Question:

"_calinda_" <calindasincl…@hotmail.com> wrote in message <news:c3kkha$2851ce$1@ID-178943.news.uni-berlin.de>… > I’d be interested in hearing about how other people who have long > term relationships/marriages handle their money, what works and what > doesn’t.  I know I don’t want to repeat past mistakes.

One reason I brought up the topic is because over time it seems to me that the majority of people in this group feel strongly that married couples *should* mingle their finances. Yesterday we had DF’s mom over and we had an interesting discussion on this very topic. His mom is 15 years younger than his dad. His dad is getting up there in age, and a bit senile. His mother was a career SAHM and has no clue about their finances. She just trusted that her husband had it all together and would take care of it. He gives her $20 per week spending money. She was saying last night that while this has worked great for them both throughout their 40+ marriage, now she is experiencing increasing anxiety over it. She says it works great as long as you trust that the person at the helm steering your financial future is of sound mind. But she frets that her husband is increasingly *not* of sound mind. She is terrified something may happen to him and she’ll not have any idea what bills are outstanding, where the money is kept, etc…. if there even is any money, and worries the money they do have might be completely wiped out by a catastrophic illness. It is likely that she’ll outlive him, and she frets how she will survive financially once he’s gone. She doesn’t know whether he’s set up anything to protect her. Her advice was that no woman, no matter how happily married and how much she trusts her husband, should get lazy and let her husband take over all the finances. Of course I don’t think anyone in this group would disagree with that – just bringing it up here since it’s on my mind today. (And yes – DF plans to intervene and have a long chat with his dad about the benefits of estate planning). jen

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Jennifer wrote: > "Bill in Co." <surly..curmudg…@earthlink.net> wrote in message > news:iMq7c.51361$aT1.13663@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net… >> This is the way it worked for us too, and that worked beautifully >> during our 27 year marriage.   I can’t imagine having separate >> finances, either, just as Tony said. > Mark me down as one more with joint finances.  Everything goes into > our mutual accounts, and I handle all the bill paying and financial > paperwork–both with our personal and our company’s finances (I’m the > bookkeeper).  DH is thrilled not to have to deal with bills and the > like, while I’m very organized and enjoy keeping track of money.  We > have equal amounts of life insurance on each other, too. > We put nearly all our expenses on our joint credit card account, > because the credit card company provides both a monthly rebate and an > excellent year-end report.  We’re both committed to no debt (I pay > the credit card in full each month) and have similar savings and > spending goals, so that works well for us.  For instance, we both put > high priority on sending our kids to what we consider to be a good > private school, and at the same time we concentrate on socking away > funds for our eventual retirement.  We have big plans for our > retirement.  :-D > One positive factor in our life is that we have adequate finances, so > there’s never a problem if he wants to buy something and does, nor is > there an issue if I want to go out and blow some money on something I > like.  When we were first together and didn’t have any money, we > lived very frugally. Now we live more extravagantly, but it’s well > within what we can afford, which IMO is what matters. > I will say that cash can be a little issue, only because we *so* > rarely handle it.  I take a little bit out of the bank now and then > just for scouting fees and other small increments for which I need > cash.  I hate to give cash to DH because then there’s no accounting > of it, and it tends to disappear…but then I’m in this position of > being pissy about cash when I would never do the same in regard to > our overall finances…!  I just can’t stand money going away without > having an understanding of where it went, which is what cash seems to > do in DH’s hands.  :-)

Your system seems to be very similar to ours. I print out Quicken expense, net worth and investment reports for my husband every so often and we go thorough them but  he leaves the day-to-day finances to me. Every so often I sit him down at the computer and run him through the internet banking procedures I have set up and our calendar of expenses. There’s also a master list of all accounts, financial institutions, insurance companies in our file cabinet. If I get run over by a bus tomorrow our affairs are ‘in order’ and he’d be able to pick up it all up with a minimum of effort. We don’t have discretionary money anymore, we just spend what we want and seem to know how much we can. I don’t bother with itemising cash expenses because they tend to be small and items we for which we wouldn’t use a credit card. My husband uses me as a his personal cash point unless I ask him to hit the ATM on the way home because I haven’t been able to get near one. I am curious how couples who don’t have joint finances handle long term savings goals such as investment and retirement funds.  If each have different amounts of money left over at the end of the month where is the incentive to make plans together on what to do with that money for the benefit of the family as a whole? Tai

Response:

"Joy" <joydoesntlikes…@nospam.yahoo.com> wrote in message <news:k5l7c.59937$xL3.35820@bignews1.bellsouth.net>… > Do the two of you actually contribute about the same amount of money toward > your actual cost of living?  

He makes 1/3-1/4 of what I make. A big chunk of his pay goes straight to child support. Then he has another percentage taken out for his retirement. Before we got engaged, I purchased a house in my own name using my own savings as the downpayment. I cover the mortgage, real estate taxes, etc. I also cover the heat & electric. He covers the cable, phone, internet access, and also contributes a little every now and then towards the condo fee which includes water, sewer, insurance, and maintenance/capital expenses. We each cover our own individual gas, tolls, car payments and auto insurance. The only real big ticket items we purchased in the last year were a mattress and a futon, and I bought those. I pay for the weekly big grocery shopping trip, which only includes food and tons of cases of diet coke for him (I won’t touch the stuff – yuck); non-food items such as paper goods, laundry detergent, etc he purchases because he gets a discount. He also pays for any last-minute items we need during the week which is always something – bagels, more milk, etc. And he keeps us stocked in good coffee, wine, beer, and Starbucks Java Chip (cuz that plays into the whole "living pleasurably" thing!).  We each buy our own drugstore things, cuz he prefers to shop and order online and I prefer going to the store. When it comes to buying things for the house, I tend to purchase most of the bigger ticket items, such as a new mattress, whereas he is always picking up supplies at Home Depot like paint, caulk, nails, gardening stuff, etc. He has put a lot of sweat equity into the place. Entertainment expenses (theater tickets, restaurant meals, video rentals, etc) are almost exclusively his domain. He hates having me offer to pay for dinner out, although I do manage to fight successfully for the check on occasions. Most of the time, however, it’s his treat and he does tend to be quite generous in this regard. I pay for all expenses relating to my children, including daycare, camp, school supplies, clothing, piano lessons, etc, etc. All in all, I think it works out pretty fairly from an ability to pay/proportion standpoint. > Everybody is different, I suppose, but I’d be a > little uncomfortable just because of my past experience.  When I was > married, I too, paid far and away the majority of the costs to live – I paid > the mortgage, utilities, etc.  My ex, on the other hand, spent all his money > on living pleasurably – which for him meant drinking in bars, buying pot to > smoke, eating out a lot, and buying himself the occasional expensive toy.

DF very rarely buys any expensive toys. He’s got a modest, used car and has no ambition to own something flashier. Other than his two robots, he’s not really a gadget guy. He is quite frugal by nature and would be even if he won the lottery; dumpster diving and coupon clipping is more like a hobby to him. His indulgences, OTOH, are entertainment-related; he loves going to restaurants and attending the theater. He doesn’t do drugs. Any drinking in bars, eating out, going out is almost always shared with me. He doesn’t like to go out without me. > You can bet that I resented that.  I wound up unable to buy things for > myself, because I was paying the bills, while he had money to blow. You’d > want to make sure you don’t wind up feeling the same way.

No, on the contrary I feel more guilty that his footing what he does foot enables me to have more money than I have ever had. I am looking into investments for the extra. I realize that if we weren’t together and I wasn’t benefiting from his additional paycheck, I wouldn’t be able to save as much as I am currently saving. Money would be a lot more tight, and I wouldn’t be able to enjoy the sort of extra things he tends to pay for. jen

Response:

shinypenny wrote: > "_calinda_" <calindasincl…@hotmail.com> wrote in message > <news:c3kkha$2851ce$1@ID-178943.news.uni-berlin.de>… >> I’d be interested in hearing about how other people who have long >> term relationships/marriages handle their money, what works and what >> doesn’t.  I know I don’t want to repeat past mistakes. > One reason I brought up the topic is because over time it seems to me > that the majority of people in this group feel strongly that married > couples *should* mingle their finances.

IF you have a responsible partner.    (And if you don’t, well, I won’t go there.  

Response:

"Jennifer" <JenPam2…@yahoo.com> wrote in message <news:nqGdnXScy8xRNsPdRVn-vg@comcast.com>… > "Bill in Co." <surly..curmudg…@earthlink.net> wrote in message > news:iMq7c.51361$aT1.13663@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net… > > This is the way it worked for us too, and that worked beautifully during >  our 27 > > year marriage.   I can’t imagine having separate finances, either, just as >  Tony > > said. > Mark me down as one more with joint finances.  Everything goes into our > mutual accounts, and I handle all the bill paying and financial > paperwork–both with our personal and our company’s finances (I’m the > bookkeeper).  DH is thrilled not to have to deal with bills and the like, > while I’m very organized and enjoy keeping track of money.  

See, I just know that if we put everything into a joint account, I’d get lazy and let DF take over the bill paying, because I hate doing it and he doesn’t mind it. I guess I don’t want to let myself get lazy like that. It’s important to me to be on top of such things. > For instance, we both put high priority on sending our kids to what we > consider to be a good private school,

Between us we have four college educations to pay for (my two kids and his two kids). But we disagree on what percentage a parent *owes* their children, and how much the child should be expected to contribute. I am aiming to be able to cover the majority, if not all, of my kids’ educations – I don’t like the thought of them starting their careers with debt hanging over their heads. If they pay for anything it will be books and misc things like entertainment expenses. DF, OTOH, feels it’s more important to put his extra savings into his retirement, as the kids can always get scholarships, loans, etc, just as he did. He feels it’s good for them to foot their own bill, as they’ll appreciate it all the more. > and at the same time we concentrate on > socking away funds for our eventual retirement.  We have big plans for our > retirement.  :-D

He and I both have our individual retirement accounts that we’ve been contributing to and continue to contribute to. He puts in a greater percentage of his pay to retirement than I do, but since I make three times as much as he does, it evens out. We are both on track to retire in good shape, whether we’re together or not. > One positive factor in our life is that we have adequate finances, so > there’s never a problem if he wants to buy something and does, nor is there > an issue if I want to go out and blow some money on something I like.

Yes, that’s the situation we’re in, too. > When > we were first together and didn’t have any money, we lived very frugally. > Now we live more extravagantly, but it’s well within what we can afford, > which IMO is what matters. > I will say that cash can be a little issue, only because we *so* rarely > handle it.  I take a little bit out of the bank now and then just for > scouting fees and other small increments for which I need cash.  I hate to > give cash to DH because then there’s no accounting of it, and it tends to > disappear…but then I’m in this position of being pissy about cash when I > would never do the same in regard to our overall finances…!  I just can’t > stand money going away without having an understanding of where it went, > which is what cash seems to do in DH’s hands.  :-)

We use our ATM cards for almost every thing – helps with tracking of where the money goes. Of course you still need a bit in the wallet at all times for incidentals and emergencies. Just this morning DF slipped a $20 in my wallet since he knew I had nothing. He says he can’t stand the thought of me driving 50 miles to work without any cash in my wallet. jen

Response:

Doug Anderson wrote: > In our case it is pretty easy since we got married relatively young > and had very little then.

Same here- we were 21 & 22 when we married, I supported the two of us (barely but still) as he was fresh out of college. >I can imagine thinking differently if I was > in a relationship that began when I was 35 or 40, I suppose, but it > seems easier not to think about what is whose, and what is fair.

That’s what we’ll be dealing with if we do end up co-mingling finances/expenses.  I’m 44, he’s 54.  We both have older children (mine 18 & 16 – his 24 & 20).  College expenses for three of them are either in effect or looming on the horizon.  He’s also looking at retirement much sooner than I and that’s a consideration as well. Then there will be somewhat of a discrepancy of what we’ll each be bringing into the relationship as  far as finances;  I’ll have money from the sale of my home, though his earning capacity is higher.  I would hate for this to become such a problem that it drives a wedge, but I can see how these kinds of issues can become problems for some couples.  I’m probably also worrying too much, lol. Cal~

Response:

_calinda_ wrote: > Same here- we were 21 & 22 when we married, I supported the two of > us (barely but still) as he was fresh out of college.

Umm just to clarify.. I was speaking of my former husband here… and below that I was speaking of my SO  :-)  Sorry for any confusion. Cal~

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -"_calinda_" <calindasincl…@hotmail.com> writes: > Doug Anderson wrote: > > In our case it is pretty easy since we got married relatively > young > > and had very little then. > Same here- we were 21 & 22 when we married, I supported the two of > us (barely but still) as he was fresh out of college. > >I can imagine thinking differently if I was > > in a relationship that began when I was 35 or 40, I suppose, but > it > > seems easier not to think about what is whose, and what is fair. > That’s what we’ll be dealing with if we do end up co-mingling > finances/expenses.  I’m 44, he’s 54.  We both have older children > (mine 18 & 16 – his 24 & 20).  College expenses for three of them > are either in effect or looming on the horizon.  He’s also looking > at retirement much sooner than I and that’s a consideration as well. > Then there will be somewhat of a discrepancy of what we’ll each be > bringing into the relationship as  far as finances;  I’ll have money > from the sale of my home, though his earning capacity is higher.  I > would hate for this to become such a problem that it drives a wedge, > but I can see how these kinds of issues can become problems for some > couples.  I’m probably also worrying too much, lol.

I think I’d spend some time worrying about it too if I were you. If you do in fact spend the rest of your lives together it may not matter too much, but there is the possibility that you’ll divorce, and it looks like you both potentially could have things to lose in that situation.

Response:

shinypenny0…@yahoo.com (shinypenny) writes: > "_calinda_" <calindasincl…@hotmail.com> wrote in message <news:c3kkha$2851ce$1@ID-178943.news.uni-berlin.de>… > > I’d be interested in hearing about how other people who have long > > term relationships/marriages handle their money, what works and what > > doesn’t.  I know I don’t want to repeat past mistakes. > One reason I brought up the topic is because over time it seems to me > that the majority of people in this group feel strongly that married > couples *should* mingle their finances.

I don’t know about "should," but I’m very happy not to be thinking about "mine" and "thine" in my own marriage. In our case it is pretty easy since we got married relatively young and had very little then.  I can imagine thinking differently if I was in a relationship that began when I was 35 or 40, I suppose, but it seems easier not to think about what is whose, and what is fair. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Yesterday we had DF’s mom over and we had an interesting discussion on > this very topic. His mom is 15 years younger than his dad. His dad is > getting up there in age, and a bit senile. His mother was a career > SAHM and has no clue about their finances. She just trusted that her > husband had it all together and would take care of it. He gives her > $20 per week spending money. > She was saying last night that while this has worked great for them > both throughout their 40+ marriage, now she is experiencing increasing > anxiety over it. She says it works great as long as you trust that the > person at the helm steering your financial future is of sound mind. > But she frets that her husband is increasingly *not* of sound mind. > She is terrified something may happen to him and she’ll not have any > idea what bills are outstanding, where the money is kept, etc…. if > there even is any money, and worries the money they do have might be > completely wiped out by a catastrophic illness. It is likely that > she’ll outlive him, and she frets how she will survive financially > once he’s gone. She doesn’t know whether he’s set up anything to > protect her. > Her advice was that no woman, no matter how happily married and how > much she trusts her husband, should get lazy and let her husband take > over all the finances.

Well, it seems like good advice for both partners in a marriage to understand the general picture of their financial situation (though not necessarily all the fine details). My wife’s parents were in a somewhat similar situation.  My mother-in-law just found herself gradually needing to take over more and more financial details as her husband stopped doing them. Fortunately she somehow knew enough to figure out what she needed to figure out at the time!

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Joy wrote: > "_calinda_" <calindasincl…@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:c3kkha$2851ce$1@ID-178943.news.uni-berlin.de… >> Finances were one of many problems in my former marriage.  My ex is >> a CFO, made bucket loads of money but didn’t want to deal with the >> household finances.  Said after dealing with millions of dollars >> every day, he found it depressing to handling our "piddly little >> accounts". >> I found that I resented being forced to handle the bill paying and >> accounting part of the equation > I’m curious, Cal, was it the actual bill paying activity that you > resented, or was it the fact that he had the ability to choose > whether or not to take on that job, and you didn’t?  This was a > problem in my marriage – not for bill paying (which I actually wanted > to do myself), but for other tasks.  I always seemed to be the > default person to deal with anything my ex didn’t feel like dealing > with – he could decide not to do a task if he didn’t want to, but I > didn’t get to choose, I was just stuck with it.  Does that make > sense?  I’m wondering if something like that was the actual source of > your resentment.

