I like long hair. I like being able to style it. My own hair is almost down to my waist and I get it cut off for charity every two years or so (my hair grows very, very fast). With age, I don't know what I'll do with it, but I really can't see myself ever having short hair.
Fwiw, I can't find any pictures of her with "long, long hair". Wanna shoot one my way? I've seen some shoulder-length hair.
Ok...back to the greasy hair discussion...
At my rather advanced age I find I still need to shampoo my hair daily ... Which I find more and more annoying as I approach the possible end of my days . I resent the time frittered away by the need for sleeping, shampooing, and blow-drying. Not to mention the careful application of makeup . Sigh.
It's raining and what I was supposed to do with DW got changed to a much needed haircut. She d*i*d*n*o*t like the idea of a baldy-because it would mean that SHE would have to tend to me more often.
My boyfriend wears a hat all the freaking time. His hair is greasy after a day or so of not washing it (methinks partially because of the hat). I'll tell him to go wash it and he just doesn't understand what the issue is (although he does it without protest...mostly...) because he wasn't really raised to wash his hair every day and no one else in his family has that problem. Sorry, love, but when your red hair looks brown- it's too greasy. Go shower. Git.
More on hair .. Does anyone get Hillary's hair ?? I check in to the amid privilege blog.. The princeton alum from cc's blog . Not getting the long, long gray hair at all . Past a certain age , such long, long hair strikes me as very unattractive--greasy or not. Why is Hillary doing this. ?
-- Edited by hope on Thursday 19th of April 2012 08:36:18 PM
unfortunately one can lose a bunch of $$$$ in 401ks because people let the investments ride- We do. I have meaning to move the funds or to hedge the funds. Whether we move or hedge the 401, it will cost some money. However, in 2008-2009 we went from $200,000 to $45,000 in a balanced allocation. Of the $200,000, $100,000 was contributions, not unearned gains.
Then in 2010, DW was RIF'd. If we had borrowed from the 401k in early 2008, and had not repaided the funds by 2010; The borrowed funds would have been due at that time. Tax penalties are severe if borrowed funds are not repaid to 401k.
-- Edited by longprime on Thursday 19th of April 2012 08:26:51 PM
My husband used to have greasy hair. Now he doesn't. Have hair, I mean. When he had it, it was that black, shiny (greasy) hair that some Italians have. Now he is bald and I love, love, love it.
I think your wife knows if you're not using enough soap or shampoo in the shower if she can tell that your hair looks unclean and you stink. Women are much more sensitive to smells than many men are, I think. If she thinks you stink, you do. Trust her. Shower, shampoo, soap, deodorant. Do it!
I say this from a point of frustration, from having some male family members that think this doesn't matter and that it is not noticed. It is. My father is so proud of that fact that he goes 2-3 months without bathing. Really. And doesn't wear deodorant, ever. He occasionally rinses himself with warm water, but doesn't use soap. He doesn't actually smell or look that bad, for some reason one can get away from that in their eighties, I guess. But he does smell sometimes. And of course, with my dad, it's all a scientific experiment and he will always have the brain of an engineer. Plus my older son, who is absolutely the most handsome kid, doesn't always pay attention to these issues. Sigh. Listen to the women in your life, they aren't making things up just to torment you.
Just read last two pages of zm's thread, #256+. It has changed.
I used to market retail financials. You'd be amazed on how many people raided their qualified retirement funds, then to not be able to pay the monies back. These people would be lucky to get 50% on the retirement funds borrowing-worse if they borrowed to purchase/upgrade housing during the 2002-2007 years. Retirement fund borrowing was something I never purposed.
zm, I didn't want to ask on there because I didn't want to look stupid. I occasionally come here for clarity. My apologies if you thought I was offensive.
I was wondering if you would acknowledge the apologies; which brings up a personal question I have had for a few weeks.
When someone offers an obviously heartfelt apology, isn't it correct to acknowledge that apology?
We recently had a family incident in which my son's gf felt she was owed an apology by my other son. My son felt very badly about this, and wrote her a very nice apology. She did not write him back to say that she received the apology (although we know through my son that she did) or that she appreciated it, all was forgiven, etc.---nothing.
I personally think this is a rather imperious if not rude response.
I'd be interested in hearing what readers here think.
My husband is great at "yes, dear" but I'm not so much, which is the backstory to this whole issue. I tend to be a very small bulldozer and am working at being a better wife by being respectful of his feelings even when I don't agree. Historically, that's been a problem for me.
My goal for 2012 has been about being more grateful and less controlling in my marriage. As you can see, it's a work in progress.
I didn't pursue the thread past the beginning couple of pages. I have zero interest in the personal reasons. We very recently purchased qualified/non qualified annuities and filed for retirement benefits. Each presenter made emphasis on the importance that signing off on the "beneficiary" acknowlegdements.
IMO, Guys should save themselves a lot of grief by saying, "Yes, Dear".
hope: "At first I thought--why doesn't Mr. ZM realize how important this is for ZM and just give in, esp. since it's not that large a sum in scheme of things? But then I remembered it is a large sum for an instrument, and how stubborn my husband can be about certain things."
