First of all, when is an offer of marriage an “indecent proposal”?

Second of all, I do NOT consider $500 “cheap”.

Third, given the style, intellect, and tenor of your reply, were I not married, I would take a trip down there to meet you. Since I AM married, would you consider some sort of temporary arrangement until I can work our my problem?

always,
tony

First I would like to apologize for my slow response, but it is now after May 1 and I am feeling flush and level headed again (less likely to accept the heady opportunity to be a “mail-order bride” at my age). At first blush your “indecent proposal” made me smile. Then I gave some serious thought to the arrangement. Being pragmatic, I made a list of points for possible negotiation. I will get to those later. ; )
Prior to reading your article I had been doing some revaluation of my “budget”-Tax time. One of the numbers I was trying to target was my “mad money”-the amount I could spent relatively guilt free, after earnestly meeting my past, present and future obligations. $500 was the ballpark figure I was trying to make work, playing fast and loose with “wants vs. needs”. I long ago gave up purchases for prestige, but do consider feeding my 5 dogs a “need”.

In reply to a responder you wrote:
“Most folks would consider themselves “rich” if they had an extra $1,000/mo to spend just as they wished. If you had no bills (other than utilities and property taxes) it wouldn’t take much of an income to be “rich”.”

I am happy with $500 to spend without thinking….once EVERYTHING else is taken care of. Which brings me to your proposal. If EVERYTHING were taken care of would I be willing to accept such an arrangement for $500/mo.? (The old punch line “Now that we have established your character, we can negotiate price.” mockingly floated threw my mind.) Then Lynne threw in something about my being cheap and easy…I am taking care of the not being easy or cheap now.

Given your penchant for parable and clever comments to responders, I couldn’t help but think of the article “A Lesson in Redistribution of Wealth/Healthcare Bill, Thursday, April 15th, 2010, Author Unknown”. I would not want to be guilty of accepting a contract without knowing the terms….Certainly there are implied conditions with regard to wifely duties, the keeping of a house, etc. Also, while $500/mo. extra by my hand seems luxurious, by someone else’s I might need that $1000/mo. especially if we are talking in perpetuity…. A la “THE RICH GET RICHER AND THE POOR GET POORER” Sunday, March 7th, 2010 or “Don’t Call Me Lucky”, Wednesday, April 7th, 2010. I am working on option 2 from the first article, but not quite there yet…
As for being “damaged goods”, as I remember it Linda let you down pretty gently. I do share Linda’s love for lively conversation, the use re-appropriation of some items and her marital status. But thanks for the “out”.
Now that I have been called out for my “Crush”, I will try not to fawn so openly, but continue to enjoy all the postings here and on W&G.

Affectionately with tongue in cheek,

Cheri.

PERHAPS Obama does want the “best and brightest” in gubbermint, but you wouldn’t know it by he appointees.

Apparently he is as successful acquiring such employees as he is at other pursuits.

always,
tony

SS must be frozen, and a few other items as well in the mandates. But our Public employees must take a cut in pay and a cut in pensions. There is no money to pay for this expansion. Obama wants the best and brightest in government. We need the best and brightest making new companies, new breakthroughs. Opening up new horizons of buisness. We need to grow the tax base and not limit it.

If you’re serious about being happy with $500, would you marry me?

Before you answer, you should know I’m damaged goods–Linda has already turned me down.

always,
tony

So, this is what oppression feels like…..~C

Many thx for all the fine comments.

Steve, if you want the answer to the top 3% “going on vacation”, read “Atlas Shrugged”.

As I’ve sed before, under this new medical care law, if the “old folks” think that they won’t get good medical care, they may well head off-shore where they believe they will get the care–in addition to less taxes. They have about 10 trillion dollars.

In terms of “learning the tax laws”, may I suggest you reference:

http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/starving-the-tax-beasts/

Most folks would consider themselves “rich” if they had an extra $1,000/mo to spend just as they wished. If you had no bills (other than utilities and property taxes) it wouldn’t take much of an income to be “rich”.

always,
tony

As far as government goes, aside from staying irate at the compassion of the TSA ( http://www.lewrockwell.com/akers/akers124.html ) I stay fed up with the hypocrisy of that cluster of fools who regard themselves as Anointed. It’s bad enough that at a time when we’re in debt up to our eyeballs that La Pelosi costs some six million bucks a year for her travels each weekend to San Francisco, but we have the media silence about Obama’s jaunt to the G20 conference:

http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/42183

Where is the outrage? I guess a better question might be, “Where are the true journalists?” True journalists are supposed to be suspicious of politicos, not their sycophants.

Ah, well. Enough of a rant for a Saturday.

‘Rat