms were a year longer
> > than the marriage lasted too.
>
> I think sometimes parents feel embarrassed if they can't throw
> the wedding of their daughter's dreams so they make it look
> like they can.
>

Somebody put those ideas into their daughter's head or else they live
in Fantasy Land all the time. When the rubber meets the road, put up
the basic amount for the wedding and let DD pay for her own upgrades.
If she can't afford them in cash, then maybe she should rethink her
grand plans. It's only one day and you're not going to wear that
dress ever again, honey. Want a different dress to wear at the
reception? Buy it yourself.


--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

On Sat, 29 May 2010 14:16:23 +0000 (UTC),
(Steve Pope) wrote:

> A high-end wedding costs the
> same as a high-end motor vehicle, last I checked; neither
> is a necessity, and each is likely to lose value unless
> it's a classic.

Play your cards right and you can recoup more from a high end vehicle
than you can get from used wedding goods.

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

On Sat, 29 May 2010 10:40:06 -0500, George Shirley
> wrote:

> On 5/29/2010 6:40 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> >
> > "sf" > wrote in
> >>
> >> I've never understood the concept of taking out a loan to finance a
> >> wedding.
> >
> > The son of a friend of mine did. The loan terms were a year longer than
> > the marriage lasted too.
>
> I borrowed ten bucks from my wife to pay for the marriage license. Does
> that count?

At least one of you could afford it.

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

On Sat, 29 May 2010 09:48:10 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> sf wrote:
>
> >> I hope that she is smarter than one of my former co-workers. When he
> >> retired, close to 10 years ago, he still owed $55,000 on his mortgage.
> >> He bought the house in the mid 70s and it was probably not worth more
> >> than $40,000 at the time, but he had taken out mortgages on it to pay
> >> for his daughters' weddings.
> >
> > I've never understood the concept of taking out a loan to finance a
> > wedding.
>
>
> Some people feel it is important to treat their daughters like
> princesses for a day. IMO, it is a damned shame to spend as much on a
> few hours of festivities as it would cost for a good down payment on a
> house.

DITTO!

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

On Sat, 29 May 2010 07:40:50 -0400, "Ed Pawlowski"
> wrote:

>
> "sf" > wrote in
> >
> > I've never understood the concept of taking out a loan to finance a
> > wedding.
>
> The son of a friend of mine did. The loan terms were a year longer than the
> marriage lasted too.

I believe it. That type of wedding usually comes across like more of
a coronation than a marriage to me... Daddy's little princess etc.
The bride is self-centered and believes all the "it's her day" BS
she's ever heard. Save your money for the divorce.

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

"Ed Pawlowski" > ha scritto nel messaggio
> "sf" > wrote in
>>
>> I've never understood the concept of taking out a loan to finance a
>> wedding.
>
> The son of a friend of mine did. The loan terms were a year longer than
> the marriage lasted too.

Is it any wonder that people who can't settle for the dress they can afford,
the flowers they can afford and the meal they can afford, return from their
"dream" honeymoon and find they don't particularly like this imperfect human
being they got, either.

On Fri, 28 May 2010 19:15:52 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>
>> ohnoes!!! c.c. is ****ing the handyman!!!
>
> Yup. Every chance I get...

he's a lucky dog.

your pal,
blake

On Fri, 28 May 2010 16:02:40 -0400, brooklyn1 wrote:

> On Fri, 28 May 2010 19:15:52 +0200, ChattyCathy
> > wrote:
>
>>blake murphy wrote:
>>
>>> ohnoes!!! c.c. is ****ing the handyman!!!
>>
>>Yup. Every chance I get...
>
> So would the mick for free room and board... if only he was
> desireable. LOL

unlike you, my sexual encounters are not paid transactions. and in your
case, we can all guess the direction of the cash flow.

blake

On Fri, 28 May 2010 19:57:09 -0400, brooklyn1 wrote:
>
> This is me in my yard:
> http://i47.tinypic.com/21ag02t.jpg

nice skirt.

blake

On Fri, 28 May 2010 21:34:38 -0400, Dave Smith wrote:

> Cheryl wrote:
>
>> What she didn't say was if they had to pay off a mortgage or two or
>> three. Selling a house doesn't mean instant income.
>
> I hope that she is smarter than one of my former co-workers. When he
> retired, close to 10 years ago, he still owed $55,000 on his mortgage.
> He bought the house in the mid 70s and it was probably not worth more
> than $40,000 at the time, but he had taken out mortgages on it to pay
> for his daughters' weddings.

yikes! i hope at least the daughters are still married.