Good question Joy.  I’ve never really thought about why I resented it, but perhaps you’ve hit part of it.  Yes, he did get to choose which tasks he’d do, and anything else was left to me whether I wanted that task or not.  I had a great deal of resentment buried deep down during the last decade of my marriage.  It’s taken me a long time to even allow myself to see it though, say nothing to analyze it. I am not a natural ‘bookkeeper’ either, these types of tasks I find difficult to stay on top of to this day.  It did come easy to him, but he just couldn’t be bothered.  But, we would still fight over how the money was spent or should’ve been spent..(or not spent as the case may be).  And I wanted to scream at him that if he was so concerned/interested why the hell didn’t he show it more than once a year at tax time?  We were locked in a power struggle. Though my SO and I are no where near ready to even consider co-mingling our finances, I think this thread has been quite helpful in pointing out some things for me.  (Thanks for starting it Jen )  For starters I realize that my problem wasn’t a finance issue as much as learning how to make the ‘business side’ of a relationship work for both partners. Cal~

Response:

Hiya, new guy here.  I have to say that your reasoning is exactly why my wife and I maintain separate accounts.  I make about twice what she does, and while we split the utility type bills mostly in half, I pay 2/3 of the mortgage.  Because of that, I don’t feel I need to justify or explain where I spend my cash.  If she needs something and is running short, I give her the cash.  But if I want to buy a high priced item I don’t think I need to justify it to her, or anyone else for that matter.  The bills are always paid and then some.  And she is very well taken care of.  Seems to work for us. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Jennifer wrote: >"Bill in Co." <surly..curmudg…@earthlink.net> wrote in message >news:iMq7c.51361$aT1.13663@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net… >>This is the way it worked for us too, and that worked beautifully during >our 27 >>year marriage.   I can’t imagine having separate finances, either, just as >Tony >>said. >Mark me down as one more with joint finances.  Everything goes into our >mutual accounts, and I handle all the bill paying and financial >paperwork–both with our personal and our company’s finances (I’m the >bookkeeper).  DH is thrilled not to have to deal with bills and the like, >while I’m very organized and enjoy keeping track of money.  We have equal >amounts of life insurance on each other, too. >We put nearly all our expenses on our joint credit card account, because the >credit card company provides both a monthly rebate and an excellent year-end >report.  We’re both committed to no debt (I pay the credit card in full each >month) and have similar savings and spending goals, so that works well for >us.  For instance, we both put high priority on sending our kids to what we >consider to be a good private school, and at the same time we concentrate on >socking away funds for our eventual retirement.  We have big plans for our >retirement.  :-D >One positive factor in our life is that we have adequate finances, so >there’s never a problem if he wants to buy something and does, nor is there >an issue if I want to go out and blow some money on something I like.  When >we were first together and didn’t have any money, we lived very frugally. >Now we live more extravagantly, but it’s well within what we can afford, >which IMO is what matters. >I will say that cash can be a little issue, only because we *so* rarely >handle it.  I take a little bit out of the bank now and then just for >scouting fees and other small increments for which I need cash.  I hate to >give cash to DH because then there’s no accounting of it, and it tends to >disappear…but then I’m in this position of being pissy about cash when I >would never do the same in regard to our overall finances…!  I just can’t >stand money going away without having an understanding of where it went, >which is what cash seems to do in DH’s hands.  :-) >Jennifer

Response:

whans…@aol.com (WhansaMi) wrote in message <news:20040321120049.29635.00001689@mb-m21.aol.com>… > Early on, I discovered that DH was bad about making payments on time, and I’d > be furious when I’d find out that we’d wasted $25 bucks because he was late. > So, he was delegated the "fixed amount" bills (the mortgages, the car payments, > etc.)  that he could set up ahead of time on direct withdraw, and never have to > look at again.  I, OTOH, took over all those that had variable amounts.  

This would never be an issue with either one of us, since we both use online bill paying systems that allow you to specify the date to pay. Just set it up once a bill is rec’d and forget about it. > I think as long as you are invested in the idea that "quality of life items" > are a reasonable expenditure, you’ll be fine.  The problem will be if you find > that you are disagreeing with the types or quantity of these items; then you > may have to renegotiate.

I don’t think we disagree about what is reasonable and what is not. We’re pretty much in synch on that one. jen

Response:

"Cari{P}" <car…@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:ptidnZo-jKJo9MPdRVn-uA@comcast.com… > _calinda_ wrote: > > My SO and I do not live together and we don’t mingle our money at > > this time.   What I see as an ideal is for a couple to make the time > > to sit down and do the bill payments/accounting part as a team and > > to take that time to discuss what has worked and what hasn’t in > > regards to spending and to set goals together for where to go next > > financially.  At the same time, this seems to be an unrealistic > > situation for real life. > This is exactly how my parents have operated for the last almost 40 > years.  Every Sunday evening they "do the bills."  It’s amazing.  :) > Never worked for DH and myself

Ooooh, DH couldn’t care less about the bills; he’s just happy they’re paid, lol.  Once in a while I sit down with him and say, this is how much we have. Other than that, I’m the only one who touches the checkbook. Jennifer

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Jennifer wrote: > "Cari{P}" <car…@comcast.net> wrote in message > news:ptidnZo-jKJo9MPdRVn-uA@comcast.com… >>_calinda_ wrote: >>>My SO and I do not live together and we don’t mingle our money at >>>this time.   What I see as an ideal is for a couple to make the time >>>to sit down and do the bill payments/accounting part as a team and >>>to take that time to discuss what has worked and what hasn’t in >>>regards to spending and to set goals together for where to go next >>>financially.  At the same time, this seems to be an unrealistic >>>situation for real life. >>This is exactly how my parents have operated for the last almost 40 >>years.  Every Sunday evening they "do the bills."  It’s amazing.  :) >>Never worked for DH and myself > Ooooh, DH couldn’t care less about the bills; he’s just happy they’re paid, > lol.  Once in a while I sit down with him and say, this is how much we have. > Other than that, I’m the only one who touches the checkbook. > Jennifer

*laughs*  See.. that’s how it is in the relationship I have with my husband.  I handle all of our finances and any purchases are made with mutual agreement. This would probably never work for my parents.  Heh.

Response:

"Bill in Co." <surly..curmudg…@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:iMq7c.51361$aT1.13663@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net… > This is the way it worked for us too, and that worked beautifully during our 27 > year marriage.   I can’t imagine having separate finances, either, just as Tony > said.

Mark me down as one more with joint finances.  Everything goes into our mutual accounts, and I handle all the bill paying and financial paperwork–both with our personal and our company’s finances (I’m the bookkeeper).  DH is thrilled not to have to deal with bills and the like, while I’m very organized and enjoy keeping track of money.  We have equal amounts of life insurance on each other, too. We put nearly all our expenses on our joint credit card account, because the credit card company provides both a monthly rebate and an excellent year-end report.  We’re both committed to no debt (I pay the credit card in full each month) and have similar savings and spending goals, so that works well for us.  For instance, we both put high priority on sending our kids to what we consider to be a good private school, and at the same time we concentrate on socking away funds for our eventual retirement.  We have big plans for our retirement.  :-D One positive factor in our life is that we have adequate finances, so there’s never a problem if he wants to buy something and does, nor is there an issue if I want to go out and blow some money on something I like.  When we were first together and didn’t have any money, we lived very frugally. Now we live more extravagantly, but it’s well within what we can afford, which IMO is what matters. I will say that cash can be a little issue, only because we *so* rarely handle it.  I take a little bit out of the bank now and then just for scouting fees and other small increments for which I need cash.  I hate to give cash to DH because then there’s no accounting of it, and it tends to disappear…but then I’m in this position of being pissy about cash when I would never do the same in regard to our overall finances…!  I just can’t stand money going away without having an understanding of where it went, which is what cash seems to do in DH’s hands.  :-) Jennifer

Response:

_calinda_ wrote: > My SO and I do not live together and we don’t mingle our money at > this time.   What I see as an ideal is for a couple to make the time > to sit down and do the bill payments/accounting part as a team and > to take that time to discuss what has worked and what hasn’t in > regards to spending and to set goals together for where to go next > financially.  At the same time, this seems to be an unrealistic > situation for real life.

This is exactly how my parents have operated for the last almost 40 years.  Every Sunday evening they "do the bills."  It’s amazing.  :) Never worked for DH and myself -Cari

Response:

I think I can understand keeping separate *accounts* for "practical" purposes (such as, one partner is not a meticulous record keeper and keeping a single checking account is a nightmare). However, I have a gut feeling that keeping separate completely separate finances (as opposed to just separate "personal" or "spending money" accounts) due to differences in values concerning what money should be spent on, it just a coverup for dealing with those differences. Again, I say this in part because (whatever my financial records look like on paper) I am a cursedly meticulous mental accountant of who pays for what. "shinypenny" <shinypenny0…@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:c8cb5319.0403210813.14bf6e95@posting.google.com… > And he gave two specific examples. > He would like to travel more; I agree that this is something > worthwhile that I would also like to spend money on. And yet he > pointed out that if it were left to me, we’d never go anywhere because > he senses, when push comes to shove, I feel too guilty to indulge in > travel for pleasure’s sake. I think of a different use for that money, > something more practical. So he figures if we’re both going to live > out our dream of traveling the world, it’s going to come from his > income, not mine.

And do you agree that simply keeping his income physically separate from yours is going to stop you from thinking, either before the trip or afterward, "if we hadn’t spent that money, it would have been easier to go ahead and get the roof redone" or "saved a little extra for the kids’ college funds" or whatever? See, I couldn’t "fool" myself that way. There’s A+B amount of household income, and X+Y amount of household expenses, and it doesn’t matter if the money to pay for trip Z comes from an (A+B) common pot or a B separate account, there’s still Z less money to spend on everything else. The separate finances scheme kind of shoves these financial points of difference under the rug, I think, but I would still feel the lumps and resent having t o walk around on them. > Likewise he would like to spend some money on our wedding. Nothing > overly extravagant, but for him it is important to throw a tasteful > party for his friends and family. He doesn’t think this is a waste of > money; on the contrary, he wants to create a memory. I like the idea > on principal, but when push comes to shove, I rationalize to myself > that there’s a better use for the money. So he says he’s been saving > for this, so we can do it right without overreaching what he knows is > my personal comfort zone.

And you don’t resent the fact that he’s putting money away for this expensive wedding that you have not fully agreed to spend money on, and thus having less to contribute to . . . ahem . . . paying his way? > Not to paint him as an extravagant spender who likes to rack up the > debt. He has none and is proud of it. It’s just that it is important > to him to not only live, but to live pleasurably and enjoy his money > while he’s still alive. I like that about him.

If I understand correctly, he has somewhat recently downscaled his income, by choice, due to a career change (if I’m confusing your fiance with someone else, forgive me.) I’m curious, how much your joint household arrangement now enables him to live the lifestyle to which he had become accustomed previously, while giving him the luxury of working a more rewarding, but less well compensated, job? I am not at all implying that he should go back to his old career to "pay his way," by the way. But I *personally* would not be comfortable in a position where I was, essentially, paying the bills for the cost of living, and my partner was paying the bills for "living well." If you "like that about him" (that he spends money on enjoying life) well enough, it seems like you should be able to "put your money where your mouth is" and agree to spending money on living well out of a joint account.

Response:

On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 12:48:23 -0500, _calinda_ <calindasincl…@hotmail.com> wrote:

<Snip> > I’d be interested in hearing about how other people who have long > term relationships/marriages handle their money, what works and what > doesn’t.  I know I don’t want to repeat past mistakes.

All of our money goes into a join account, and my wife handles the paying of the bills.  She and I are given a small weekly allowance to handle our personal "discretionary incidentals".   I find this works best.  If I need to repair something for the house, if it doesn’t go over $25 I don’t have to report it.  If it does, my wife and I talk it over.  On bigger purchases, we come to an agreement on how the money will be spent (if we want a new house like we just bought, or we need a new car…). This works for us.  I can’t imagine having separate finances, everything else is "together". -Tony — "If the grass appears to be greener on the other side of the fence, it’s time to fertilize your lawn!" Want to jump start your marriage?  Consider a Marriage Encounter weekend. Check out http://www.wwme.org for more information.

Response:

On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 13:30:28 -0500, "Joy" <joydoesntlikes…@nospam.yahoo.com> wrote: >Do the two of you actually contribute about the same amount of money toward >your actual cost of living?  Everybody is different, I suppose, but I’d be a >little uncomfortable just because of my past experience.  When I was >married, I too, paid far and away the majority of the costs to live – I paid >the mortgage, utilities, etc.  My ex, on the other hand, spent all his money >on living pleasurably – which for him meant drinking in bars, buying pot to >smoke, eating out a lot, and buying himself the occasional expensive toy. >You can bet that I resented that.  I wound up unable to buy things for >myself, because I was paying the bills, while he had money to blow. You’d >want to make sure you don’t wind up feeling the same way.  I’m sure your >fiancee isn’t going blow his paycheck on beer – but if you don’t agree with >how he does spend it you could wind up resentful, too.

Yes, everyone has their own style. In my case we keep separate accounts. My wife likes to think she is responsible with her money but the truth is she is very much an impulse buyer. She loves gadgets, but is unfortunately a mechanical idiot. Consequently, several times a year she comes home from the store with some new whiz-bang gadget with a big sticker price and very low usefullness. I resent having to be the responsible one, but if she were spending our mingled money I’d resent that even more (I make about 3 times as much as she does). She isn’t going to change so the best I can do is limit the damage.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Tony Miller wrote: > On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 12:48:23 -0500, _calinda_ > <calindasincl…@hotmail.com> wrote: > <Snip> >> I’d be interested in hearing about how other people who have long >> term relationships/marriages handle their money, what works and what >> doesn’t.  I know I don’t want to repeat past mistakes. > All of our money goes into a join account, and my wife handles the paying > of the bills.  She and I are given a small weekly allowance to handle our > personal "discretionary incidentals". > I find this works best.  If I need to repair something for the house, if > it doesn’t go over $25 I don’t have to report it.  If it does, my wife and > I talk it over.  On bigger purchases, we come to an agreement on how the > money will be spent (if we want a new house like we just bought, or we > need a new car…). > This works for us.  I can’t imagine having separate finances, everything > else is "together". > -Tony

This is the way it worked for us too, and that worked beautifully during our 27 year marriage.   I can’t imagine having separate finances, either, just as Tony said.

Response:

"_calinda_" <calindasincl…@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:c3kkha$2851ce$1@ID-178943.news.uni-berlin.de… > Finances were one of many problems in my former marriage.  My ex is > a CFO, made bucket loads of money but didn’t want to deal with the > household finances.  Said after dealing with millions of dollars > every day, he found it depressing to handling our "piddly little > accounts". > I found that I resented being forced to handle the bill paying and > accounting part of the equation

I’m curious, Cal, was it the actual bill paying activity that you resented, or was it the fact that he had the ability to choose whether or not to take on that job, and you didn’t?  This was a problem in my marriage – not for bill paying (which I actually wanted to do myself), but for other tasks.  I always seemed to be the default person to deal with anything my ex didn’t feel like dealing with – he could decide not to do a task if he didn’t want to, but I didn’t get to choose, I was just stuck with it.  Does that make sense?  I’m wondering if something like that was the actual source of your resentment.

Response:

"shinypenny" <shinypenny0…@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:c8cb5319.0403210813.14bf6e95@posting.google.com… > He said that we have two different financial styles. We are both good > with meeting expenses, saving money for retirement, living frugally > where it counts, and steering clear of debt, and yet we are different > in our disposable spending priorities. He said he has come to the > conclusion that security is much more important to me than to him, and > that if we mingled all our money he suspects I’d find it harder to > part with some of it for the fun things in life like entertainment and > travel. > He said he likes the way we’ve divided the expenses now – I cover all > the costs to live, he covers the costs to live "pleasurably." That was > how he put it.

Do the two of you actually contribute about the same amount of money toward your actual cost of living?  Everybody is different, I suppose, but I’d be a little uncomfortable just because of my past experience.  When I was married, I too, paid far and away the majority of the costs to live – I paid the mortgage, utilities, etc.  My ex, on the other hand, spent all his money on living pleasurably – which for him meant drinking in bars, buying pot to smoke, eating out a lot, and buying himself the occasional expensive toy. You can bet that I resented that.  I wound up unable to buy things for myself, because I was paying the bills, while he had money to blow. You’d want to make sure you don’t wind up feeling the same way.  I’m sure your fiancee isn’t going blow his paycheck on beer – but if you don’t agree with how he does spend it you could wind up resentful, too.

Response:

WhansaMi wrote:

<snipped everything so far,  as I wasn’t sure what to keep but find this topic interesting nonetheless… this type of discussion is why I enjoy reading here!> Finances were one of many problems in my former marriage.  My ex is a CFO, made bucket loads of money but didn’t want to deal with the household finances.  Said after dealing with millions of dollars every day, he found it depressing to handling our "piddly little accounts". I found that I resented being forced to handle the bill paying and accounting part of the equation as well as the fact that his was the final say in anything we bought or did with our money.  I became passive aggressive as a means of dealing with my resentment.  I wasn’t aware of this at that time, this is only something that I’ve realized I was doing only in hindsight.  I let bills slide and accrue late fees, etc.  Some of this was not intentional, as I have ADD, but some of it WAS and I have only lately been able to admit that even to myself. My SO and I do not live together and we don’t mingle our money at this time.   What I see as an ideal is for a couple to make the time to sit down and do the bill payments/accounting part as a team and to take that time to discuss what has worked and what hasn’t in regards to spending and to set goals together for where to go next financially.  At the same time, this seems to be an unrealistic situation for real life. I’d be interested in hearing about how other people who have long term relationships/marriages handle their money, what works and what doesn’t.  I know I don’t want to repeat past mistakes. Cal~

Response:

> He said he has come to the >conclusion that security is much more important to me than to him, and >that if we mingled all our money he suspects I’d find it harder to >part with some of it for the fun things in life like entertainment and >travel.

