02 Jun 08 13:14, Cindy Haglund wrote to Roy Witt:


 RW>> My dad once told me that although he was quite well off, he could
 RW>> only

 CH>  Interesting. Being well off to some people means to indulge in
 CH> excess while with others they minimalize with the best they can buy
 CH> and save for rainy day. :)

In his case, he passed it along to his heirs, before he died. Of course he
made sure that mom was well taken care of too.

 CH> Know what I mean? I know a couple who remodled a 1910 home (this in
 CH> Vancouver, BC). It's not huge, nor ornate, but beautiful with quality
 CH> workmanship.

My mom and dad started out in a 1 room house in the country. Their last
place they really called home was a big house in the 'better off' part of
town. It was a 3 story, mid-1880s mansion, converted to a house with a
seperate apartment upstairs, former maid and butler quarters. Even though
my mother couldn't keep it clean, it was their pride and joy.

 CH> What I am saying is. I'd rather have a small hosue I can afford to
 CH> furnish with good furniture (and not in excess) and accessories etc..
 CH> and of course good kitchen appliances- than a HUGE house left half
 CH> bare. I've seen this happen. People buy more than they can afford or
 CH> want to have to keep up.

If they do that gradually over a period of a lifetime, it's awfully hard
to seperate it into what you want to keep and what you need to get rid of.

 CH> This notiton of more is better isn't so. It's just what big business
 CH> wants us to believe.

I like more...Nancy and I delve into antique furniture and actually live
with it.

 CH> What's that expression about he who wants for the least has the most?
 CH> SOmething like that.. :)

No idea...I never quit wanting things.

                R\%/itt



--- Twit(t) Filter v2.1 (C) 2000