your pal,
blake

On Fri, 28 May 2010 21:39:25 -0700, sf wrote:

> On Fri, 28 May 2010 21:34:38 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> Cheryl wrote:
>>
>>> What she didn't say was if they had to pay off a mortgage or two or
>>> three. Selling a house doesn't mean instant income.
>>
>> I hope that she is smarter than one of my former co-workers. When he
>> retired, close to 10 years ago, he still owed $55,000 on his mortgage.
>> He bought the house in the mid 70s and it was probably not worth more
>> than $40,000 at the time, but he had taken out mortgages on it to pay
>> for his daughters' weddings.
>
> I've never understood the concept of taking out a loan to finance a
> wedding.

it's weird. especially since some BYOB blowout party would be more fun.

your pal,
blake

On Sat, 29 May 2010 14:16:23 +0000 (UTC), Steve Pope wrote:

> Nancy Young > wrote:
>
>>Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>>> "sf" > wrote in
>
>>>> I've never understood the concept of taking out a loan to finance a
>>>> wedding.
>
>>> The son of a friend of mine did. The loan terms were a year longer
>>> than the marriage lasted too.
>
>>I think sometimes parents feel embarrassed if they can't throw
>>the wedding of their daughter's dreams so they make it look
>>like they can.
>
> I also believe that money is fungible. Borrowing money for
> a wedding is no different than borrowing money for any other
> non-absolutely-necessary expense. A high-end wedding costs the
> same as a high-end motor vehicle, last I checked; neither
> is a necessity, and each is likely to lose value unless
> it's a classic.
>
> Steve

nice turn of phrase there, steve.

your pal,
blake

Giusi wrote:

> Is it any wonder that people who can't settle for the dress they can afford,
> the flowers they can afford and the meal they can afford, return from their
> "dream" honeymoon and find they don't particularly like this imperfect human
> being they got, either.


Some people have no money smarts. My nephew just got married a few
months ago. He and his wife are marginally employed and don't have much
money, except for tattoos. They used wedding present money to fly out to
Edmonton to visit her brother.... for two days. Hardly worth flying
close to 3,000 for three days IMO. Last week she posted a picture of
her newest tattoo on FaceBook, a tree that covers most of the left side
of her back. Two days later she posed about needing to come up with
$22,000 for tuition. I must be different, aside from my personal
aversion to tattoos..... trailer trash artwork, I would be worrying
about tuition before I spent a lot of money on a tattoo.

On Sat, 29 May 2010 11:00:24 -0400, brooklyn1 wrote:

> On Fri, 28 May 2010 21:39:25 -0700, sf > wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 28 May 2010 21:34:38 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:
>>
>>> Cheryl wrote:
>>>
>>> > What she didn't say was if they had to pay off a mortgage or two or
>>> > three. Selling a house doesn't mean instant income.
>>>
>>> I hope that she is smarter than one of my former co-workers. When he
>>> retired, close to 10 years ago, he still owed $55,000 on his mortgage.
>>> He bought the house in the mid 70s and it was probably not worth more
>>> than $40,000 at the time, but he had taken out mortgages on it to pay
>>> for his daughters' weddings.
>>
>>I've never understood the concept of taking out a loan to finance a
>>wedding.
>
> A perfect indicater that the couple can't afford marriage. I think
> that nowadays especially in order to qualify for a marraige licence a
> couple should have to place $50,000 into an endowment fund that
> neither can touch until their 25th wedding anniversary... if they
> divorce it goes to the State.

fruitcake. think your parents could have managed that? or did they even
bother to get married?

even if they did, i doubt it would have kept your dad from splitting.

blake

sf wrote:

>> There were about 150 guests, so it was probably at least $30,000 just
>> for the reception, not to mention limo, photographer, flowers, DJ etc.
>> The couple is now going through a divorce.
>
> They probably had a lot of money issues too.


I don't think so. Daddy is quite wealthy. The groom does well in
advertising and the bride is a forensic accountant.

> $150 per plate is standard for a decent reception (not extravagant)
> here. I don't believe in sit down dinners or even buffets for
> weddings, but it's the fashion. My attitude is - give them lots of
> hors d'oeuvres with an open bar & some music; and call it a day.

That's what we had. It was an early afternoon wedding, a marquis tent in
the back yard with hors d'ovres and drinks. People still tell us how
much they enjoyed it.


> I also think wedding gifts are way too extravagant. Why is the bride
> asking for such expensive china and silver when she doesn't have a pot
> to p*ss in? Fortunately, it seems like the tide is turning because
> the registry lists for the last couple of weddings were very practical
> and most of the choices were not at all expensive.