I’m still half asleep, so maybe I’ll have more to post later, but I have *time* now.  :-) My DH and I do something like this, although it evolved for different reasons — the primary one being that we were both too lazy to close out our individual accounts, open a new one, and reroute all of our direct deposits and such into a joint one!  So what has happened is that we have separate checking accounts, and a mutual savings account.   Early on, I discovered that DH was bad about making payments on time, and I’d be furious when I’d find out that we’d wasted $25 bucks because he was late. So, he was delegated the "fixed amount" bills (the mortgages, the car payments, etc.)  that he could set up ahead of time on direct withdraw, and never have to look at again.  I, OTOH, took over all those that had variable amounts.   Because he makes three times as much as I do, it made sense for him to take over a higher total amount but we still found that I typically was more "flush" at the end of the month, as my bill paying load is significantly lighter.  At first I was giving him a check to balance things out, but later we decided that I was better off keeping the discretionary funds in my account, in no small part because I tend to be less impulsive about spending.  Now, I’m not saying I am a tightwad — I’m not!   But, I tend to spend in $50 increments, whereas he spends in $300 increments.  So, we let the discretionary funds accrue in my account, and spend them together.  If we are buying a big-ticket luxury item, I’ll write the check.  If he runs short because he bought something, I’ll write him a check.  I basically have the job of monitoring the quality of life items. This works for us because he trusts me.  The fact is, if I left today I could take a couple thou in joint assets out of the account, and there wouldn’t be much he could do about it — his name is not on that account.  I know I won’t, and he trusts that I won’t, so there is no anxiety around it.  But, for others, this might not be a viable option. I think as long as you are invested in the idea that "quality of life items" are a reasonable expenditure, you’ll be fine.  The problem will be if you find that you are disagreeing with the types or quantity of these items; then you may have to renegotiate. Sheila

Response:

Bringing this topic up again. DF and I were talking about this again yesterday. I brought it up with him because I was thinking maybe I was only assuming, like me, he wants to keep our finances separate after marriage. Wanted to feel him out some more on it. Here is what he said and I’m curious what the group thinks. He said that we have two different financial styles. We are both good with meeting expenses, saving money for retirement, living frugally where it counts, and steering clear of debt, and yet we are different in our disposable spending priorities. He said he has come to the conclusion that security is much more important to me than to him, and that if we mingled all our money he suspects I’d find it harder to part with some of it for the fun things in life like entertainment and travel. He said he likes the way we’ve divided the expenses now – I cover all the costs to live, he covers the costs to live "pleasurably." That was how he put it. And he gave two specific examples. He would like to travel more; I agree that this is something worthwhile that I would also like to spend money on. And yet he pointed out that if it were left to me, we’d never go anywhere because he senses, when push comes to shove, I feel too guilty to indulge in travel for pleasure’s sake. I think of a different use for that money, something more practical. So he figures if we’re both going to live out our dream of traveling the world, it’s going to come from his income, not mine. Likewise he would like to spend some money on our wedding. Nothing overly extravagant, but for him it is important to throw a tasteful party for his friends and family. He doesn’t think this is a waste of money; on the contrary, he wants to create a memory. I like the idea on principal, but when push comes to shove, I rationalize to myself that there’s a better use for the money. So he says he’s been saving for this, so we can do it right without overreaching what he knows is my personal comfort zone. Not to paint him as an extravagant spender who likes to rack up the debt. He has none and is proud of it. It’s just that it is important to him to not only live, but to live pleasurably and enjoy his money while he’s still alive. I like that about him. jen

Response:

Question:

everytime I rest my palm the pitch changes,

Don’t rest your palm so heavily on the bridge. However, if you’ve convinced yourself that it’s not bad technique, then you can try moving your palm as close to the line between the two support posts. If you rest your hand there, then you shouldn’t rock the trem as much. as well as every time I bend a string

Before I got my tremsetter, I would deal with this by actually rocking my pick hand back toward the back of the bridge, where I’d get more leverage to keep the trem from rocking forward during bends. So, bends became a two-handed deal where, as I bent the string with my fret-hand, my pick-hand would roll back slightly to counter the increased tension in the string(s). I’ve heard mention of a device called a trem-setter. would this help and are they expensive ?

They’re about $50. Yes, they do help. If I ever guy another guitar, it’ll have a floating trem. As soon as I get off of the phone to order the guitar, I’m going to make the call to order the tremsetter for it. They should be standard issue…. they should come pre-installed on all floating-trem guitars (and they ARE on some Ibanezes now… sort of). The tremsetter makes the trem have a certain spot that it "likes" to be. It takes a certain amount of extra tension to get it to budge out of this "home" position. String bends or sloppy picking-hand palm-rest technique aren’t enough to get it to budge. However, it doesn’t contribute too much to the stiffness of the normal operation of the trem. However, tremsetters are very tricky to setup right. Many people buy them, set them up improperly, and then announce that they suck. Personally, it took me about 3 weeks of experimenting and one call to the company before I had it all setup. That was about 11 years ago. I haven’t adjusted it since then and I make SURE that I don’t have to by NOT CHANGING my brand or gauge of strings. In short, a properly adjusted tremsetter will make a WORLD of difference. However, adjusting it is a tricky affair and can take a few weeks of systematic experimentation. However, once you get it right, you won’t have to futz with it again. This shit trem also means its a bastard to tune. You tune one string, and then the tension from tuning the next string pulls the trem down a bit making it close to impossible to tune properly.

Ah… I remember having this problem… 11 years ago. Now, with the trem-setter, I make about 2 or 3 passes through the tuning knobs and I’m ready to rock. Incidentally, if you end up not getting a trem-setter, you can try this: Bring all of the strings up to enough tension so that it starts floating the trem. Then, tune the low-E string artificially high (basically accounting for the fact that it’s going to drop when the other strings are brought up) by about 2 half-steps. In other words, tune it to an F#. Then, do the same for the A-string, but don’t go quite so much over (because you only have four more strings to bring up to pitch). Then, do the same for the D-string… but don’t go quite as much over the proper pitch as you did with the A-string (because now you only have three more strings that are going to be brought up to pitch that you need to account for). Get the idea? Once you get to the high-E, you just tune that to E normally. It’ll probably be chaos at first. However, with a little practice, I was able to tune my pre-tremsetter floating trem in about 3 or 4 passes. The trick is all in accounting for the pitch drop on the first few strings that you tune. And don’t even mention trying to put different gauge strings on the thing.

Why in the world are you changing string gauges? any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Well, you can get a new Ibanez with the cool built-in trem-centering system that they showed at NAMM this year. – Joe

Response:

Thanks Tim! You’ve put a smile on my face Carl

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – It’s not a bad trem. The Ibanez Lo-pro edge (what you have) is (as far as floyd’s go) very stable and reliable. As another poster said, block it up with some wood. Other than that sell the guitar or trade it in for another model that isn’t routed for pull-ups. If you don’t like floyd’s that float then you bought the wrong guitar! If you only bought it recently then I’m sure you could get a deal done with the place you bought it. Daniel C. Hi all.  have an Ibanez RG570EX, which has the supposed best locking trem out of the RG range.. I can’t remember the exact model, but it’s a floating trem which allows you to ‘pull-up’ two whole notes, as well as down obviously. My problem with this is that it is shite. I dont want it to ‘float’. I like floyd roses that are locked tight to the body, with say 4 highly tensioned springs. I dont use the trem at all really, and certainly not for pulling up. What can I do ? everytime I rest my palm the pitch changes, as well as every time I bend a string (really really puts me off picking this thing up) I’ve heard mention of a device called a trem-setter. would this help and are they expensive ? This shit trem also means its a bastard to tune. You tune one string, and then the tension from tuning the next string pulls the trem down a bit making it close to impossible to tune properly. And don’t even mention trying to put different gauge strings on the thing. any advice would be greatly appreciated. I dont play much any more, but bought this thing in the hope that I’d want to pick it up because of its niceness, and this isn’t happening! thanks, Carl Please, reconsider. The Floyd Rose is the 8th Wonder Of The World. As you have obviously selected an electric guitar, you would be SEVERELY restricting yourself, musically, if you were to hamper/replace it in any way. I realize that you don’t play that much anymore, but, what the heck; start by trying to live with it and then progress to the art of trem (because it is an art). I trust that you shall make the right decision Regards, Tim Durban, South Africa

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -It’s not a bad trem. The Ibanez Lo-pro edge (what you have) is (as far as floyd’s go) very stable and reliable. As another poster said, block it up with some wood. Other than that sell the guitar or trade it in for another model that isn’t routed for pull-ups. If you don’t like floyd’s that float then you bought the wrong guitar! If you only bought it recently then I’m sure you could get a deal done with the place you bought it. Daniel C. Hi all.  have an Ibanez RG570EX, which has the supposed best locking trem out of the RG range.. I can’t remember the exact model, but it’s a floating trem which allows you to ‘pull-up’ two whole notes, as well as down obviously. My problem with this is that it is shite. I dont want it to ‘float’. I like floyd roses that are locked tight to the body, with say 4 highly tensioned springs. I dont use the trem at all really, and certainly not for pulling up. What can I do ? everytime I rest my palm the pitch changes, as well as every time I bend a string (really really puts me off picking this thing up) I’ve heard mention of a device called a trem-setter. would this help and are they expensive ? This shit trem also means its a bastard to tune. You tune one string, and then the tension from tuning the next string pulls the trem down a bit making it close to impossible to tune properly. And don’t even mention trying to put different gauge strings on the thing. any advice would be greatly appreciated. I dont play much any more, but bought this thing in the hope that I’d want to pick it up because of its niceness, and this isn’t happening! thanks, Carl

Please, reconsider. The Floyd Rose is the 8th Wonder Of The World. As you have obviously selected an electric guitar, you would be SEVERELY restricting yourself, musically, if you were to hamper/replace it in any way. I realize that you don’t play that much anymore, but, what the heck; start by trying to live with it and then progress to the art of trem (because it is an art). I trust that you shall make the right decision Regards, Tim Durban, South Africa

Response:

Hey I’ve got no problems with Floyd Roses! Hell I love them – I think they look cool and when they’re tensioned up and tight-smack to the body, the strings stay in tune thanks to the locking nut. Just these ‘floating’ ones I hate. My uncle put together a guitar using, I think a Floyd Rose licensed trem made by ESP (or maybe that was the body..) and this thing was fantastic. It was so tight against the body that unless you pushed real hard on the trem-arm, it never moved. And of course there was no up-pull possible because it was flush against the body. This I like. Ibanez ‘floater’ I hate. Thanks for the suggestions so far. I may try the wooden block thing once I’ve read it again and understand what you’re saying more clearly (i’m in a rush to go out now so have only quickly read these replies) once again thanks thus far Carl

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi all.  have an Ibanez RG570EX, which has the supposed best locking trem out of the RG range.. I can’t remember the exact model, but it’s a floating trem which allows you to ‘pull-up’ two whole notes, as well as down obviously. My problem with this is that it is shite. I dont want it to ‘float’. I like floyd roses that are locked tight to the body, with say 4 highly tensioned springs. I dont use the trem at all really, and certainly not for pulling up. What can I do ? everytime I rest my palm the pitch changes, as well as every time I bend a string (really really puts me off picking this thing up) I’ve heard mention of a device called a trem-setter. would this help and are they expensive ? This shit trem also means its a bastard to tune. You tune one string, and then the tension from tuning the next string pulls the trem down a bit making it close to impossible to tune properly. And don’t even mention trying to put different gauge strings on the thing. any advice would be greatly appreciated. I dont play much any more, but bought this thing in the hope that I’d want to pick it up because of its niceness, and this isn’t happening! thanks, Carl

Response:

It’s not a bad trem. The Ibanez Lo-pro edge (what you have) is (as far as floyd’s go) very stable and reliable. As another poster said, block it up with some wood. Other than that sell the guitar or trade it in for another model that isn’t routed for pull-ups. If you don’t like floyd’s that float then you bought the wrong guitar! If you only bought it recently then I’m sure you could get a deal done with the place you bought it. Daniel C.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi all.  have an Ibanez RG570EX, which has the supposed best locking trem out of the RG range.. I can’t remember the exact model, but it’s a floating trem which allows you to ‘pull-up’ two whole notes, as well as down obviously. My problem with this is that it is shite. I dont want it to ‘float’. I like floyd roses that are locked tight to the body, with say 4 highly tensioned springs. I dont use the trem at all really, and certainly not for pulling up. What can I do ? everytime I rest my palm the pitch changes, as well as every time I bend a string (really really puts me off picking this thing up) I’ve heard mention of a device called a trem-setter. would this help and are they expensive ? This shit trem also means its a bastard to tune. You tune one string, and then the tension from tuning the next string pulls the trem down a bit making it close to impossible to tune properly. And don’t even mention trying to put different gauge strings on the thing. any advice would be greatly appreciated. I dont play much any more, but bought this thing in the hope that I’d want to pick it up because of its niceness, and this isn’t happening! thanks, Carl

Response:

I dont think you should since I love my trem, but if you ever do feel of getting rid of it ive me an email.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi all.  have an Ibanez RG570EX, which has the supposed best locking trem out of the RG range.. I can’t remember the exact model, but it’s a floating trem which allows you to ‘pull-up’ two whole notes, as well as down obviously. My problem with this is that it is shite. I dont want it to ‘float’. I like floyd roses that are locked tight to the body, with say 4 highly tensioned springs. I dont use the trem at all really, and certainly not for pulling up. What can I do ? everytime I rest my palm the pitch changes, as well as every time I bend a string (really really puts me off picking this thing up) I’ve heard mention of a device called a trem-setter. would this help and are they expensive ? This shit trem also means its a bastard to tune. You tune one string, and then the tension from tuning the next string pulls the trem down a bit making it close to impossible to tune properly. And don’t even mention trying to put different gauge strings on the thing. any advice would be greatly appreciated. I dont play much any more, but bought this thing in the hope that I’d want to pick it up because of its niceness, and this isn’t happening! thanks, Carl

Response:

I dont want it to ‘float’. I like floyd roses that are locked tight to the body, with say 4 highly tensioned springs. I dont use the trem at all really, and certainly not for pulling up.

That’s the same problem I had with my RG550.  Even when I do a pull up on fretboard, all the other strings go flat so I can’t play them simultaneously. What can I do ?

Nothing I’ve tried will lock it in place. everytime I rest my palm the pitch changes, as well as every time I bend a string (really really puts me off picking this thing up)

This is another gripe I had with floyd-rose. I’ve heard mention of a device called a trem-setter. would this help and are they expensive ?

I don’t think that’s what you think it’ll do…  I think it’s a device which stabilizes the tremolo even greater than it already does. This shit trem also means its a bastard to tune. You tune one string, and then the tension from tuning the next string pulls the trem down a bit making it close to impossible to tune properly. And don’t even mention trying to put different gauge strings on the thing.

Yep..  that was a long and hard trial and error for me to finally be able to put in new strings with consistency.  For heavier gauge strings, forget about it.  The bridge will float ridiculously high it’s unplayable. any advice would be greatly appreciated. I dont play much any more, but bought this thing in the hope that I’d want to pick it up because of its niceness, and this isn’t happening!

I finally had it with my Ibanez, and picked up a Fender Fat Strat.  It differs from people to people but to me it sounds way better, and the flexible bridge which lets it rest on the body is also a big plus. I have to hand it to floyd-rose though, even while it floats mid-air all the time, it remarkably stays in tune relatively well no matter how hard the whammy punishment.  I still won’t go back to it though, I’m happy with my new fender.

Response:

I sold my Ibanez RG because I got sick of the floyd rose. Plain and simple. I own set bridge Schecter guitars now and I’m very happy. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi all. have an Ibanez RG570EX, which has the supposed best locking trem out of the RG range.. I can’t remember the exact model, but it’s a floating trem which allows you to ‘pull-up’ two whole notes, as well as down obviously. My problem with this is that it is shite. I dont want it to ‘float’. I like floyd roses that are locked tight to the body, with say 4 highly tensioned springs. I dont use the trem at all really, and certainly not for pulling up. What can I do ? everytime I rest my palm the pitch changes, as well as every time I bend a string (really really puts me off picking this thing up) I’ve heard mention of a device called a trem-setter. would this help and are they expensive ? This shit trem also means its a bastard to tune. You tune one string, and then the tension from tuning the next string pulls the trem down a bit making it close to impossible to tune properly. And don’t even mention trying to put different gauge strings on the thing. any advice would be greatly appreciated. I dont play much any more, but bought this thing in the hope that I’d want to pick it up because of its niceness, and this isn’t happening! thanks, Carl

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi all.  have an Ibanez RG570EX, which has the supposed best locking trem out of the RG range.. I can’t remember the exact model, but it’s a floating trem which allows you to ‘pull-up’ two whole notes, as well as down obviously. My problem with this is that it is shite. I dont want it to ‘float’. I like floyd roses that are locked tight to the body, with say 4 highly tensioned springs. I dont use the trem at all really, and certainly not for pulling up. What can I do ? everytime I rest my palm the pitch changes, as well as every time I bend a string (really really puts me off picking this thing up) I’ve heard mention of a device called a trem-setter. would this help and are they expensive ? This shit trem also means its a bastard to tune. You tune one string, and then the tension from tuning the next string pulls the trem down a bit making it close to impossible to tune properly. And don’t even mention trying to put different gauge strings on the thing. any advice would be greatly appreciated. I dont play much any more, but bought this thing in the hope that I’d want to pick it up because of its niceness, and this isn’t happening! thanks, Carl

If you never use the trem, it’s easy, fast, and cheap to simply block it. This is done by setting up the guitar as desired. Then, remove the backplate and measure the distance between the spring-side of the bridge block and the cavity wall.   Cut  a piece of hardwood to fit snugly in this space. Loosen the strings, remove the springs, insert the block.   Add all the springs you can and tighten the claw so that the springs are fully tensioned.   Retune, remove the bar, and you’re done. With the bridge blocked this way, it will shift neither sharp or flat. Since no physical modifications have been made to the guitar, it can be restored to original condition in minutes. HTH -pk

Response:

Hi all.  have an Ibanez RG570EX, which has the supposed best locking trem out of the RG range.. I can’t remember the exact model, but it’s a floating trem which allows you to ‘pull-up’ two whole notes, as well as down obviously. My problem with this is that it is shite. I dont want it to ‘float’. I like floyd roses that are locked tight to the body, with say 4 highly tensioned springs. I dont use the trem at all really, and certainly not for pulling up. What can I do ? everytime I rest my palm the pitch changes, as well as every time I bend a string (really really puts me off picking this thing up) I’ve heard mention of a device called a trem-setter. would this help and are they expensive ? This shit trem also means its a bastard to tune. You tune one string, and then the tension from tuning the next string pulls the trem down a bit making it close to impossible to tune properly. And don’t even mention trying to put different gauge strings on the thing. any advice would be greatly appreciated. I dont play much any more, but bought this thing in the hope that I’d want to pick it up because of its niceness, and this isn’t happening! thanks, Carl

Response:

Question:

Does anyone have any good references to basic accounting sites, thanks. Rob

Response:

Does anyone have any good references to basic accounting sites, thanks.