I never start a discussion about a large purchase, unless to praise the purchase. Its the small stuff that get to have "discussions." You should have heard the "discussion" on the pink pokka dot on teal, pajama bottoms, I got at a garage sale (free) to be used as pedal pushers on my bike.
Longprime, in the thread at CC I made it clear countless times that (a) it wasn't about money because we have the cash and (b) I would discuss it with my husband in three years and suspect that he might change his mind change when he's looking at a 17-year old rather than a 13-year old. I am bothered by the implication that I was sneaking behind his back. I wasn't and never would be. You are also wrong about the spousal consent issue because that is discretionary to specific plans. Mine has it, many don't.
Ultimately, it was really scummy to take the thread of another member of this community from another forum without permission for the purpose of mocking and spreading misinformation.
I do apologize for the reference about the ability to fund an instrument. No personal intentions on you, family, or purchase.
My intentions, while doing taxes, in this political time, and in my arguments/discussions DW have with me about purchases, was to highlight some of money's discourses.
In this family, although we keep separate accounts, the situation is Her money is her's and my money is her's too. I recently purchased an athletic shirt for my biking, new, plain, long sleeved, wellmade, for $7.00 at a closeout store. She put up a big thing about it-she objects for spending the money on shirts that I have too many of (no arguments from me there) (this shirt's p;urchase is to be the first new clothing that I solely made in a least a decade). The real issue is that its Her job to buy clothing in this family and not mine, no matter how trival the purchase. The money and opportunity costs are only the front issues- I had great fun when I purchased (Goodwill, $2.00) and wore joke boxers at the gym, that was bright red, and across the rear-"hot stuff" and a little devil.
I remember when DS got a better music instrument. Done deal, when I discovered the purchase. We miss his practicing and hope that the instrument gets played.
If you think you are controlling, I got razed by DW in the shower, for not using enough shampoo-and because I don't use enough, I therefore have greasy hair. 39 years together, sorta.
-- Edited by longprime on Wednesday 18th of April 2012 03:35:12 PM
I went over to look at that thread after reading about it here, and I stayed up late reading it! For some reason I find it fascinating. Still have not finished it, though.
At first I thought--why doesn't Mr. ZM realize how important this is for ZM and just give in, esp. since it's not that large a sum in scheme of things? But then I remembered it is a large sum for an instrument, and how stubborn my husband can be about certain things. I wanted to send my second child to a local parochial school instead of the public which I had grown to hate. My husband was not totally onboard with this. In order to avoid the expenditure discussion for four years, I opened a savings acct., and put all my subbing checks in it. This acct. paid for the four years of parochial school, without my husband every seeing a bill. Out of sight, out of mind, as far as my husband was concerned.
Mr. Z and ZM seem to have a loving but very independent relationship--which some people are having trouble understanding over there.
I have to admit I get lost as to why a credit card in ZM's name can't be opened, or a separate savings, or why her own discretionary $ can't be used at her own discretion! Fascinating, though!
I am more offended than I can possibly tell you that someone had the nerve to start a thread about my personal business. Not only that, but to take my posts from another forum and discuss them here without my permission. And finally to misrepresent my words and to twist my intentions and statements is beyond the pale. Longprime, I deeply resent your statement that I don't have the money for the instrument, I absolutely do. And to you I say How dare you? This thread and your comments are the height of classlessness and personal attacks. I have never, ever done anything to attack you and you should be ashamed.
Not cool and there are some serious apologies owed to me and not just from Longprime.
Part of the purpose of this forum (I think) is to comment on CC threads. Many of us are either in exile, or have been banned, nevertheless we still take a look over there from time to time! It's been weeks, actually, since I peeked over there, but this thread led me to the one on CC. As I said, I found it to be a fascinating and fun read!
Perhaps this thread should have been started in the "CC topics" subforum.
I'm pretty sure that most of the people commented on in that subforum are not readers of this forum! In this case, you are! I can understand how the idea that someone would be discussing things you said in a completely different context (CC) would be offensive to you.
I think a lot of us are coming up against these issues--retirement funds, college payments, etc. That's why I found it interesting.
Again, my apologies if I offended you. I completely get what you are saying.
P.S. I see that I cross-posted with your complaint with my post below. If I had seen your post first, I would not have commented at all. :(
-- Edited by hope on Wednesday 18th of April 2012 09:36:49 AM
I believe the main issue is one of disagreement over the expenditure. Beyond that, it's not even about borrowing from the fund - it's the shock that ZM is required to have a signature from her husband for her retirement fund, but husband's fund doesn't require the same.
I can't say that I understand it completely, either, but marriages can be confusing. I am sure mine is no exception.
Are you following that thread? I just don't get it to be honest. I don't understand the vast majority of what's going on with zm and her husband and the clarinet.
Doesn't it make sense that if you file taxes with your spouse and consequently get a tax benefit for filing jointly and for participating in a retirement program, that your spouse should be aware of significant changes that you make in your 401k program, epecially when the results affect your spouse tax situation you default or die?
Darn regulations. Can't do anything without the spouse discovering it.