I have no problem with registries for good china, crystal and silverware
so that guests can contribute to their collection, but registries are
going overboard these days. They are nothing less than a wish list and
IMO much too demanding.

Dave Smith > wrote:

> Some people have no money smarts. My nephew just got married
> a few months ago. He and his wife are marginally employed and
> don't have much money, except for tattoos. They used wedding
> present money to fly out to Edmonton to visit her brother.... for
> two days. Hardly worth flying close to 3,000 for three days IMO.

> Last week she posted a picture of her newest tattoo on
> FaceBook, a tree that covers most of the left side of her
> back. Two days later she posed about needing to come up with
> $22,000 for tuition. I must be different, aside from my personal
> aversion to tattoos..... trailer trash artwork, I would be
> worrying about tuition before I spent a lot of money on a tattoo.

One thing that was pointed out to me that I hadn't intuited
was that tattoos indicate "access to wealth that nobody can
take away from you"... unlike a fancy car it can't be stolen
or repossessed. A large tattoo means you at one point either
had enough money to pay for it, or were worth that much to
somebody else.


Steve

On Sat, 29 May 2010 14:34:44 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> Last week she posted a picture of
> her newest tattoo on FaceBook, a tree that covers most of the left side
> of her back. Two days later she posed about needing to come up with
> $22,000 for tuition. I must be different, aside from my personal
> aversion to tattoos..... trailer trash artwork, I would be worrying
> about tuition before I spent a lot of money on a tattoo.

Money grows on trees, doesn't it???

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

On Sat, 29 May 2010 18:56:24 +0000 (UTC),
(Steve Pope) wrote:

>
> One thing that was pointed out to me that I hadn't intuited
> was that tattoos indicate "access to wealth that nobody can
> take away from you"... unlike a fancy car it can't be stolen
> or repossessed. A large tattoo means you at one point either
> had enough money to pay for it, or were worth that much to
> somebody else.

What a crock of sh*t - and you bought it?

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

On Sat, 29 May 2010 14:38:15 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> sf wrote:
>
> >> There were about 150 guests, so it was probably at least $30,000 just
> >> for the reception, not to mention limo, photographer, flowers, DJ etc.
> >> The couple is now going through a divorce.
> >
> > They probably had a lot of money issues too.
>
>
> I don't think so. Daddy is quite wealthy. The groom does well in
> advertising and the bride is a forensic accountant.
>

All of the above doesn't make them good at handling their own money
and staying afloat on their own.

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

sf > wrote:

>On Sat, 29 May 2010 18:56:24 +0000 (UTC),

>> One thing that was pointed out to me that I hadn't intuited
>> was that tattoos indicate "access to wealth that nobody can
>> take away from you"... unlike a fancy car it can't be stolen
>> or repossessed. A large tattoo means you at one point either
>> had enough money to pay for it, or were worth that much to
>> somebody else.

>What a crock of sh*t - and you bought it?

I believe it in fact represents the thinking of some people.

Whether it's a crock or not, I have no particular opinion, but
most/all status symbols are a crock...

Steve

On Sat, 29 May 2010 19:12:46 +0000 (UTC),
(Steve Pope) wrote:

>Whether it's a crock or not, I have no particular opinion, but
>most/all status symbols are a crock...
>
>Steve

Except some are better crocks than others..like Le Crueset.

Christine

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
.. .
> On Fri, 28 May 2010 19:57:09 -0400, brooklyn1 wrote:
>>
>> This is me in my yard:
>>
>
> nice skirt.
>
> blake

AND, nice coconut Palm trees in Nuu Yawk

Christine Dabney > wrote:

>On Sat, 29 May 2010 19:12:46 +0000 (UTC),

>>Whether it's a crock or not, I have no particular opinion, but
>>most/all status symbols are a crock...

>Except some are better crocks than others..like Le Crueset.

My favorite status symbol ever!


Steve

Nancy Young wrote:
> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> "sf" > wrote in
>>>
>>> I've never understood the concept of taking out a loan to finance a
>>> wedding.
>>
>> The son of a friend of mine did. The loan terms were a year longer
>> than the marriage lasted too.
>
> I think sometimes parents feel embarrassed if they can't throw the
> wedding of their daughter's dreams so they make it look
> like they can.
> nancy


These days an expensive wedding is one of the worst investments a parent
can make. Spending a fortune (when you don't have one) for the prestige
is pretty lame.

They are just as married in a small, simple, close family and best
friends wedding as they are with 500 guests and doves flying.

gloria p