I don’t know about the "good" part, but here goes: http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/http.html#accounting    All the best, Timo — Prof. Timo Salmi ftp & http://garbo.uwasa.fi/ archives 193.166.120.5 Department of Accounting and Business Finance  ; University of Vaasa Acc. Journals Links  http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/opas/jott/jottjour.html

Response:

There is an accounting forum on Compuserve that seems pretty good. Bill Couture

Response:

Question:

My 9 year old doesn’t seem affected. She is as happy as usual, although she keeps campaigning for a pet dog.

Can you have a dog where you live?   My 8 year old, on the other hand, has become extremely clingy, whiny, and fearful of just about everything: spiders, dogs, school. Very jumpy, and prone to tears. We had an incident on Monday where it took her 45 minutes to separate from me and go into the classroom……. the school counselor had to come down and pry her away from me.

A nice mid-sized dog could be just what the doctor ordered for the younger child … it is tough to feel alone or afraid when you have a furry buddy sitting there with his/her head under your arm listening to your every fear and complaint… especially if mom just yelled at you for something Both girls were at my ex’s last week, and their daddy watched the evening news with them, despite my suggesting they not see this. Maybe I’m the overprotective one, but it is enough to hear about it, not see vivid pictures on t.v.

Best advice I heard was to shut off the TV when the kids are present .. younger kids cannot tell the difference between a replay and an ongoing event.    OTOH, I admit to having been glued to the TV last week (I had no kids around to frighten). Kids came home Friday and we talked about it. They told me about people jumping out of buildings holding hands. About a "missile" hitting the towers. I explained it was an airplane, not a  missile, and my youngest said, "well, when we watched it with daddy, and the buiding exploded and fell down, daddy shouted, ooooooh! they bombed it!!!"

If either of you fly for your jobs or for pleasure, the idea civilian aircraft were used might scare them very much … I can see them thinking they have no idea if you will return from a business trip. I reassured them they were safe, etc, but my youngest keeps asking, "mommy, are YOU safe?" Poor kid…… jen

Once a younger child starts worrying about the safety or lifespan of a parent, it is tough to assure them all is well.  I guess this is one of those places where you lead by example while trying to discuss the notion of relative safety.   As a child, I never had to deal with the idea anything could ever happen to my parents, siblings, relatives or friends.     Thana

Response:

Hi Thana, Can you have a dog where you live?  

Yes, but I don’t think it would be fair to the dog. There’s not much of a lawn, for one thing, and for two, no one is home during the day. I think it would be cruel to get a dog and park him alone for 10 hours at a stretch. A nice mid-sized dog could be just what the doctor ordered for the younger child … it is tough to feel alone or afraid when you have a furry buddy sitting there with his/her head under your arm listening to your every fear and complaint… especially if mom just yelled at you for something

Agreed. I would like a black lab someday. Not just for my kids, but for myself. I’d feel safer with a dog in the house. However, even if we were in a situation where a dog would be a possibility, my youngest is too afraid of dogs right now, and I don’t think it would be fair to her. Oh well, for now we’ll just have to settle for our "attack skunk" that lives in the bushes in front of our house…. Best advice I heard was to shut off the TV when the kids are present .. younger kids cannot tell the difference between a replay and an ongoing event.    OTOH, I admit to having been glued to the TV last week (I had no kids around to frighten).

I have kept the t.v. off completely all week, except for when the kids are sound asleep. It makes a huge difference for my own mental health, too. I can personally only take those images and the news in small doses……. I believe my ex only watched the news with them once, the evening of the disaster, but that was obviously enough to get them upset and create lasting nightmare images. Of course, you can’t protect your kids from everything, as my ex insists……. but wasn’t hearing about the disaster sufficient, without having to actually *see* it? Or does seeing it make it a necessary reality somehow? I don’t know the answer to this. All I know is the oldest seems to be dealing with it fine, while the youngest is a complete mess. If either of you fly for your jobs or for pleasure, the idea civilian aircraft were used might scare them very much … I can see them thinking they have no idea if you will return from a business trip.

Lately the only flying I’ve done has been *with* the kids, to visit grandma. The girls haven’t seemed to make the connection though. They still want to get on a plane this xmas. Or, maybe they’ve been testing me to see if we will still get on a plane this xmas? Once a younger child starts worrying about the safety or lifespan of a parent, it is tough to assure them all is well.  I guess this is one of those places where you lead by example while trying to discuss the notion of relative safety.   As a child, I never had to deal with the idea anything could ever happen to my parents, siblings, relatives or friends.    

I have discussed relative safety in the past. For example, the girls sometimes worry about the house catching on fire, and I reassure them that 1) the house is over 100 years old, and if it hasn’t caught fire by now, then it probably won’t while we’re living here; and 2) I don’t know a single person who has ever personally been in a fire; ergo, fire must be pretty rare. As for the WTC thing, my youngest reasoned that it was like lightening striking the tallest object…… and so we were safe because our house isn’t quite so tall……. Also, my youngest told me that she still loved the bad man that crashed the airplane……. because she loves everyone……. but, she didn’t like his behavior at all…… jen

Response:

Jen, You’re right — it *is* hard to be a parent at times like this, when you don’t know whether your words of reassurance will comfort or come back to haunt you. My son called me from school on September 11, terribly upset about what had happened in New York and worried about our family, some of whom live in Manhattan.  I’m not sure what comfort I provided — I was caught up in the crisis on a personal as well as a professional level. About 9 PM, I stopped everything and simply went upstairs to my son’s room, where he was watching some silly comedy show.  For the first time in a long time, he asked me to stay with him until he fell asleep.  And I did.   He’ll be 16 soon, so he’s not a young child with obsessive worries any more.  But despite the deep voice, the nearly 6 foot stature and the typical teen-age bravado, he’s still a kid who needs the best I can give him.  Even when I worry that it’s not enough.  He knows I love him, and maybe that’s all that’s really important. Barb – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Rambling here…… I guess the hardest thing about being a parent in times like this, is being the strong one to reassure them that everything is going to be okay. Hard to do when you have your own doubts and worries. Here in Boston we are on high alert this weekend due to rumors of a possible second wave of attacks. I was relieved the kids were going to be with their dad’s today. When it comes to physical protection of the kids, he’s more qualified than I am, plus he lives farther from the city. However, at the same time, I can’t stand not to have them near me during a situation like this. How does everyone else cope? jen

Response:

I was in a fire in January this year – an electric fan burst into flames but we managed to extinguish the fire before the wooden cabinet on which it was standing caught. Scary. It happened at midday, but inside the room it was darker than midnight at new moon because the smoke was so thick and oily. — Though no one can go back and make a brand new start, anyone can start from now and make a brand new ending. ~ Carl Bard ~ – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I don’t know a single person who has ever personally been in a fire; ergo, fire must be pretty rare.

Response:

In the United States and Canada, a home fire is reported to a fire department roughly every 75 seconds. Fires kill 350 people and injure more than 1,300. Jen Speaking as a firefighter and installer of fire alarm systems, the age of the building is not the biggest predicator of the likelihood of a fire. Cooking, heating, and electrical fires are among the nation’s leading causes of home fires, accounting for an annual average of nearly 50% of home fires and almost one-third of associated fire deaths. The above information on fires was taken from the NFPA website.  Please do not be lulled into a false sense of security because you have never had a fire.  Our fire district has about 8,000 people in it and we average 4 major (total losses) and 12 minor house fires a year. http://www.firepreventionweek.org/ You can get more information from this web site, including things to download for children about fire safety.  My business has proudly sponsored distributing "Fire Prevention Week" pamphlets and information to the local grade schools and at the local county fairs for many years.  Rehearsing what to do in the event of fire has got to be done on a regular basis, especially when children are around. sam Don’t push the red button, Never push the red button!       Daffy Duck

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I have discussed relative safety in the past. For example, the girls sometimes worry about the house catching on fire, and I reassure them that 1) the house is over 100 years old, and if it hasn’t caught fire by now, then it probably won’t while we’re living here; and 2) I don’t know a single person who has ever personally been in a fire; ergo, fire must be pretty rare. jen

Response:

Thanks, Steve. The trouble is, how does one strike the right balance between reasonable concern, and fear that keeps a young child up way past bedtime? I also went through this last year with my older daughter. I think it is a stage kids go through, obsessing about the house catching on fire. I recall similarly obsessing when I was about that age. I remember coping by checking off a list of childish & magical rationalizations……. such as, it rained today, therefore the grass is too wet for a fire…… our house is built of brick, therefore it on fire……. things like that. We have discussed fire safety, and what to do in the event of a fire. They know how to exit, etc. We have great smoke detectors, too…… they are so loud and very sensitive, and will go off at the slightest bit of smoke from the kitchen. No one could possibly sleep through them…… so I feel fairly safe and confident. Last year, my daughter’s number one concern was her blankie. Would mommy save her blankie if there was a fire? She was pretty confident I would save her, but not necessarily her blankie…… what if I couldn’t find it in the dark? It got so bad, at one point, I had to pin her blankie to her nightgown so she would finally be at peace enough to fall asleep. It doesn’t help that our neighbors across the street had a 5 am scare last week…… something happened with their boiler that created tons of smoke (no fire), and we had fire engines wake us all up. It also doesn’t help, I suppose, that the whole neighborhood participated in the candle vigil this week. The kids thought it was cool, all the candles lit along the street, but I think it also set off the obsession about fire. Rambling here…… I guess the hardest thing about being a parent in times like this, is being the strong one to reassure them that everything is going to be okay. Hard to do when you have your own doubts and worries. Here in Boston we are on high alert this weekend due to rumors of a possible second wave of attacks. I was relieved the kids were going to be with their dad’s today. When it comes to physical protection of the kids, he’s more qualified than I am, plus he lives farther from the city. However, at the same time, I can’t stand not to have them near me during a situation like this. How does everyone else cope? jen – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In the United States and Canada, a home fire is reported to a fire department roughly every 75 seconds. Fires kill 350 people and injure more than 1,300. Jen Speaking as a firefighter and installer of fire alarm systems, the age of the building is not the biggest predicator of the likelihood of a fire. Cooking, heating, and electrical fires are among the nation’s leading causes of home fires, accounting for an annual average of nearly 50% of home fires and almost one-third of associated fire deaths. The above information on fires was taken from the NFPA website.  Please do not be lulled into a false sense of security because you have never had a fire.  Our fire district has about 8,000 people in it and we average 4 major (total losses) and 12 minor house fires a year. http://www.firepreventionweek.org/ You can get more information from this web site, including things to download for children about fire safety.  My business has proudly sponsored distributing "Fire Prevention Week" pamphlets and information to the local grade schools and at the local county fairs for many years.  Rehearsing what to do in the event of fire has got to be done on a regular basis, especially when children are around. sam Don’t push the red button, Never push the red button!       Daffy Duck I have discussed relative safety in the past. For example, the girls sometimes worry about the house catching on fire, and I reassure them that 1) the house is over 100 years old, and if it hasn’t caught fire by now, then it probably won’t while we’re living here; and 2) I don’t know a single person who has ever personally been in a fire; ergo, fire must be pretty rare. jen

Response:

Have you seen that special with Linda Ellerbee?  I think it is on Nickalodeon.  She had children talking about what happened, and a fairly tame but insightful presentation on what happened.  I enjoyed it very much, and it plays frequently.  Oprah had Mrs. Bush on her show today to talk about what to do with our children on this, and I imagine on the Oprah website there will be information for a little while, since that is usually the case.  Sorry I didn’t have your message earlier to alert you to these things.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – ML, The U.S. Department of Education has taken over the lead role of dissiminating information and help to parents and teachers, in response

Response:

Hi Mary Lou, My 9 year old doesn’t seem affected. She is as happy as usual, although she keeps campaigning for a pet dog. My 8 year old, on the other hand, has become extremely clingy, whiny, and fearful of just about everything: spiders, dogs, school. Very jumpy, and prone to tears. We had an incident on Monday where it took her 45 minutes to separate from me and go into the classroom……. the school counselor had to come down and pry her away from me. Both girls were at my ex’s last week, and their daddy watched the evening news with them, despite my suggesting they not see this. Maybe I’m the overprotective one, but it is enough to hear about it, not see vivid pictures on t.v. Kids came home Friday and we talked about it. They told me about people jumping out of buildings holding hands. About a "missile" hitting the towers. I explained it was an airplane, not a  missile, and my youngest said, "well, when we watched it with daddy, and the buiding exploded and fell down, daddy shouted, ooooooh! they bombed it!!!" I reassured them they were safe, etc, but my youngest keeps asking, "mommy, are YOU safe?" Poor kid…… jen

Response:

So I’m curious how others are dealing with their kids’ feelings right now, in regards to both the big tragedy and the individual ones going on.  Kids must be feeling very unsettled right now, and probably downright terrified? My 18-yr old is fascinated with the goings-on in the news, and talking about psychology and criminal-profiling and stuff like that, as well as studying the CNN photos, taking in every thing he hears/reads regarding facts, prophecy, and politics.  I think that’s pretty healthy, except i’m worried about his attitude about the recent murder a couple blocks away from his house being "no big deal" in comparison… It would have been before this, i believe. My 15-yr old is a basket-case, breaking down in tears during school yesterday, having anger fits, etc.  The counselors have finally started insisting on seeing him regularly, as his reactions seem more rooted in the shooting than in the recent event (although triggered),  maybe just becuz the danger was right  there instead of hundereds of miles away?  We learned a lot after the shooting, about some of the feelings i hear ppl describing now with the other event.  The fear, walking around pumped on adrenalin all the time, peeking around the corner, trusting nobody, guilt, helplessness, and an overwhelming sense of impending doom.  But instead of a small community, this time it’s an entire nation.  I don’t know what to tell him other than to pray.  He collected over $200 Sunday for the red cross (with a couple other boy scouts) and is now encouraging other scouts to do the same.  I think this is helping him to be able to help in some way, plus it’s getting him out talking to other people about it..

Response:

ML, The U.S. Department of Education has taken over the lead role of dissiminating information and help to parents and teachers, in response to the requests like yours about how to help kids get through this. There’s a link from their main page (http://www.ed.gov/) for their information site.

thanks, Janie.  I appeciate your help very much, in these matters where one can feel so lost.

Response:

Question:

Yeah.  That’s what we’re talkin’ about. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – We *are* talking about Milwaukie’s Best–made by Miller co.–not Old Milwaukee (which I can’t stand).  Right? Yeah, it’s still made…and out here, at least, widely available. —

Response:

I’m drinking a Corona now. Yum.

Corona is my choice also and you can use the bottles if you brew your own.  They cap well. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Buy yourself some Mexican beer. If you can find: "Bohemia" much the better, but "Tecate" is also good. But if you prefer the different taste of "Corona" or "Victoria", that is also good. On the Rum side, I would go for "Bacardi", which is good and affordable. But, I myself would go for the beer. — Teilhard The Extraterrestrial I need to go to the store.  Trying to decide which one to purchase.

Response:

We *are* talking about Milwaukie’s Best–made by Miller co.–not Old Milwaukee (which I can’t stand).  Right? Yeah, it’s still made…and out here, at least, widely available. — It is life itself which raises the philosophical questions.     W. A. Luijpen remove nospam for reply

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Heh…I thought that was really odd.  I didn’t even know they still make the stuff! That’s really funny, since it is the only "mainstream" beer I like well enough to drink.  Heh.  There’s no accounting for taste, eh? — It is life itself which raises the philosophical questions.     W. A. Luijpen remove nospam for reply Um…cough cough…at school, that beer was known as "The Beast" because it was cheap and everyone thought it tasted like shit.  Sorry. Can’t stomach beer that actually has a flavor to it…which means Guinness is absolutely disgusting to me. Got my Bacardi.  Good thing, too. The only "mainstream" beer I like at all is Milwaukee’s Best–ever tried that?  Everything else I drink is microbrew stouts, and Guinness. Rum:  I recommend Mount Gay Eclipse, a Barbados rum. Good luck…and enjoy. — It is life itself which raises the philosophical questions.     W. A. Luijpen remove nospam for reply What kind of beer do you like? I’m a blue collar woman…Miller or Bud Lite is fine with me…or the occasional Icehouse.  No glass. What kind of rum? Bacardi, definitely.  Of course, my experience with rum is pretty limited, to bacardi and malibu.  Malibu is like drinking suntan lotion. I’d better go soon or I won’t go at all.  My body would probably thank me for that, but my mind wouldn’t. I have both rum and beer, and am opinionated on the subject. — It is life itself which raises the philosophical questions.     W. A. Luijpen remove nospam for reply I need to go to the store.  Trying to decide which one to purchase.

Response:

Whiskey only tastes good in apple juice.  Yeah, I know it’s weird, but when you’re looking for something to mix and that’s the only thing in the house, you discover these things. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I really like rum, and some sweet things–like Drambouie–I like well enough.  I can’t *stand* whiskey…that stuff smells and tastes like hair oil. But again, it’s a matter of taste.  Who knows why. — It is life itself which raises the philosophical questions.     W. A. Luijpen remove nospam for reply rum is just too sweet…..I hate sweet things. I jsut didnt’ want beer.  Seemed like a good alternative. I need to go to the store.  Trying to decide which one to purchase. I was about to say beer, buit I have been drinking that tonight and I really wish I hadn’t. Well, good thing I bought rum, then. — JP

Response:

Heh…I thought that was really odd.  I didn’t even know they still make the stuff! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – That’s really funny, since it is the only "mainstream" beer I like well enough to drink.  Heh.  There’s no accounting for taste, eh? — It is life itself which raises the philosophical questions.     W. A. Luijpen remove nospam for reply Um…cough cough…at school, that beer was known as "The Beast" because it was cheap and everyone thought it tasted like shit.  Sorry. Can’t stomach beer that actually has a flavor to it…which means Guinness is absolutely disgusting to me. Got my Bacardi.  Good thing, too. The only "mainstream" beer I like at all is Milwaukee’s Best–ever tried that?  Everything else I drink is microbrew stouts, and Guinness. Rum:  I recommend Mount Gay Eclipse, a Barbados rum. Good luck…and enjoy. — It is life itself which raises the philosophical questions.     W. A. Luijpen remove nospam for reply What kind of beer do you like? I’m a blue collar woman…Miller or Bud Lite is fine with me…or the occasional Icehouse.  No glass. What kind of rum? Bacardi, definitely.  Of course, my experience with rum is pretty limited, to bacardi and malibu.  Malibu is like drinking suntan lotion. I’d better go soon or I won’t go at all.  My body would probably thank me for that, but my mind wouldn’t. I have both rum and beer, and am opinionated on the subject. — It is life itself which raises the philosophical questions.     W. A. Luijpen remove nospam for reply I need to go to the store.  Trying to decide which one to purchase.

Response:

I really like rum, and some sweet things–like Drambouie–I like well enough.  I can’t *stand* whiskey…that stuff smells and tastes like hair oil. But again, it’s a matter of taste.  Who knows why. — It is life itself which raises the philosophical questions.     W. A. Luijpen remove nospam for reply

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – rum is just too sweet…..I hate sweet things. I jsut didnt’ want beer.  Seemed like a good alternative. I need to go to the store.  Trying to decide which one to purchase. I was about to say beer, buit I have been drinking that tonight and I really wish I hadn’t. Well, good thing I bought rum, then. — JP

Response:

That’s really funny, since it is the only "mainstream" beer I like well enough to drink.  Heh.  There’s no accounting for taste, eh? — It is life itself which raises the philosophical questions.     W. A. Luijpen remove nospam for reply

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Um…cough cough…at school, that beer was known as "The Beast" because it was cheap and everyone thought it tasted like shit.  Sorry. Can’t stomach beer that actually has a flavor to it…which means Guinness is absolutely disgusting to me. Got my Bacardi.  Good thing, too. The only "mainstream" beer I like at all is Milwaukee’s Best–ever tried that?  Everything else I drink is microbrew stouts, and Guinness. Rum:  I recommend Mount Gay Eclipse, a Barbados rum. Good luck…and enjoy. — It is life itself which raises the philosophical questions.     W. A. Luijpen remove nospam for reply What kind of beer do you like? I’m a blue collar woman…Miller or Bud Lite is fine with me…or the occasional Icehouse.  No glass. What kind of rum? Bacardi, definitely.  Of course, my experience with rum is pretty limited, to bacardi and malibu.  Malibu is like drinking suntan lotion. I’d better go soon or I won’t go at all.  My body would probably thank me for that, but my mind wouldn’t. I have both rum and beer, and am opinionated on the subject. — It is life itself which raises the philosophical questions.     W. A. Luijpen remove nospam for reply I need to go to the store.  Trying to decide which one to purchase.

Response:

have a rum & coke = heaven

I’m having one right now, thanks.  : ) i once went to the bacardi factory in puerto rico, by the way they have 151-proof rum heheh

That’s some scary stuff! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – sarah. — but my faith in love is still devout

Response:

Well, good thing I bought rum, then.

have a rum & coke = heaven i once went to the bacardi factory in puerto rico, by the way they have 151-proof rum heheh sarah. — but my faith in love is still devout

Response:

rum is just too sweet…..I hate sweet things.

I jsut didnt’ want beer.  Seemed like a good alternative. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I need to go to the store.  Trying to decide which one to purchase. I was about to say beer, buit I have been drinking that tonight and I really wish I hadn’t. Well, good thing I bought rum, then. — JP

Response:

rum is just too sweet…..I hate sweet things.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I need to go to the store.  Trying to decide which one to purchase. I was about to say beer, buit I have been drinking that tonight and I really wish I hadn’t. Well, good thing I bought rum, then. — JP

Response:

Cheers back at ya! wish I had a lime!

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Cheers! — Teilhard The Extraterrestrial I’m drinking a Corona now. Yum. Buy yourself some Mexican beer. If you can find: "Bohemia" much the better, but "Tecate" is also good. But if you prefer the different taste of "Corona" or "Victoria", that is also good. On the Rum side, I would go for "Bacardi", which is good and affordable. But, I myself would go for the beer. — Teilhard The Extraterrestrial I need to go to the store.  Trying to decide which one to purchase.

Response:

Cheers! — Teilhard The Extraterrestrial – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m drinking a Corona now. Yum. Buy yourself some Mexican beer. If you can find: "Bohemia" much the better, but "Tecate" is also good. But if you prefer the different taste of "Corona" or "Victoria", that is also good. On the Rum side, I would go for "Bacardi", which is good and affordable. But, I myself would go for the beer. — Teilhard The Extraterrestrial I need to go to the store.  Trying to decide which one to purchase.

Response:

I need to go to the store.  Trying to decide which one to purchase. I was about to say beer, buit I have been drinking that tonight and I really wish I hadn’t.

Well, good thing I bought rum, then. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – — JP

Response:

I need to go to the store.  Trying to decide which one to purchase.

I was about to say beer, buit I have been drinking that tonight and I really wish I hadn’t. — JP

Response:

Um…cough cough…at school, that beer was known as "The Beast" because it was cheap and everyone thought it tasted like shit.  Sorry. Can’t stomach beer that actually has a flavor to it…which means Guinness is absolutely disgusting to me. Got my Bacardi.  Good thing, too. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The only "mainstream" beer I like at all is Milwaukee’s Best–ever tried that?  Everything else I drink is microbrew stouts, and Guinness. Rum:  I recommend Mount Gay Eclipse, a Barbados rum. Good luck…and enjoy. — It is life itself which raises the philosophical questions.     W. A. Luijpen remove nospam for reply What kind of beer do you like? I’m a blue collar woman…Miller or Bud Lite is fine with me…or the occasional Icehouse.  No glass. What kind of rum? Bacardi, definitely.  Of course, my experience with rum is pretty limited, to bacardi and malibu.  Malibu is like drinking suntan lotion. I’d better go soon or I won’t go at all.  My body would probably thank me for that, but my mind wouldn’t. I have both rum and beer, and am opinionated on the subject. — It is life itself which raises the philosophical questions.     W. A. Luijpen remove nospam for reply I need to go to the store.  Trying to decide which one to purchase.

Response:

The only "mainstream" beer I like at all is Milwaukee’s Best–ever tried that?  Everything else I drink is microbrew stouts, and Guinness. Rum:  I recommend Mount Gay Eclipse, a Barbados rum. Good luck…and enjoy. — It is life itself which raises the philosophical questions.     W. A. Luijpen remove nospam for reply

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – What kind of beer do you like? I’m a blue collar woman…Miller or Bud Lite is fine with me…or the occasional Icehouse.  No glass. What kind of rum? Bacardi, definitely.  Of course, my experience with rum is pretty limited, to bacardi and malibu.  Malibu is like drinking suntan lotion. I’d better go soon or I won’t go at all.  My body would probably thank me for that, but my mind wouldn’t. I have both rum and beer, and am opinionated on the subject. — It is life itself which raises the philosophical questions.     W. A. Luijpen remove nospam for reply I need to go to the store.  Trying to decide which one to purchase.

Response:

What kind of beer do you like?

I’m a blue collar woman…Miller or Bud Lite is fine with me…or the occasional Icehouse.  No glass. What kind of rum?

Bacardi, definitely.  Of course, my experience with rum is pretty limited, to bacardi and malibu.  Malibu is like drinking suntan lotion. I’d better go soon or I won’t go at all.  My body would probably thank me for that, but my mind wouldn’t. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I have both rum and beer, and am opinionated on the subject. — It is life itself which raises the philosophical questions.     W. A. Luijpen remove nospam for reply I need to go to the store.  Trying to decide which one to purchase.

Response:

I’m not a big rum fan so I would go for the beer.

Thanks for the advice.  I’m leaning toward the rum, though.  I don’t know why, but i am. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Bruce.

Response:

I’m drinking a Corona now. Yum.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Buy yourself some Mexican beer. If you can find: "Bohemia" much the better, but "Tecate" is also good. But if you prefer the different taste of "Corona" or "Victoria", that is also good. On the Rum side, I would go for "Bacardi", which is good and affordable. But, I myself would go for the beer. — Teilhard The Extraterrestrial I need to go to the store.  Trying to decide which one to purchase.

Response:

What kind of beer do you like? What kind of rum? I have both rum and beer, and am opinionated on the subject. — It is life itself which raises the philosophical questions.     W. A. Luijpen remove nospam for reply

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I need to go to the store.  Trying to decide which one to purchase.

Response:

I need to go to the store.  Trying to decide which one to purchase.

I’m not a big rum fan so I would go for the beer. Bruce.

Response:

I’m not a beer connossieur.  I can only drink Miller Lite or Bud Lite. Admittedly, I’m a very blue collar chick in this respect.  I don’t even use a glass.  As for rum, it’s definitely Bacardi or nothing.  I can’t decide, though.  If I get rum, I’ll have it in the house for awhile, which is both a good and a bad thing.  If I get beer, it could make my stomach upset again. I don’t know.  *shrug* – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Buy yourself some Mexican beer. If you can find: "Bohemia" much the better, but "Tecate" is also good. But if you prefer the different taste of "Corona" or "Victoria", that is also good. On the Rum side, I would go for "Bacardi", which is good and affordable. But, I myself would go for the beer. — Teilhard The Extraterrestrial I need to go to the store.  Trying to decide which one to purchase.

Response:

I need to go to the store.  Trying to decide which one to purchase.

Response:

Buy yourself some Mexican beer. If you can find: "Bohemia" much the better, but "Tecate" is also good. But if you prefer the different taste of "Corona" or "Victoria", that is also good. On the Rum side, I would go for "Bacardi", which is good and affordable. But, I myself would go for the beer. — Teilhard The Extraterrestrial – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I need to go to the store.  Trying to decide which one to purchase.

Response:

Question:

I would like to know if there is a way of changing Non Stock item codes in bulk, i.e. all my codes need a ZZ in front of them. Is this possible or do I have to edit them individually? No help from Intuit now there’s a suprise ! Jacapo

Response:

Often you can interpret "No help" as meaning "No way".  I’d say that’s probably the case here. There’s certainly no such "bulk change" feature in the software. I don’t remember seeing ANY software with "bulk change" functions for fields such as item numbers, account numbers, customer numbers, etc.  In fact, many accounting programs don’t allow changing those fields at all, even one at a time.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I would like to know if there is a way of changing Non Stock item codes in bulk, i.e. all my codes need a ZZ in front of them. Is this possible or do I have to edit them individually? No help from Intuit now there’s a suprise ! Jacapo

Response:

It’s very hard for some people to believe that they "Can’t always get what they want", I mean all we have to do is push a button, right?  The request is not a common one or a recommended one.  It depends on how much accounting knowledge is available. Take the list into excel, make the change and import it back in.  Read the manual and figure it out. Roman (I have done this but it takes some time to set it up. It just depends on how many in the list)

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Often you can interpret "No help" as meaning "No way".  I’d say that’s probably the case here. There’s certainly no such "bulk change" feature in the software. I don’t remember seeing ANY software with "bulk change" functions for fields such as item numbers, account numbers, customer numbers, etc.  In fact, many accounting programs don’t allow changing those fields at all, even one at a time. I would like to know if there is a way of changing Non Stock item codes in bulk, i.e. all my codes need a ZZ in front of them. Is this possible or do I have to edit them individually? No help from Intuit now there’s a suprise ! Jacapo

Response:

It’s very hard for some people to believe that they "Can’t always get what they want", I mean all we have to do is push a button, right?  The request is not a common one or a recommended one.  It depends on how much accounting knowledge is available. Take the list into excel, make the change and import it back in.  Read the manual and figure it out. Roman

I would have thought no answer at all would have been better than this snivelling response.

Response:

Perhaps you should read the manual. If I export the item list, make the changes and then import back again, I get a whole set of new item codes not editing existing ones. People like you are about as much use as a chocolate teapot and nasty to boot. Thanks for nothing Roman. Jacapo

Response:

In my opinion, Jacapo: When you ask for information here (any Newsgroup), you take what you can get and you should be grateful for and respectful of any reasonable and honest effort to help. Your response to Roman is rude, uncalled for, unnecessary, and inappropriate. You are correct about the effects of export/import as described. If you know so much: – why didn’t you know everything else about this issue? – why didn’t you say earlier that you knew that, and that it wasn’t acceptable? With your attitude, it’ll be a minor miracle if anyone else offers to help. Just my opinion.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Perhaps you should read the manual. If I export the item list, make the changes and then import back again, I get a whole set of new item codes not editing existing ones. People like you are about as much use as a chocolate teapot and nasty to boot. Thanks for nothing Roman. Jacapo

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In my opinion, Jacapo: When you ask for information here (any Newsgroup), you take what you can get and you should be grateful for and respectful of any reasonable and honest effort to help. Your response to Roman is rude, uncalled for, unnecessary, and inappropriate. You are correct about the effects of export/import as described. If you know so much: – why didn’t you know everything else about this issue? – why didn’t you say earlier that you knew that, and that it wasn’t acceptable? With your attitude, it’ll be a minor miracle if anyone else offers to help. Just my opinion.

Opinions are like arseholes – everybody’s got one. I thought Roman’s reply was unhelpful and in a way it was rude too. I didn’t expect such an irritated response. Jacapo

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In my opinion, Jacapo: When you ask for information here (any Newsgroup), you take what you can get and you should be grateful for and respectful of any reasonable and honest effort to help. Your response to Roman is rude, uncalled for, unnecessary, and inappropriate. You are correct about the effects of export/import as described. If you know so much: – why didn’t you know everything else about this issue? – why didn’t you say earlier that you knew that, and that it wasn’t acceptable? With your attitude, it’ll be a minor miracle if anyone else offers to help. Just my opinion. Opinions are like arseholes – everybody’s got one. I thought Roman’s reply was unhelpful and in a way it was rude too. I didn’t expect such an irritated response. Jacapo

Response:

And I thought I was being sarcastic.  Strange how we all have different points of view. To my friend accross the pond, Jacapo, If you would have left off the Bash at Quickbooks, in that post, and one other one I read earlier I would have probably just told you how to do it. But your post has nothing to do with accounting, this is not the alt.i can’t figure out how my software works or alt.i’m too lazy to do some work on my own newsgroup However we do help anyone who needs help on their programs.  The main topic though is accounting. Remember Quickbooks uses a database format for keeping all you information together. All of those items are linked to transactions in your company. You cannot just go and change an item code that is spread throughout your file. You did not tell us how many items you have to do this to, you did not tell us what you tried, How in the hell do you expect to get help, we can’t read your mind. Just a you can’t read mine, which knows what do do with the extra item that was added to your list of items. When you can get down off of your high horse and ask a question and give some facts without bashing anyone or any company I will tell you what to do with the extra item. I know how quickbooks works and you don’t. And if you react just because someone else does, what does that say about you. Roman

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In my opinion, Jacapo: When you ask for information here (any Newsgroup), you take what you can get and you should be grateful for and respectful of any reasonable and honest effort to help. Your response to Roman is rude, uncalled for, unnecessary, and inappropriate. You are correct about the effects of export/import as described. If you know so much: – why didn’t you know everything else about this issue? – why didn’t you say earlier that you knew that, and that it wasn’t acceptable? With your attitude, it’ll be a minor miracle if anyone else offers to help. Just my opinion. Opinions are like arseholes – everybody’s got one. I thought Roman’s reply was unhelpful and in a way it was rude too. I didn’t expect such an irritated response. Jacapo

Response:

Haha!  :) I knew what you meant, Roman and I thought your reply was fitting.  :) Smart comment, followed by useful advice for as much as was said about the problem.  :) c. — Cindy Fox Computer Training Solutions www.cindyfox.com (602) 692-8923

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – And I thought I was being sarcastic.  Strange how we all have different points of view. To my friend accross the pond, Jacapo, If you would have left off the Bash at Quickbooks, in that post, and one other one I read earlier I would have probably just told you how to do it. But your post has nothing to do with accounting, this is not the alt.i can’t figure out how my software works or alt.i’m too lazy to do some work on my own newsgroup However we do help anyone who needs help on their programs.  The main topic though is accounting. Remember Quickbooks uses a database format for keeping all you information together. All of those items are linked to transactions in your company. You cannot just go and change an item code that is spread throughout your file. You did not tell us how many items you have to do this to, you did not tell us what you tried, How in the hell do you expect to get help, we can’t read your mind. Just a you can’t read mine, which knows what do do with the extra item that was added to your list of items. When you can get down off of your high horse and ask a question and give some facts without bashing anyone or any company I will tell you what to do with the extra item. I know how quickbooks works and you don’t. And if you react just because someone else does, what does that say about you. Roman In my opinion, Jacapo: When you ask for information here (any Newsgroup), you take what you can get and you should be grateful for and respectful of any reasonable and honest effort to help. Your response to Roman is rude, uncalled for, unnecessary, and inappropriate. You are correct about the effects of export/import as described. If you know so much: – why didn’t you know everything else about this issue? – why didn’t you say earlier that you knew that, and that it wasn’t acceptable? With your attitude, it’ll be a minor miracle if anyone else offers to help. Just my opinion. Opinions are like arseholes – everybody’s got one. I thought Roman’s reply was unhelpful and in a way it was rude too. I didn’t expect such an irritated response. Jacapo

Response:

Question:

An Innovative Lifelong Learning Methodology

Question:

Since when did inventory appear in the P&L? Perhaps you refer to the Cost of goods sold account? but how can that be equal to the B/S inventory? Therefore you must mean a write-up situation  where you have Opening Inventory Plus Purchases Less Closing Inventory (this appearing on both P&L and B/S?) = Cost of goods sold Most accounting packages handle inventory dymanically, debiting inventory at the time of purchase and crediting it at time of sale (and simultaneously debiting cost of goods), therefore the COGS goes to the P&L and Inventory to the balance sheet. HS – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – BZZZZZZZT! Either way is fine. If you debit Purchases, you have to close it out at the end of the year anyway. The end result is the same. Debiting Inventory is easier though. It’s not.  There are two trial balance inventory accounts – P&L inventory and BS inventory.  They should always be the same.  At the end of the year you merely journal in whatever is required to get them to equal physical stock, as follows: DR/CR  P&L inventory       X   CR/DR  BS inventory        X If you are suggesting that we journal amounts into either one of these accounts without doing the same to the other then you’re going to get into a pickle.  How will you journal in your closing stock at the end of the period?  You’re in great risk of getting in a situation that you won’t understand at the year end and you won’t be able to explain to your superiors/auditors. I repeat, debit purchases, credit accruals GRNI.  If you use a reversing journal then you don’t need to worry about closing it out (if I’m understanding you right). — "If you want to look at my feet, say so," said the young man.  "But don’t be a God-damned sneak about it."                              (from "A Perfect Day for Bananafish")

Response:

Since when did inventory appear in the P&L?

It always has done. Perhaps you refer to the Cost of goods sold account? but how can that be equal to the B/S inventory?

It doesn’t. Therefore you must mean a write-up situation  where you have Opening Inventory Plus Purchases Less Closing Inventory (this appearing on both P&L and B/S?) = Cost of goods sold

Dead right.  Did they teach you different? Most accounting packages handle inventory dymanically, debiting inventory at the time of purchase and crediting it at time of sale (and simultaneously debiting cost of goods), therefore the COGS goes to the P&L and Inventory to the balance sheet.

The danger with the scenario you describe is that people make elementary bookkeeping howlers like we’ve been seeing here because they’re led to make shortcuts by their systems.  If your system fails or you have to do anything out of the ordinary then you’re in big trouble.  You really can’t beat a solid grounding in double entry.  My tuppence worth. — "If you want to look at my feet, say so," said the young man.  "But don’t be a God-damned sneak about it."                               (from "A Perfect Day for Bananafish")

Response:

Since when did inventory appear in the P&L? It always has done.

        I personally have never worked for a company that has done it this way. When I was in public practice, we never did it this way either. I find it completely unnecessary. Most accounting packages handle inventory dymanically, debiting inventory at the time of purchase and crediting it at time of sale (and simultaneously debiting cost of goods), therefore the COGS goes to the P&L and Inventory to the balance sheet. The danger with the scenario you describe is that people make elementary bookkeeping howlers like we’ve been seeing here because they’re led to make shortcuts by their systems.  If your system fails or you have to do anything out of the ordinary then you’re in big trouble.  You really can’t beat a solid grounding in double entry.  My tuppence worth.

        Debiting Inventory instead of Purchases is a shortcut. If someone doesn’t understand how this works, they obviously shouldn’t do it this way. "Everything should be made as simple  as possible, but not simpler."                                 – Albert Einstein      

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – BZZZZZZZT! Either way is fine. If you debit Purchases, you have to close it out at the end of the year anyway. The end result is the same. Debiting Inventory is easier though. It’s not.  There are two trial balance inventory accounts – P&L inventory and BS inventory.  They should always be the same.  At the end of the year you merely journal in whatever is required to get them to equal physical stock, as follows: DR/CR  P&L inventory       X   CR/DR  BS inventory        X If you are suggesting that we journal amounts into either one of these accounts without doing the same to the other then you’re going to get into a pickle.  How will you journal in your closing stock at the end of the period?  You’re in great risk of getting in a situation that you won’t understand at the year end and you won’t be able to explain to your superiors/auditors. I repeat, debit purchases, credit accruals GRNI.  If you use a reversing journal then you don’t need to worry about closing it out (if I’m understanding you right).

Assume: Beginning Inventory = 30,000 Purchases = 200,000 Ending Inventory = 26,000 Therefore: Cost of Goods Sold = Beg. Inv. + Purchases – End. Inv. COGS = 30,000 + 200,000 – 26,000 COGS = 204,000 Your way: 1) Purchases                            200,000         Accounts Payable                        200,000 To record purchase of merchandise. 2) Cost of Goods Sold                   4,000         Inventory                               4,000 To adjust inventory to ending balance. 3) Cost of Goods Sold                   200,000         Purchases                               200,000 To close out purchases account against COGS. Therefore, COGS = 4,000 + 200,000 = 204,000 Inventory = 30,000 – 4,000 = 26,000 My way: 1) Inventory                            200,000         Accounts Payable                        200,000 To record purchase of merchandise. 2) Cost of Goods Sold                   204,000         Inventory                               204,000 To adjust inventory to ending balance. Therefore, COGS = 204,000 Inventory = 30,000 + 200,000 – 204,000 = 26,000 The results are the same. "Everything should be made as simple  as possible, but not simpler."                                 – Albert Einstein      

Response:

That would be easy ! Use the "Goods In Trasit" Account

Response:

Could somebody tell me how to correct the following error. At the end of the year physical inventory reflects goods that have been received. The invoice however was not received and not entered during the same fiscal year. What accounts do you use to make correction? Thank you for your help

Per GAAP, whoever is in possession of goods has the title to them. therefore, even if you have not received the invoice for the goods already included in your physical inventory, you need to make accrual for its costs. Normally, this is the pro-forma entries:         Purchases                               xxxx                 Accounts payable                        xxxx If you have further questions, please forward your message to me at my dennis

Response:

BZZZZZZZT! Either way is fine. If you debit Purchases, you have to close it out at the end of the year anyway. The end result is the same. Debiting Inventory is easier though.

It’s not.  There are two trial balance inventory accounts – P&L inventory and BS inventory.  They should always be the same.  At the end of the year you merely journal in whatever is required to get them to equal physical stock, as follows: DR/CR  P&L inventory       X    CR/DR  BS inventory        X If you are suggesting that we journal amounts into either one of these accounts without doing the same to the other then you’re going to get into a pickle.  How will you journal in your closing stock at the end of the period?  You’re in great risk of getting in a situation that you won’t understand at the year end and you won’t be able to explain to your superiors/auditors. I repeat, debit purchases, credit accruals GRNI.  If you use a reversing journal then you don’t need to worry about closing it out (if I’m understanding you right). — "If you want to look at my feet, say so," said the young man.  "But don’t be a God-damned sneak about it."                               (from "A Perfect Day for Bananafish")

Response:

Debit Inventory Credit Accrues Accounts Payable BZZZZZZT! inventory isn’t part of the double entry system.  Sorry.  You meant purchases.

BZZZZZZZT! Either way is fine. If you debit Purchases, you have to close it out at the end of the year anyway. The end result is the same. Debiting Inventory is easier though. "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."                                                 – Albert Einstein      

Response:

: Debit Inventory : Credit Accrues Accounts Payable : : : BZZZZZZT! : : inventory isn’t part of the double entry system.  Sorry.  You meant : purchases. : : — : "If you want to look at my feet, say so," said the young man.  "But : don’t be a God-damned sneak about it." :                               (from "A Perfect Day for Bananafish") : It depends if they are using a perpetual system or not… IF they are using perpetual system and thus DR Inventory and CR A/P on purchases and  then on sales they make the following two entries:  DR A/R CR Sales and  DR Cost of Goods Sold CR Inventory….   So in this situation if they are on a perpetual system they need to accrue for inventory and then reverse the entry in the subsequent year when they enter the actual invoice into the system.

Response:

Debit Inventory Credit Accrues Accounts Payable – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Could somebody tell me how to correct the following error. At the end of the year physical inventory reflects goods that have been received. The invoice however was not received and not entered during the same fiscal year. What accounts do you use to make correction? Thank you for your help

Response:

Debit Inventory Credit Accrues Accounts Payable

BZZZZZZT! inventory isn’t part of the double entry system.  Sorry.  You meant purchases. — "If you want to look at my feet, say so," said the young man.  "But don’t be a God-damned sneak about it."                               (from "A Perfect Day for Bananafish")

Response:

Could somebody tell me how to correct the following error. At the end of the year physical inventory reflects goods that have been received. The invoice however was not received and not entered during the same fiscal year. What accounts do you use to make correction? Thank you for your help

Response:

Could somebody tell me how to correct the following error. At the end of the year physical inventory reflects goods that have been received. The invoice however was not received and not entered during the same fiscal year. What accounts do you use to make correction? Thank you for your help

debit purchases credit creditors (GRNI accrual) that way you get COS right. — "If you want to look at my feet, say so," said the young man.  "But don’t be a God-damned sneak about it."                               (from "A Perfect Day for Bananafish")

Response:

What happened when you counted the inventory and found it differed from your books (because you didn’t have the invoice)??? If the terms of the invoice state that the goods belonged to you at 12/31, then you should accrue the invoice in A/P or accrued expenses.  Then you should debit inventory or, if the inventory has already been adjusted to the physical count (which included the goods in question), then cost of goods sold. : Could somebody tell me how to correct the following error. : : At the end of the year physical inventory reflects goods that have been : received. The invoice however was not received and not entered during the : same fiscal year. What accounts do you use to make correction? : : Thank you for your help : : :

Response:

Question:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -I get your drift.  Actually, I was thinking about this subject yesterday, and it seems to me that the weak point in your proposition is that you are equating self interest with selfishness.  but they are not the same.  I am willing to accept as a general statement that we all humans act in our perceived self interest.  this, of course, is not to say out of selfishness.   there is nothing wrong with acting in your own self interest.  after all, whose self interest should you act in, if not your own?  this is far different from acting selfishly, which necessarily involves someone else. I really don’t think it is ever necessary to be selfish in order to serve your own self interest.  An important distinction must be made between actual self interest and perceived self interest.  Many people perceive harmful, wasteful and unneccessary things, to name just a few, to be in their self interest.  acting in furtherance of these wrongfully perceived items of self interest could well involve selfishness, I can think of many examples and many situations to both illustrate and explore these ideas.  I am sure you can too.  the one that comes to mind most readily is an employer who pays his employees a stingy wage, because he is selfish, and he perceives it to be in his self interest to do so.  in truth, he may be far better off paying a fair wage, and attracting more skilled and more productive workers.  Greed, of course, is a huge cause of selfishness, and it is never in one’s true self interest to be greedy. anyway, I throw these ideas out for thought and discussion. -Carlos

I definitly agree with you!  Though I use different words, perhaps yours are better to illistrate the point.  My problem is the way the dictionary defines selfish and unselfish.  The dictionary that I have says: Selfish – Having such reguard for one’s own interests and advantage that the happiness and welfare of others becomes of less concern than is concidered right or just; too much concern with one’s own welfare.  First off, who decides what is right or just, for we all have our own definitions for that.  The dictionary basically says that calling someone selfish is a judgement call and we are working on releasing our judgements of self and others (hence my definition of selfish – what someone calls you when you don’t want to give what they want to have).  Do we serve our own self interest?  YES! Dayly, hourly, every minute, every second.  Is the happiness and welfare of others only of secondary imortance to ourselves?  You bet!  There is a "but" here though.  A big "BUT" (no pun intended)!  When we finally realise that the happiness and welfare of others is directly tied in with our own, we can put everyone first, for it is in our highest self interest to give of ourselves and in thus doing we receive the same. That’s a big realisation, though.  And not one that is easy to come by.  We have to be selfish (as you would say Carlos) then we have to become aware that we are being that way and work to change the way we do things so that we can truely serve our self interest to the best advantage for ourselves, with the realisation that serving others, with honour and integrity, serves ourselves to the greatest advantage. That’s why I would tell someone to go out and be selfish, the lessons are inheirant.  Anyway, on with this.  The dictionary tells us: Selfless – Without reguard for oneself or one’s own interests; unselfish.  Yuck!  Now you may understand why I don’t want to be "Selfless".  I would die, if it were thus.  There has to be a balance in giving and that is receiving.  You have to able to receive as well as give or it just don’t work.  Take for instance, a person that gives everything of themselves and is not willing to receive the gifts of others to them.  They end up bitter and resentful in thier old age.  I have seen it.  How about another sinario (spelling?  What’s that?), if everyone were to give to everyone else and noone was able to receive any of it, what would happen?  Nonmovement.  They would go nowhere and they would all die, for they would just give it all away, all the time.  This is why I use the word "selfish" the way that I do.  I don’t use it as a judgement, for who am I to judge?  I use it the same way that you use the words "self interest".  In seeing how you use those words I can better explain what it is that I mean when I say "We are all selfish, all the time".  Thank you Carlos.  I am truely grateful for the time you have spent in response to my post.  Hope we may be able to share some more good insights. Drew

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Samuel.  What do you mean by "Unselfish"?  We are all completely 100% selfish at all times.  Examine the underlying motives for everything you do and you will find that it is from a selfish base.  Why do we seak answers?  For our own self gratification, of course.  What do we know except that which we experience of ourselves?  We don’t know anything except through self experience.  Why do we want relationships?  So that we can satisfy our selfish wants.  Why do we go off on a hermitage, alone in the wilderness, to find God?  For the selfish desire for inner peace and release from the self imposed torment of our lives.  Ask any of these questions and really listen and you will find that we do all things from selfishness.  Even gifts are given selfishly.  There is a difference between Ego selfishness and True selfishness.  Ego selfishness is the attempt to take power from another.  True selfishness is owning your own power and the knowing that you don’t NEED anyone elses.  How can we give, if there is nothing to give from?  If we were selfless, then how can we give of ourselves?  So, how can one be unselfish if they are selfish all the time?  Selfish is always used as sort of a swear word in this society. I don’t agree.  It’s time that we get a little selfish and stop giving our power away to those that want us to be selfless.  SELFISH – What someone calls you when you don’t want give what they want to have. Now, Samual, I really do think you are talking about releasing the NEED (or the ego self) and coming from the true self.  Gifting from the heart.  Am I selfish?  YOU BET!  Is this a selfish act?  YUP!  If I didn’t think I would get anything out of posting here, then I wouldn’t bother.  If I didn’t think that I would get anything out of life, then I wouldn’t bother.  All the true existentialists are dead. If this is all there is, then this is all there is.  Why not make the best of it?  BE who you are with relish!  And if you do not like and love who you are, then change it.  BE selfish and do it for yourself, not for your mom or dad.  Not for your friends.  Not for your lover. Not for God.  For yourself.  For, who else is there that is more important to your well BEing than you?  If you sit around waiting for others to do it for you, you will be waiting a long time.  Thanks for reading. With gratitude, Drew  

Hi Drew: I’ve been pondering upon your statements and questions for a few hours … and don’t know how to answer them! About all I can do is try to clear up what I meant by "unselfish". IMO … people who *live* as ‘Saints’ have banished the ‘little voice’ that says, … "ME first" … from their mind. They have *overcome* the self-ishness which we are all afflicted with and programmed to yield to, in this ‘dog eat dog’ world. They *live* altruistic lives … doing for others what needs to be done, with no thought of … "What’s in it for ME." **Expecting nothing** … not a "thank you", nor acknowledgement, for anything they do. In context … I thought the meaning was fairly clear. :Saints … have banished their personal greed, :and take the time to notice other people’s need. :Then … working in an absolutely UNSELFISH way, :they bring about the things … for which others ‘pray’. My apologies … if my choice of words has failed to convey exactly what is meant. Regards, samuel

Response:

It is as I thought you were trying to convey.  It is what I would concider "True Selfishness".  As I said in my post, we cannot get out of being selfish, we can, however, get out of our egos and thereby release the NEED to be satisfied by others.  This is a release of expectation that you will get a certain thing from someone or some situation and be open to receive what ever is given in that situation. For expectations come from neediness, which in turn comes from fear of not having (Ego).  When a person understands that he/she already has whatever they "NEED" then expectations are no longer abundant and he/she will be able to receive what is truely given and not be disappointed when they do not get what they expected to recieve.  "Ego Selfishness", as I call it, is when someone manipulates a situation, not only to benifit self, but to get a specific response and to feel in control of another to feel powerful.  "True Selfishness", on the other hand, is the release of the NEED to feel powerful, for the person already knows they ARE powerful, and the release of the expectation of what SHOULD happen to benifit him/her, for the person KNOWS that whatever happens, whether they judge it good or bad, ALWAYS benifits him/herself.  The trick is, being willing to receive what ever it is with an open heart and learn what there is to learn from it.  Thus, ALWAYS are we benifitted in self and from this point are able to give as much, if not more, than we receive.  We will always be selfish and we will always do things to further our selves.  The things that we should be working on though is releasing the ego and be willing to get to the point where we can give from the heart and receive to it as well, without expectation or need, the gifts that are given.  For, if we already know that we already have what we need, then the gifts we receive is just more icing on the cake.  Hey, thanks for reading and your clearification, Samuel. With gratitude, Drew

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Samuel.  What do you mean by "Unselfish"?  We are all completely 100% selfish at all times.  Examine the underlying motives for everything you do and you will find that it is from a selfish base.  Why do we seak answers?  For our own self gratification, of course.  What do we know except that which we experience of ourselves?  We don’t know anything except through self experience.  Why do we want relationships?  So that we can satisfy our selfish wants.  Why do we go off on a hermitage, alone in the wilderness, to find God?  For the selfish desire for inner peace and release from the self imposed torment of our lives.  Ask any of these questions and really listen and you will find that we do all things from selfishness.  Even gifts are given selfishly.  There is a difference between Ego selfishness and True selfishness.  Ego selfishness is the attempt to take power from another.  True selfishness is owning your own power and the knowing that you don’t NEED anyone elses.  How can we give, if there is nothing to give from?  If we were selfless, then how can we give of ourselves?  So, how can one be unselfish if they are selfish all the time?  Selfish is always used as sort of a swear word in this society. I don’t agree.  It’s time that we get a little selfish and stop giving our power away to those that want us to be selfless.  SELFISH – What someone calls you when you don’t want give what they want to have. Now, Samual, I really do think you are talking about releasing the NEED (or the ego self) and coming from the true self.  Gifting from the heart.  Am I selfish?  YOU BET!  Is this a selfish act?  YUP!  If I didn’t think I would get anything out of posting here, then I wouldn’t bother.  If I didn’t think that I would get anything out of life, then I wouldn’t bother.  All the true existentialists are dead. If this is all there is, then this is all there is.  Why not make the best of it?  BE who you are with relish!  And if you do not like and love who you are, then change it.  BE selfish and do it for yourself, not for your mom or dad.  Not for your friends.  Not for your lover. Not for God.  For yourself.  For, who else is there that is more important to your well BEing than you?  If you sit around waiting for others to do it for you, you will be waiting a long time.  Thanks for reading. With gratitude, Drew  

this is a gross misunderstanding of the subject matter, but from the point of view of many, if not most, people, absolutely correct. if being unselfish were easy, anyone could do it.  a single unselfish act is a great accomplishment.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Samuel.  What do you mean by "Unselfish"?  We are all completely 100% selfish at all times.  Examine the underlying motives for everything you do and you will find that it is from a selfish base.  Why do we seak answers?  For our own self gratification, of course.  What do we know except that which we experience of ourselves?  We don’t know anything except through self experience.  Why do we want relationships?  So that we can satisfy our selfish wants.  Why do we go off on a hermitage, alone in the wilderness, to find God?  For the selfish desire for inner peace and release from the self imposed torment of our lives.  Ask any of these questions and really listen and you will find that we do all things from selfishness.  Even gifts are given selfishly.  There is a difference between Ego selfishness and True selfishness.  Ego selfishness is the attempt to take power from another.  True selfishness is owning your own power and the knowing that you don’t NEED anyone elses.  How can we give, if there is nothing to give from?  If we were selfless, then how can we give of ourselves?  So, how can one be unselfish if they are selfish all the time?  Selfish is always used as sort of a swear word in this society. I don’t agree.  It’s time that we get a little selfish and stop giving our power away to those that want us to be selfless.  SELFISH – What someone calls you when you don’t want give what they want to have. Now, Samual, I really do think you are talking about releasing the NEED (or the ego self) and coming from the true self.  Gifting from the heart.  Am I selfish?  YOU BET!  Is this a selfish act?  YUP!  If I didn’t think I would get anything out of posting here, then I wouldn’t bother.  If I didn’t think that I would get anything out of life, then I wouldn’t bother.  All the true existentialists are dead. If this is all there is, then this is all there is.  Why not make the best of it?  BE who you are with relish!  And if you do not like and love who you are, then change it.  BE selfish and do it for yourself, not for your mom or dad.  Not for your friends.  Not for your lover. Not for God.  For yourself.  For, who else is there that is more important to your well BEing than you?  If you sit around waiting for others to do it for you, you will be waiting a long time.  Thanks for reading. With gratitude, Drew   Hi Drew: I’ve been pondering upon your statements and questions for a few hours … and don’t know how to answer them! About all I can do is try to clear up what I meant by "unselfish". IMO … people who *live* as ‘Saints’ have banished the ‘little voice’ that says, … "ME first" … from their mind.

i think they have a totally different concept of "me."   it is closely tied to the concept of duty.

Response:

this is a gross misunderstanding of the subject matter, but from the point of view of many, if not most, people, absolutely correct. if being unselfish were easy, anyone could do it.  a single unselfish act is a great accomplishment.

I understand and even agree on a level.  My point is we cannot be "Selfless", it’s not in the program.  Everything we do, we do out of "Selfish" motives.  Take our needs for a moment.  Food, water, shelter and clothing.  These are the things that we need (not ego NEED, but true need) to survive.  If one were "Selfless" he/she would give all this up to someone else that needed it and therefore die.  So, even in being alive are we selfish.  There has to be a self to give from or we would have nothing to give.  Get my drift?   I do have a question for you though.  What would you concider a selfless act?  Maybe your answer will help me explain my possition better.  Thanks for the response.  With gratitude, Drew

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -this is a gross misunderstanding of the subject matter, but from the point of view of many, if not most, people, absolutely correct. if being unselfish were easy, anyone could do it.  a single unselfish act is a great accomplishment. I understand and even agree on a level.  My point is we cannot be "Selfless", it’s not in the program.  Everything we do, we do out of "Selfish" motives.  Take our needs for a moment.  Food, water, shelter and clothing.  These are the things that we need (not ego NEED, but true need) to survive.  If one were "Selfless" he/she would give all this up to someone else that needed it and therefore die.  So, even in being alive are we selfish.  There has to be a self to give from or we would have nothing to give.  Get my drift?   I do have a question for you though.  What would you concider a selfless act?  Maybe your answer will help me explain my possition better.  Thanks for the response.  With gratitude, Drew

I get your drift.  Actually, I was thinking about this subject yesterday, and it seems to me that the weak point in your proposition is that you are equating self interest with selfishness.  but they are not the same.  I am willing to accept as a general statement that we all humans act in our perceived self interest.  this, of course, is not to say out of selfishness.   there is nothing wrong with acting in your own self interest.  after all, whose self interest should you act in, if not your own?  this is far different from acting selfishly, which necessarily involves someone else. I really don’t think it is ever necessary to be selfish in order to serve your own self interest.  An important distinction must be made between actual self interest and perceived self interest.  Many people perceive harmful, wasteful and unneccessary things, to name just a few, to be in their self interest.  acting in furtherance of these wrongfully perceived items of self interest could well involve selfishness, I can think of many examples and many situations to both illustrate and explore these ideas.  I am sure you can too.  the one that comes to mind most readily is an employer who pays his employees a stingy wage, because he is selfish, and he perceives it to be in his self interest to do so.  in truth, he may be far better off paying a fair wage, and attracting more skilled and more productive workers.  Greed, of course, is a huge cause of selfishness, and it is never in one’s true self interest to be greedy. anyway, I throw these ideas out for thought and discussion. -Carlos

Response:

Samuel.  What do you mean by "Unselfish"?  We are all completely 100% selfish at all times.  Examine the underlying motives for everything you do and you will find that it is from a selfish base.  Why do we seak answers?  For our own self gratification, of course.  What do we know except that which we experience of ourselves?  We don’t know anything except through self experience.  Why do we want relationships?  So that we can satisfy our selfish wants.  Why do we go off on a hermitage, alone in the wilderness, to find God?  For the selfish desire for inner peace and release from the self imposed torment of our lives.  Ask any of these questions and really listen and you will find that we do all things from selfishness.  Even gifts are given selfishly.  There is a difference between Ego selfishness and True selfishness.  Ego selfishness is the attempt to take power from another.  True selfishness is owning your own power and the knowing that you don’t NEED anyone elses.  How can we give, if there is nothing to give from?  If we were selfless, then how can we give of ourselves?  So, how can one be unselfish if they are selfish all the time?  Selfish is always used as sort of a swear word in this society. I don’t agree.  It’s time that we get a little selfish and stop giving our power away to those that want us to be selfless.  SELFISH – What someone calls you when you don’t want give what they want to have. Now, Samual, I really do think you are talking about releasing the NEED (or the ego self) and coming from the true self.  Gifting from the heart.  Am I selfish?  YOU BET!  Is this a selfish act?  YUP!  If I didn’t think I would get anything out of posting here, then I wouldn’t bother.  If I didn’t think that I would get anything out of life, then I wouldn’t bother.  All the true existentialists are dead. If this is all there is, then this is all there is.  Why not make the best of it?  BE who you are with relish!  And if you do not like and love who you are, then change it.  BE selfish and do it for yourself, not for your mom or dad.  Not for your friends.  Not for your lover. Not for God.  For yourself.  For, who else is there that is more important to your well BEing than you?  If you sit around waiting for others to do it for you, you will be waiting a long time.  Thanks for reading. With gratitude, Drew  

Response:

Newsgroups:   misc.activism.progressive Zapatista Army of National Liberation Mexico. January 14, 1998 To the National Commission of Intermediation San Cristobal de Las Casas, Chiapas, Mexico Ladies and gentlemen members of Conai: We have become aware of the document called "For a strategy for peace with democracy" which you addressed to the branches of the government, the EZLN, to Civil Society and to the peoples of the world, dated January 11, 1998. In the part which you direct to the EZLN, you demand that we continue to act within the parameters of the law of March 11, 1995 sustaining our will for dialogue and negotiation; that we continue to struggle politically; that we deepen our efforts for dialogue with other communities and indigenous and non-indigenous organizations in Chiapas; and that we increase the dialogue with organizations which belong to civil society and political society. Since January 12 of 1994 (and not since the encounter of San Miguel in April of 1995 as you point out in your letter) the EZLN has insisted once and again on a path for dialogue towards a peaceful solution to the war.  Our civil initiatives have not been few or small.  They have been accompanied by the best of national and international civil society in order to construct conditions for a peace with justice and dignity. Examples of these peaceful initiatives include the dialogue at the Cathedral and the National Democratic Convention in 1994; the dialogue of San Andres and the National and International consultation for peace in 1995; the call to organize the FZLN, the celebration of the National Indigenous Forum, the signature of the first agreements with the federal government (which have yet to be fulfilled, the First Continental Encounter, the National Forum for the Jreform of the State, the First Intercontinental Encounter for Humanity and against Neoliberalism,  the tri-partite meetings of  Cocopa-EZLN-Conai in 1996; and the march on Mexico City by the 1,111 in 1997. The government response to our apparent will for dialogue and negotiation has been the lack of fulfillment of the first signed agreements, the activation of paramilitary groups, the assassination of our support bases, the persecution of our leaders,  the attack of the federal soldiers against the communities, and the saturation of the military in all the territory of Chiapas (in spite of the intended pretense to minimize the geography of this injustice with the label of "conflict zone.) But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war.    The government ordered the assassination of 45 indigenous people at Acteal as a departure point for an offensive against us. Through the information in the press and the confessions of some of the accused, it is evident that the massacre was planned with anticipation and full knowledge and direction from the authorities.  A few days ago, Public Security Police were detained by the Immigration Service and not by the one who is supposedlly applying the "regulations applied to weapons and explosives.", as they were transporting weapons coming from Guatemala. The recipients? The paramilitaries. But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. At the same time we learned of your letter, we received confirmation of the assassination of our companera Guadalupe Mendez Lopez, in an attack by the Public Security police of the state of Chiapas against a peaceful demonstration at the municipal head of Ocosingo on January 12th. As a response to the great mobilizations for peace with justice and dignity which occurred in several cities in Mexico and in the world, the police forces of the government shot at a civil demonstration of indigenous. But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. In the community of La Realidad, for example the federal Army doubles the number of artilleries vehicles, of military patrols. Four times a day, up to 38 motorized united "travel" through the Tojolabal community. Military airplanes carry out daily and nightly flights at different times. By day they carry out maneuvers used in aerial combat for the bombing and strafing of fixed positions. Perhaps they rehearse the future. But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. The federal government, verbally and by actions of its Secretary of Justice, defines the "new" strategy for Chiapas: the replacement of mediators, the persecution and isolation of the Zapatistas, and large amounts of money to pretend to construct the peace while feeding the war. The "strategy" is absurd: Mister Rabasa is named "coordinator of the dilaogue" (not of the "government" but of the "dialogue".  Dialogue with whom? Where is the other part of the dialogue which together with the government, names him "coordinator"? Where is the place for the mediation?  For  the Cocopa? Mister Rabasa hurries to declare that his objective is not a dialogue with the EZLN but something broader, a "Copernican revolution".  Surely  he refers to a dialogue with organizations other than the EZLN at many "little tables" (as they have tried before ) to distract public opinion and tranquilize the European Union. The new "governmental strategy" is a dialogue without the other part, without mediation, accompaniment, it is a monologue.  The fact that Rabasa Gamboa was named merits a title of "coordinator of the government monologue about Chiapas" But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. By the time this letter reaches its destination, our companeros and companeras of the support bases will have already buried Guadalupe Mendez Lopez in the Zapatista mountains.  Guadalupe died fighting through political means and the response she received was a 5.56 calibre bullet in her "left frontal" abdomen. But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. When this letter arrives in your hands, the federal government will have given away more declarations of "peace”, it will make an accounting of its intermediaries with the "actors in the conflict" and will beg to be believed when it says that the only thing which is happening in Chiapas is a conflict "among the poor" and will continue to bet that the "bitter drinks" of Acteal and Ocosingo will be digested (and forgotten) by public opinion. And the Army will continue to pursue us and provoke confrontations. But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. What effort for dialogue with indigenous and non-indigenous organizations, with civil or political society can we deepen or increase when they hunt us down like animals, with hunting dogs and all the technological paraphernalia of death? But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. Come and speak with the soldiers (silence will be the likely response to the questions about persecution), talk with the police ("Any son of a whore who throws a rock at me will get a bullet" they will answer with anger. Speak to them about dialogue, about respect, about the law, about human rights. "I am only following orders they will always answer.  Whose orders are they? We know what the orders are. ("Find them and wipe them out") but we do not know where the orders come from. But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. The Army searches diligently for an encounter with our forces, this can be proven by the nature of their movements, their approach and their distribution.  Do they do this while following "orders"? If so, then where is the government’s will for dialogue? Are they acting on their own? If so, then who is really governing this country? But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. What law should we obey if the one who advocates it does not do so, and the Executive Branch breaks it according to its interest and convenience? But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. The federal government is not willing to negotiate with truth and responsibility. It desires, and seeks desperately, a breathing space in the actual crisis. All its efforts point in that direction. It is not peace it seeks, it is time. To play at a possible solution to the conflict is its objective. Afterwards, when the waters turn its way, it will insist once again on the blows and threats for surrender. But the government says it is false that they play at peace while making war. That man does not want peace. Now he is bolder, he has erased that word in his speech from his discourse in regards to Chiapas and us.  Perhaps it is better that way. That way there is no deception. We are not willing to surrender nor to tolerate blows with impunity. All our actual effort is directed at resisting the harassment and to avoid following into the continual and more definitive belligerent provocations of the government. How long must we wait? This is the question drawn by the blood of Acteal. This is the question which we ask in front of the tomb of Guadalupe. This is the question for all of you, for all of them, for everyone. Vale. Health and remember that peace must have justice and dignity, otherwise it is just a silent war. )From the mountains of the Mexican southeast. For the Indigenous Revolutionary Clandestine Committee Zapatista Army of National Liberation Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos Mexico, January of 1998 Translated by: Cecilia Rodriguez, NCDLJ ITEM: U.S. military aid to the … read more »

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "A Saint we call that man who hath in Sat-Lok merged his soul; the fourth Realm (Dimension) beyond the three, the durbar of Satnam and Satguru. There the soul of the Saint enjoyeth bliss and resideth in Sat-Purush and Sat-Shabd. Save the Saint, none reacheth there; and without reaching there none can be a Saint." Swami Ji Maharaj (1818-1878) From Radha Soami Teachings by Prof. L. R. Puri ‘Saints’ and ‘Sinners’. Saints … are just ex-sinners who have figured out, what the object of living is really about. They’ve learned that lusting for material things, only burden, sorrow and misery brings. Saints … have banished their personal greed, and take the time to notice other people’s need. Then … working in an absolutely UNSELFISH way, they bring about the things … for which others ‘pray’. Saints … would not be such a rare breed, if more of us *chose* to emulate their unself-ish deed. We just have to tell our EGO to go to Hell! Then as Saints … instead of sinners … we can all dwell. Saints … were ordinary people … who became IN-lightened. Of being Deity* manifesting … they are not frightened. They have learned … ALTRUISTIC … is the way to live. They have learned … UNCONDITIONAL … is the way to GIVE. samuel  - 1998 Sat Lok is our True Home. Sat Nam is the True Lord.  Satguru is the Perfect Master.  Sat-Purush is another name for True Lord.  Sat-Shabd means the True Sound, or The True Holy Spirit. Michael Martin, Guru of Surat Shabd Yoga, or The Philosophy Of The Masters

Dear Samuel, Saints … are just ex-sinners who have figured out, what the object of living is really about.

Sometimes it’s likes that, but there is another type of Saint, who has been sent from the Supreme Being to save us.  You can even say, it is the Lord, himself, who comes as a Saviour. We just have to tell our EGO to go to Hell! Then as Saints … instead of sinners … we can all dwell.

Let’s don’t oversimplify things.  We have to follow the spiritual discipline, as taught by the Perfect Master, if we are to conquer the ego. Thanks for that posting, Samuel, it’s a good one. Michael Martin Guru of Surat Shabd Yoga, or The Philosophy Of The Masters

Response:

"A Saint we call that man who hath in Sat-Lok merged his soul; the fourth Realm (Dimension) beyond the three, the durbar of Satnam and Satguru. There the soul of the Saint enjoyeth bliss and resideth in Sat-Purush and Sat-Shabd. Save the Saint, none reacheth there; and without reaching there none can be a Saint." Swami Ji Maharaj (1818-1878) From Radha Soami Teachings by Prof. L. R. Puri

‘Saints’ and ‘Sinners’. Saints … are just ex-sinners who have figured out, what the object of living is really about. They’ve learned that lusting for material things, only burden, sorrow and misery brings. Saints … have banished their personal greed, and take the time to notice other people’s need. Then … working in an absolutely UNSELFISH way, they bring about the things … for which others ‘pray’. Saints … would not be such a rare breed, if more of us *chose* to emulate their unself-ish deed. We just have to tell our EGO to go to Hell! Then as Saints … instead of sinners … we can all dwell. Saints … were ordinary people … who became IN-lightened. Of being Deity* manifesting … they are not frightened. They have learned … ALTRUISTIC … is the way to live. They have learned … UNCONDITIONAL … is the way to GIVE. samuel  - 1998 – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Sat Lok is our True Home. Sat Nam is the True Lord.  Satguru is the Perfect Master.  Sat-Purush is another name for True Lord.  Sat-Shabd means the True Sound, or The True Holy Spirit. Michael Martin, Guru of Surat Shabd Yoga, or The Philosophy Of The Masters

Response:

"A Saint we call that man who hath in Sat-Lok merged his soul; the fourth Realm (Dimension) beyond the three, the durbar of Satnam and Satguru. There the soul of the Saint enjoyeth bliss and resideth in Sat-Purush and Sat-Shabd. Save the Saint, none reacheth there; and without reaching there none can be a Saint." Swami Ji Maharaj (1818-1878) From Radha Soami Teachings by Prof. L. R. Puri Sat Lok is our True Home. Sat Nam is the True Lord.  Satguru is the Perfect Master.  Sat-Purush is another name for True Lord.  Sat-Shabd means the True Sound, or The True Holy Spirit. Michael Martin, Guru of Surat Shabd Yoga, or The Philosophy Of The Masters

Response:

Question:

I agree with Rae.  No matter how rotten or discouraged  you feel, NEVER back down or get intimidated.  It wasn’t until my lawyer filed suit that my employer sat up and took real notice.  But it’s been over a year now and they still delay – picking apart anything that they can find that might disqualify my claim.  The latest pick was that in 1991, on this date,in fact that I saw a psychiatrist.  I had just happened to mention to him that I had tried to fill in as a special needs aid at the local school one day.  It didn’t work out because of pain and fatigue – I just couldn’t make it.  Well this showed up in my report to the insurance company and now the lawyers for the employer want me to explain myself and give details about returning to "work".   Well, I guess if they are going to be that way, I will have a little bit longer to wait to negotiate settlement.  In one more month, my specialist will have the results of my LP and bloodwork.  They are now lying in wait for this.  It does get us down sometimes but if you know you are right, hang in there.  Lorelle

Response:

At the begining of May I’m suppose to start partial long term disability through the insurance company at my job. I have been on short term partial disability (3 months) in which my employer has payed my full salary, since I’m a salaried employee. Now I’m waiting/worrying am I going to be accepted? The insurance company has paided claims for employees for a few months, but I am the first to apply for long term disability (15 hours per week). Hope I don’t have to get a lawyer! Cathy, Arizona Lorelle Gilbert <Richard_Gilb…@gsacrd.ab.ca> wrote in article <334DB6A0.1…@gsacrd.ab.ca>… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I agree with Rae.  No matter how rotten or discouraged  you feel, > NEVER back down or get intimidated.  It wasn’t until my lawyer filed > suit that my employer sat up and took real notice.  But it’s been over > a year now and they still delay – picking apart anything that they can > find that might disqualify my claim.  

Response:

Hi         I’ve been on short term. I recieve 50% pay on this and after 6 months I get long term at 60% pay. I guess I’m rather lucky I work for a hospital in the states. And my employeer said I would have a job waiting even if it takes months for me to recover. I’ve been out of work for 2months. I am checked out with my primary care doctor every month to see if I go back to work. I hope soon! Keep up with the paperwork. Learn all you can about the insurance. make phone calls. You need info to get the benifits. Ask questions.  GOOD LUCK!!! On 9 Apr 1997 22:20:01 GMT, "Sean Edgeworth" <Seane…@indigo.ie> wrote: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Hi all, >    I am interested in corresponding with anyone who is in the above situation >and their experiences with the insurance companys.I have availed of this >because of my MS and have no conection with any insurance company.There >were upcoming redundancys in my job but I was given no indication as to >whether I would be included or not and the company would only state that >there was a job for me there at present and no indications or guarantees >for the future.I am worried about depending >on this as a source of income long term and would be interested in learning >about >any experiences,good or bad.I was lurking for about a year while I >frantically alternated between whether to claim or not.I was hoping to see >some posts on it,unfortunately there were none.It`s too late now as I have >gone through the process and it was a scarey business.I was in a bad way >with the stress of it all and there was no advice available,just shoulder >shrugging and blank stares.I felt like I was going mad again at times,or >even rude for asking such questions.The MS society was of no help and they >ran away from the topic.I wanted to continue working but was not able to in >the end as a result of the uncertainty.I had a really good job by Irish >standards and hated loosing it.There were other people in the company (1800 >employees) who had MS but personnell refused to make repersentation to them >on my behalf to ask them their advice.I did not know who they were as they >were in a different section of the plant.If this is an unsuitable topic for >the public domain just let me know and I will give up. >                    Regds Sean

Response:

Hi Carol,         thanks for the reply,I was working fulltime when I applied.I was all messed up at the time and could not seem to think straight.I went to a solicitor in the end,gave him the details and asked him to provide me with a comprehensive assesment of the facts. I used him purely for analysing my predicament and had no thoughts of legal action.I felt that he would be used to assesing such dilemmas and did not trust my own judgement based on the fact that I was too close to the situation to make an objective assesment. He provided me with a clear, consice report with a list of options,possible risks and a final reccomendation.he was a real help in my situation. I went back to the neuro twice to be sure that there was no prior evidence of pre-existing illness,he assured me that there was not.I then got him to write to my GP and detail his assesment of my illness.I said I felt he was too expensive for the less significant treatments.I then went to my GP and demanded that he read the letter out loud.He agreed to do so reluctantly.While the neuro insisted that there was no way of saying what my future was,in the letter to my GP he was a little more frank."I am concerned that Seans illness is of a more progressive nature" were the words used I think.I felt a little devious for doing that but I needed some indication of my prognosis.The neuro was following what he felt was the best course of approach and I respect him for that,but I had more to deal with than the immediate consequences of the disease.I was more concerned with the effect it would have on my wife and family and felt it very hard to deal with not being able to provide for them. I really found this the most stressfull aspect of diagnosis and spent many nights/mornings going over and over the details in my mind;usually sitting in the kitchen in my dressingown. When I said in work that i was no longer capable of continuing they were not terribly pleased and gave me 3 months off to be sure I wanted to do that.In the meantime I had started to deteriorate and most days was very ragged in my walking and general health.At the end of the 3 months I was no better and I opted to go.I had to stay out for a further 3 months for the insurance to kick in.After 6 months I was sent two forms to be filled out,one for my neuro and one for myself.I got the neuro to fill out his first and I then completed mine.Some of the questions were a little scarey at the time,e.g When do you expect the claimant to return to work…….3months……..6months…….1year……..other stating when.The neuro wrote "Never". I really felt the pressure when I handed over the forms,and felt I was shutting the doors on employment  and doing it myself.Its a hard thing to do when you have busted a gut for 32 years to reach a level of skill and competancy,to then have to bin it all.Yet I had to be gratefull because many do not have the cover I had, so it was a strange emotion.I guess its a case of always striving for further advancment,and finding it hard to accept less than you expected.I hope I do not upset anyone who is less fortunate,I just want to help anyone in a similar predicament.The application seems to have gone through o.k. I have not been contacted by the insurance company yet.They are paying me 67% of my final years salary indexed by 5% each year.I believe that this is similar to most of these disability schemes and once the diagnosis is made then they do not tend to investigate them unless they are alerted to some evidence of a previous illness.There is no evidence in my case thank God. I was told that "no one could have realistically known prior to now that you had MS so therefor you are covered by the policy.MS is a very difficult disease to diagnose and a whole list of other possibile diseases and conditions must be eliminated first.MRI changes that somewhat and if there are obvious lesions and scar tissue then it can be made with less testing.That is what these policys are for,that is your reason for buying them in the first place,they are not for charity". It does worry me now when I see people begging for a diagnosis without considering the implications,though I never thought there was anything that seriously wrong with me when I first went to the doctor.Things always seem clearer in hindsight . I just wanted to know what was wrong, get it fixed, and get back to where I was before the symptoms started.Depressed,run down, anemia, unfit, all in your head,hypocondriac, middle age,mid life crices ,anything, but nothing serious. It was only when he said to me "your results are consistent with Multiple Sclerosis" that I thought,"what the  hell am I going to do now for a liveing".If you are not diagnosed then you are not ill,that is the bottom line.If you are diagnosed,then when that diagnosis is made the train pulls out of that station.That is not to say that there are not plenty of other options,but that one is not a hot prospect. I hope this is of use to someone out there,it is only ment to be of help and written with that in mind.                         Retired and tired,                                 Sean

Response:

Hi Sean, I’ve been on a combination of Social Security and long term disability through my employer for 7 years now.   I went back to work for a year after being diagnosed but the stress and fatigue got to be too much.  On the advice of family and doctors, I went on disability.  Now I worked in a small company, an orthopaedic practice with about 30 employees. Of course my decision wasn’t too hard to make, especially after the office manager informed me that if I missed too much more time, then I might not have a job to come back to(I’d missed a week in a years time due directly to my MS). I don’t know if you’ve thought about SS or not, but it has worked well for me.  I was only 32 at the time all this happened. If I can be of further assistance, please e-mail me. Marcy

Response:

Sean, My experience with LTD through my employer is very similar to Carol’s, except that I applied for benefits (and was accepted on the first try) before I went to part time status. I was, however (as Carol probably was too) turned down for SSDI because I make more than $500 per month.  I knew that they would turn me down when I applied, but my LTD requires me to apply or they reduce my benefits. Z – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Carol Roberts <Qrobe…@worldnet.att.net> wrote: >This topic is very suitable for this newsgroup.  I think I was lucky.  I >worked as a certified public accountant (CPA) with a small regional >firm. They had some ability to be flexible.  I never paid any attention >to the disability plan that was part of the employee package until I >realized that I would no longer qualify to participate in the plan the >next year due to the decreased hours I was working.  I had gone down to >10-15 per week.  So the idea came to me, maybe I qualify for benefits. >Everyone cautioned me that I would have to appeal at least once. But I >went ahead anyway. I filled out forms, doctors filled out forms, my >employer filled out forms.  We put them all in one envelope and 10 days >later I received a letter stating what my benefits were, and how much >they were reduced for wages earned. ( each dollar earned reduced >benefits by fifty cents) And that even if I earned too much to receive >benefits, as long as the illness persisted I would not have to reapply >at a later time when I could not work full-time again.  I worked for >another year before I was let go because the cognitive problems made my >work very unreliable – sometimes it was trully garbage.  When I went on >full disability the private insurance required that I apply for public >disability (SSDI), and the social security benefits offset the private >benefit almost totally.  But if I should ever be able to work enough to >lose the SSDI, the private benefit will increase accordingly. >Again, I feel very lucky because both times I got approved for benefits >on the first try.  I think I was very clear about how my life was so >different than it was before I got sick.  And I don’t even have a >definite diagnosis of MS.  My benefits are received for possible MS and >major depression.  Hope this info is what you were looking for. >Carol Roberts

http://www.mindspring.com/~cczimmer/ +————————————————————————+ + Carolyn C. Zimmer       | "I’ve been warped by the rain,               | + Duluth, GA              |  driven by the snow, I’m drunk and dirty,    | + cczim…@mindspring.com |  don’t you know, But I’m still…willin’"    | + STANDARD DISCLAIMER     |                               Lowell George  | +————————————————————————+

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Sean Edgeworth wrote: > Hi all, >         I am interested in corresponding with anyone who is in the above situation > and their experiences with the insurance companys.I have availed of this > because of my MS and have no conection with any insurance company.There > were upcoming redundancys in my job but I was given no indication as to > whether I would be included or not and the company would only state that > there was a job for me there at present and no indications or guarantees > for the future.I am worried about depending > on this as a source of income long term and would be interested in learning > about > any experiences,good or bad.I was lurking for about a year while I > frantically alternated between whether to claim or not.I was hoping to see > some posts on it,unfortunately there were none.It`s too late now as I have > gone through the process and it was a scarey business.I was in a bad way > with the stress of it all and there was no advice available,just shoulder > shrugging and blank stares.I felt like I was going mad again at times,or > even rude for asking such questions.The MS society was of no help and they > ran away from the topic.I wanted to continue working but was not able to in > the end as a result of the uncertainty.I had a really good job by Irish > standards and hated loosing it.There were other people in the company (1800 > employees) who had MS but personnell refused to make repersentation to them > on my behalf to ask them their advice.I did not know who they were as they > were in a different section of the plant.If this is an unsuitable topic for > the public domain just let me know and I will give up. >                         Regds Sean

Sean, This topic is very suitable for this newsgroup.  I think I was lucky.  I worked as a certified public accountant (CPA) with a small regional firm. They had some ability to be flexible.  I never paid any attention to the disability plan that was part of the employee package until I realized that I would no longer qualify to participate in the plan the next year due to the decreased hours I was working.  I had gone down to 10-15 per week.  So the idea came to me, maybe I qualify for benefits. Everyone cautioned me that I would have to appeal at least once. But I went ahead anyway. I filled out forms, doctors filled out forms, my employer filled out forms.  We put them all in one envelope and 10 days later I received a letter stating what my benefits were, and how much they were reduced for wages earned. ( each dollar earned reduced benefits by fifty cents) And that even if I earned too much to receive benefits, as long as the illness persisted I would not have to reapply at a later time when I could not work full-time again.  I worked for another year before I was let go because the cognitive problems made my work very unreliable – sometimes it was trully garbage.  When I went on full disability the private insurance required that I apply for public disability (SSDI), and the social security benefits offset the private benefit almost totally.  But if I should ever be able to work enough to lose the SSDI, the private benefit will increase accordingly. Again, I feel very lucky because both times I got approved for benefits on the first try.  I think I was very clear about how my life was so different than it was before I got sick.  And I don’t even have a definite diagnosis of MS.  My benefits are received for possible MS and major depression.  Hope this info is what you were looking for. Carol Roberts

Response: