Rusnano commits to anti-cancer joint venture ? RT

Rusnano invset in anti-cancer medicine

Rusnano and the American biotechnology firm Cleveland BioLabs, have agreed to finance the development of innovative anti-cancer and anti-infection medicines and the creation of a joint venture, Panacela.

?Under the agreement, Rusnano is to invest up to $26 million over the next four years into the new company with Cleveland BioLabs to invest $3 million. The first transaction is scheduled for September 30, 2011.? Cleveland BioLabs will have a 55% stake in the company with Rusnano to hold 24%.
Panacela will receive intellectual property rights on a number of compounds hold by Cleveland BioLabs and Rosewell Park Cancer Institute, the Cleveland Clinic Foundation and the Children?s Cancer Institute Australia.? A portfolio consist of five compounds ? potential candidates for becoming medicines, developed in research led by Andrey Gudkov, the Doctor of Biological Sciences, director on science in Cleveland BioLabs and the senior vice-president on fundamental research in the Rosewell Park Cancer Institute.
Under the agreement, Russia is to be the first market to sell the medicines, after they have undergone clinical testing and registration procedures. After launching the medicines in Russia, Panacela will also promote them globally, including the USA.

Michael Fonstein, the CEO and president of Cleveland Biolabs, said that Rusnano will provide an ideal partner to take the intellectual property through to product stage.
?Our strong side is research and development that is why we are trying to push scientific achievements that can open new therapy opportunities. We are very happy that Rusnano is becoming our key partner in the project,?

Dmitriy Lysenkov, Managing director of RUSNANO, said the partnership will ensure project success, in a key market for Rusnano
?Biopharmaceutical Industry is one of the priorities for Rusnano. For us the development of the project in a partnership with renowned biotechnology company, as CBLI is very important.? Our joint venture, Panacela, will attract the best international experience in developing cost-effective and socially valuable products for the Russian and global markets?

Source: http://rt.com/business/news/rusnano-commits-anti-cancer-joint-687/

judas judas us open tickets coldwell banker eras oscar de la hoya philadelphia phillies

America's pressing moral dilemma

AP Photo/Charles Dharapak

This originally appeared on Robert Reich's blog.

We dodged another shut-down bullet, but only until November 18. That's when the next temporary bill to keep the government going runs out. House Republicans want more budget cuts as their price for another stopgap spending bill.

Among other items, Republicans are demanding major cuts in a nutrition program for low-income women and children. The appropriation bill the House passed June 16 would deny benefits to more than 700,000 eligible low-income women and young children next year.

What kind of country are we living in?

More than one in three families with young children is now living in poverty (37 percent, to be exact) according to a recent analysis of Census data by Northeastern University's Center for Labor Market Studies. That's the highest percent on record. The Agriculture Department says nearly one in four young children (23.6) lives in a family that had difficulty affording sufficient food at some point last year.

We're in the worst economy since the Great Depression -- with lower-income families and kids are bearing the worst of it -- and what are Republicans doing? Cutting programs Americans desperately need to get through it.

Medicaid is also under assault. Congressional Republicans want to reduce the federal contribution to Medicaid by $771 billion over next decade and shift more costs to states and low-income Americans.

It gets worse. Most federal programs to help children and lower-income families are in the so-called "non-defense discretionary" category of the federal budget. The congressional super-committee charged with coming up with $1.5 trillion of cuts eight weeks from now will almost certainly take a big whack at this category because it's the easiest to cut. Unlike entitlements, these programs depend on yearly appropriations.

Even if the super-committee doesn't agree (or even if they do, and Congress doesn't approve of their proposal) an automatic trigger will make huge cuts in domestic discretionary spending.

It gets even worse. Drastic cuts are already underway at the state and local levels. Since the fiscal year began in July, states no longer receive about $150 billion in federal stimulus money -- money that was used to fill gaps in state budgets over the last two years.

The result is a downward cascade of budget cuts -- from the federal government to state governments and then to local governments -- that are hurting most Americans but kids and lower-income families in particular.

So far this year, 23 states have reduced education spending. According to a survey of city finance officers released Tuesday by the National League of Cities, half of all American cities face cuts in state aid for education.

As housing values plummet, local property tax receipts are down. That means even less money for schools and local family services. So kids are getting larger class sizes, reduced school hours, shorter school weeks, cuts in pre-Kindergarten programs (Texas has eliminated pre-Kindergarten for 100,000 children), even charges for textbooks and extra-curricular activities.

Meanwhile the size of America's school-age population keeps growing notwithstanding. Between now and 2015, an additional 2 million kids are expected to show up in our schools.

Local family services are being cut or terminated. Tens of thousands of social workers have been laid off. Cities and counties are reducing or eliminating their contributions to Head Start, which provides early childhood education to the children of low-income parents.

All this would be bad enough if the economy were functioning normally. For these cuts to happen now is morally indefensible.

Yet Republicans won't consider increasing taxes on the rich to pay for what's needed -- even though the wealthiest members of our society are richer than ever, taking home a bigger slice of total income and wealth than in seventy-five years, and paying the lowest tax rates in three decades.

The President's modest proposals to raise taxes on the rich -- limiting their tax deductions, ending the Bush tax cut for incomes over $250,000, and making sure the rich pay at the same rate as average Americans -- don't come close to paying for what American families need.

Marginal tax rates should be raised at the top, and more tax brackets?should be added for incomes over $500,000, over $1,500,000, over $5 million. The capital gains tax should be as high as that on ordinary income.

Wealth over $7.2 million should be subject to a 2 percent surtax. After all, the top one half of 1 percent now owns over 28 percent of the nation's total wealth. Such a tax on them would yield $70 billion a year. According to an analysis by Yale's Bruce Ackerman and Anne Alstott, that would generate at least half of $1.5 trillion deficit-reduction target over ten years set for the supercommittee.

Another way to raise money would be through a tiny tax (one-half of one percent) tax on financial transactions. This would generate $200 billion a year, and hardly disturb Wall Street's casino at all. (The European Commission is about to unveil such a tax there.)

All this can be done, but only if Americans understand what's really at stake here.

When Republicans recently charged the President with promoting "class warfare," he answered it was "just math." But it's more than math. It's a matter of morality.

Republicans have posed the deepest moral question of any society: whether we're all in it together. Their answer is we're not.

President Obama should proclaim, loudly and clearly, we are.

Source: http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2011/09/29/american_moral_dilemma/index.html

flds flds dream house dream house weather houston weather houston revenge

Use a five-level structure for the continued success of the leading ...

Many professionals do not know what to do or feel less than satisfied, they do not know how they make their teleseminars structure. Once you know the structure of a conference call in an effective and appealing, you'll know how to get a consistent experience that the participants want to make to come back.

Here is an acronym for remembering the parts through a learning-based conference call to move when you calla tele-class, tele-workshop, tele forum, teleseminar or tele program. The acronym stands for GODIG and Greet, overview, debriefing, content and Iteractive Gms.

Greeting occurs in the first 3 minutes and requires a delicate balance between the interaction with the participants on arrival and in a long conversation with someone. The tele leader has two priorities in the healthy range, welcome the participants and require you to hear the technical problems that attention.

Phase two isOverview section of the conference call, which includes formal welcoming people, creating the framework for the call, the introduction of the structure and the focus or theme. This section describes the wait for what will be covered and what participants can expect to remove from the call. For example, I might say, is an overview: "Welcome to our series on how to telecall Teleseminars are today appealing lead us to question covering the 5-step foolproof structure.teleseminar, so you feel safe while driving their own learning based on telephone conferences. "This section requires only a few minutes, but there is a clear tone and intention for the session.

The third step is debriefing all areas of work (if there is a continuous series of teleclasses) or the address of a pre-work you have sent to the participants before the call. Field work includes people, and when people feel involved, are more profit from and enjoy the experience. You may have little or as muchField work, how do you think that the participants commit themselves. You can send images, PDF files, pictures or PowerPoint files. Debriefing and pre-work will people think and be willing to participate.

Debriefing and pre-work can take 10 minutes or one hour tele-class. People are already working and you can easily move into the largest section of which one hour to telecall interactive content.

The worst that can happen is a call where the tele leaderThe lessons with you for a whole hour. There are many opportunities for interactive participation, the creation of games, exchange of experiences, so that real-time surveys and discuss cases that explore the human one topic. You can really plays where people get to real life situations and are trained on the conversation. And you can metaphors and visual language to learning more interesting. In a telephone call lasts interactive content 30-40Minutes.

The last step in a learning-based tele-call is where you find out what did the participants. The Gems had, and actions that are committed under. Take 5 to 10 minutes to hear what is important for people to do after the call. The telescopic leader can also assign the area it may make sense, would be for the participants.

Have a structure that you have the confidence that you know what you're doing and where you are going to give the invocation. Have a structurefor calls that I made myself apart as a professional mediator in the conference call.

Source: http://writing-teleseminars.chailit.com/use-a-five-level-structure-for-the-continued-success-of-the-leading-teleseminar.html

napoleon napoleon wish you were here lyrics wish you were here lyrics mine mine malta

Missing mom's husband also faces porn inquiry

>>> we begin this half-hour with new details on the arrest of the father-in-law in the case of a missing utah mom, susan powell . he's now facing serious charges, including child pornography after a raid on his home tied to his daughter-in-law's disappearance. in a moment we'll talk to susan powell 's parents. but first, nbc's miguel almaguer is in tacoma, washington with the latest.

>> reporter: good morning. steven powell spent the weekend in jail unable to make bail. detectives say they've just begun their investigation and say more charges could follow. in his first court appearance, steven powell pled not guilty to 14 counts of voyeurism and possession of child pornography . behind bars on $200,000 bails, the father-in-law of susan powell is accused of secretly videotaping the missing mother & and an unknown number of other females, including two sisters from his neighborhood just 8 and 10 years old. police say some of the unsuspecting victims including the children were nude.

>> we don't know how many victims there are because we've only looked at 5% to 10% of the photographs and videos. what's most disturbing to us is the weird creepy factor with this is already high.

>> reporter: police raided powell 's home last month. detectives then saying only the search warrant was connected to susan 's disappearance. police now say they've recovered over 1,000 images, some ten years of secret videotapes and pictures. the raid conducted the same day steven powell told nbc news his daughter-in-law had likely run off with another man and often flirted with him.

>> susan and i -- it just happened. i don't know -- i think it was more her than me at the beginning but as it progressed, it was both of us.

>> reporter: susan 's family has always denied steven powell 's allegations, calling them victim blaming .

>> clearly, blatantly, attempt to assassinate my daughter's character.

>> reporter: police say the arrest is not connected to susan 's disappearance but susan 's sister says steven powell may know something more.

>> just knowing that -- what he's capable of, i thought i heard it all, seen it all from that family.

>> reporter: susan 's husband, josh powell , told police his wife disappeared nearly two years ago after he had taken their young boys camping overnight in a snowstorm in the utah desert. shortly after susan vanished, police named josh a person of interest. but he's always denied any involvement in her disappearance.

>> i could never hurt susan or my sons.

>> reporter: shortly after susan vanished, josh and his children moved back home here to washington state with steven powell . but after steven 's arrest, the boys were removed from the home and placed in protective custody .

>> i want them to be with a stable family where they can learn good values and grow up normally.

>> reporter: susan 's family is now ready for a custody hearing set for wednesday. a legal battle playing out in the same courthouse where steven powell 's been charged with multiple felonies and faces five years in prison. since the arrest, the powell family has denied all of our interview requests and late last week they suffered another setback in court -- a judge said they could not publish susan 's private journals. ann?

>> miguel almaguer, thank you so much.

>>> chuck and judy cox are susan powell 's parents. good morning to both of you.

>> good morning.

>> morning.

>> possession of child pornography , voyeurism. chuck, let me start with you. what's your reaction to hearing these kinds of charges against your daughter, susan 's, father-in-law?

>> very disturbing. i had no idea that this was going on.

>> do you think, given that the police are now treating his case as a separate case -- you know, i guess i'm asking what is your thinking about this? are you more concerned that steven powell could have been involved in your daughter's disappearance? judy , want to weigh in on that?

>> i feel, being his father, i think it is very possible that he knows something. but that's the investigation with the police .

>> chuck, you want to add to that?

>> well, it increases my concern but we let the police do their police work. we are very comfortable that they investigated all aspects of our daughter's disappearance and they're continuing to work hard on it.

>> have they asked you about what susan may have told you regarding steven powell 's behavior toward her, whether she reported any instance in which she caught him videotaping her?

>> we discussed all aspects with the police and we have told them that she was uncomfortable with steven .

>> you know, i am just trying to get a sense about how you two are wrapping your minds around all the sort of facts of this case. i mean would you say that you are shock by these charges against steven powell ?

>> oh, definitely. definitely shocked by the charges. we had no idea that there would be this -- that this type of situation was going on.

>> does it change the way you look at josh, judy ?

>> it's hard to look at possibly even the whole family. we just are amazed of -- and shocked and outraged at steven powell .

>> i know that at the end of miguel almaguer's report we heard that your grandsons have been removed now from the home. have you been able to see these children, your grandchildren? do you know that they're okay?

>> we haven't been able to see them. we heard they were in protective custody and we're glad that they're being taken care of.

>> so what is your best hope now as you wait for word about your still-missing daughter, still missing after two years, and your two grandsons now in someone else's care? judy , what is your best hope now?

>> well, we're very pleased that the children are staf aafe and out of the home. we still want to focus on finding our daughter and we feel with all the energy and actions that have been going on with the police that they are doing their job and i think they're doing an excellent job.

>> we hope they're getting close to resolution. they're going to arrest the persons responsible and we're going to find out where our daughter is.

>> well, that's what we all wish you the best on that, chuck and judy cox, thank you so much this morning for joining us. our best to you.

>> thank you.

>> thank you.

Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44690664/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

lightsquared jane lynch matt ryan matt ryan ricky gervais golden globes real housewives of new york justified

Small Business group prefers Republicans ? Bearing Drift: Virginia's ...

Small Business group prefers Republicans

By JR Hoeft | September 27, 2011 | in Politics ?????

The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) has taken an interest in Virginia politics.

In the past week, they have endorsed Caren Merrick (31st), Jeff Frederick (36th), Bill Stanley (20th), Ben Loyola (6th), and Adam Light (38th) in crucial state senate races.

Additionally, Scott Lingamfelter, Ron Villanueva, and Barbara Comstock also got the NFIB nod in their bids to return to the House of Delegates.

It should be no surprise, all the endorsed are Republicans.

As an example of why NFIB chose so many Republicans, one only need to read their statement about Merrick:

?Caren Merrick understands the challenges facing Virginia?s small, family businesses and is the clear choice in Senate District 31,? said Nicole Riley, state director of NFIB/Virginia.

?We believe Caren Merrick will take a fiscally responsible approach to managing state government and support legislation that helps our small businesses grow and create jobs and puts the Commonwealth back on the pathway to success.?

It?s all about allowing small businesses the freedom to be entrepreneurs? Isn?t that just the American dream? Nice to see that Virginia Republicans still remember what it means to be an American.

I wonder why there have been no Democrats endorsed so far?

Tags: Adam Light barbara comstock ben loyola Bill Stanley Caren Merrick Jeff Frederick Ron Villanueva Scott Lingamfelter

About the author

JR Hoeft

Conservative to the core; liberal with his opinion! J.R. has been involved in politics for over a decade and has worked on several campaigns in Hampton Roads. He has served on the Executive Committee of the Republican Party of Chesapeake and the Central Committee of the Republican Party of Virginia. He is also the director of ?Blogs United? in Virginia. E-mail J.R.. Follow J.R. on Twitter.

Source: http://www.bearingdrift.com/2011/09/27/small-business-group-prefers-republicans/

christmas island rosh hashanah rosh hashanah cantaloupe cantaloupe antonio gates antonio gates

Ex-finance chief: Russian budget is overextended (AP)

MOSCOW ? The influential Russian finance minister who was ousted by President Dmitry Medvedev warned Tuesday that Russia's budget is overextended because of increased spending on defense and social needs.

Alexei Kudrin was forced out Monday after a public spat with Medvedev over the finance minister's statement that he would refuse to serve in the government if Medvedev became prime minister.

Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin announced over the weekend that they intended to swap jobs next year. Many suspect Kudrin had hoped to be named prime minister under Putin.

In his first comments since the ouster, Kudrin, who has been Russia's finance minister since 2000, said his statement on the country's financial health was "well thought out and well founded."

"For the past several months, despite my numerous objections, some of them made publicly, decisions were taken on budget policies that without doubt have increased budget risks," he said in a statement. "And budget risks are connected first of all with excessive commitments in the defense sector and social sector that will inevitably affect the entire national economy."

Medvedev had decided to raise budget military spending by 1.3 percent of Russia's gross domestic product.

Kudrin said he had discussed his desire to resign in February with Putin, who asked him to stay on because of the challenges of managing the budget during an election campaign. Russia holds parliamentary elections in December and a presidential election in March.

Putin appointed one of Kudrin's deputies, Anton Siluanov, to serve as acting finance minister, while one of Putin's deputies, Igor Shuvalov, will oversee financial and economic issues in the government. Kudrin had held both posts: finance minister and deputy prime minister.

Standard & Poor's said Kudrin's departure and the impending job switch between Medvedev and Putin would have no immediate impact on Russia's economic policies or its debt rating.

But investors and analysts, however, warned it would be hard to find a replacement who would be as effective in vehemently opposing populist spending, especially in an election year.

A darling of investors and post-Soviet Russia's longest-serving finance minister, Kudrin was widely credited with softening the blow of the 2008-2009 global downturn in Russia with his conservative fiscal policies. During Putin's presidency from 2000 to 2008, Kudrin set up a rainy day fund to stash away some of the revenue from Russia's oil exports. The idea angered many in the government who sought higher spending, but ultimately proved to be an invaluable cushion.

S&P said the recent days' events would be unlikely to result in a "significant departure from current economic and fiscal policies." The agency said it expects "Russian state capitalism and the close links between politics and business to remain unchanged."

The agency, however, voiced concern that a government reshuffle could make it difficult for Russia to "consolidate public finances" and boost long-term growth by "improving the business environment, competition, and the productive infrastructure."

Some analysts said the decision to sack him would reflect badly on Medvedev.

Vladimir Milov, former deputy energy minister and opposition figure, wrote in the Moskovskiye Novosti paper that "the firing of an efficient finance minister in a grave financial and economic situation and with the authorities' obvious inability to reverse it is an unexplainable decision."

Ovanes Oganisyan, vice president at the Moscow-based investment bank Renaissance Capital, said in a note to investors that "the bench is quite short" for Kudrin's long-term replacement.

He said the finance minister's position will be key in the new government "considering the fiscal challenges that Russia may be facing in upcoming years, including a weak economic growth environment and growing budget deficits."

Russia markets, buoyed by higher oil prices and surging stocks worldwide, seemingly paid no heed to the landmark resignation. The MICEX benchmark index was up 2.4 percent and the ruble gained 1.3 percent against the dollar.

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/eurobiz/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110927/ap_on_bi_ge/eu_russia_finance_minister

chelsea clinton facebook news facebook news boardwalk empire earthquake california earthquake california pan am

Bogleheads :: View topic - life insurance money question

View previous topic :: View next topic ? Author Message am

Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Posts: 801
Location: Illinois

Back to top

?

'); //-->

kenner

Joined: 01 Mar 2008
Posts: 1180

Back to top

?

'); //-->

Johm221122

Joined: 13 May 2011
Posts: 460

Back to top

?

'); //-->

letsgobobby

Joined: 18 Sep 2009
Posts: 2280

Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 10:59 am?? ?Post subject:
expenses are 2.5% of initial so anything not too conservative or aggressive would work. me: 25% VXUS 25% VTI 25% VAIPX (if in a tax-protected account) 25% VBMFX (or use a tax-free option if taxable) rebalance once per year or anytime any percentage is outside the 20-30% range. These are the instructions we left for our estate.

Back to top

?

'); //-->

am

Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Posts: 801
Location: Illinois

Back to top

?

'); //-->

livesoft

Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 18691

Back to top

?

'); //-->

am

Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Posts: 801
Location: Illinois

Back to top

?

'); //-->

bluemarlin08

Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 766

Back to top

?

'); //-->

kenner

Joined: 01 Mar 2008
Posts: 1180

Back to top

?

'); //-->

Valuethinker

Joined: 11 May 2007
Posts: 17094

Back to top

?

'); //-->

BruceM

Joined: 08 Aug 2008
Posts: 1599
Location: Manzanita, Oregon

Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 4:17 pm?? ?Post subject: Re: life insurance money question
am wrote: What investing instructions would you leave to your spouse if your policy was 3 mil and monthly expenses were 6k. Say you wanted the money to last her entire lifetime potentially 50 years+. You don't provide enough information. Is the required $72K/yr what the LI proceeds would have to provide by itself, or is this gross of all income sources, such as a job or other savings? If the latter, it sounds like the LI policy is acting as a sort of lottery ticket, providing an unneeded large windfall should you unexpectedly die. Things start getting complex with a 3-4MM estate and modest consumption needs. Gifting to family or charity, along with income tax, asset protection and perhaps estate tax issues will become primary concerns. It sounds like DW is not interested iin tackling this without you there and there may be conflicts of interest if she considers remarriage after your death. Given these potential issues, I think I'd start talking to a Fee-Only financial planner, experienced on these (and other matters), so you can have at least a basic plan for her to work from you die. BruceM

Back to top

?

'); //-->

kenner

Joined: 01 Mar 2008
Posts: 1180

Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 8:02 pm?? ?Post subject: Re: life insurance money question
BruceM wrote: am wrote: What investing instructions would you leave to your spouse if your policy was 3 mil and monthly expenses were 6k. Say you wanted the money to last her entire lifetime potentially 50 years+. You don't provide enough information. Is the required $72K/yr what the LI proceeds would have to provide by itself, or is this gross of all income sources, such as a job or other savings? If the latter, it sounds like the LI policy is acting as a sort of lottery ticket, providing an unneeded large windfall should you unexpectedly die. Things start getting complex with a 3-4MM estate and modest consumption needs. Gifting to family or charity, along with income tax, asset protection and perhaps estate tax issues will become primary concerns. It sounds like DW is not interested iin tackling this without you there and there may be conflicts of interest if she considers remarriage after your death. Given these potential issues, I think I'd start talking to a Fee-Only financial planner, experienced on these (and other matters), so you can have at least a basic plan for her to work from you die. BruceM Perhaps the life insurance will not be part of the estate. That's how many - perhaps most - people would set it up.

Back to top

?

'); //-->

relentless

Joined: 14 Mar 2011
Posts: 228

Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 8:34 pm?? ?Post subject: Re: life insurance money question
kenner wrote: Perhaps the life insurance will not be part of the estate. That's how many - perhaps most - people would set it up. I think you are missing the larger point, which is that spouse needs to manage a large amount of money whether it goes directly to her or to a trust. My own life insurance policy will go into a trust, which I think is defitinely something to consider to protect your widow should she get remarried and your children if you have any. You would want to discuss with a dedicated estate attorney. Our comprehensive estate plan including revocable trusts was pretty inexpensive (less than 2K). I have given my wife and the backup trustee the name and contact information for one of the regularly posting Boglehead financial advisors, so that they can have his firm manage the insurance money in case of my/our demise. I think 25 basis points/year for AUM is pretty reasonable (and probably far less expensive than the alternatives).

Back to top

?

'); //-->

am

Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Posts: 801
Location: Illinois

Back to top

?

'); //-->

relentless

Joined: 14 Mar 2011
Posts: 228

Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 9:32 pm?? ?Post subject:
am wrote: Is there a way from some scum bag wasting the money meant for her and the kids? A couple nightmare scenarios that I considered: 1) widow gets remarried and then passes away. New husband now gets everything and either spends it all or leaves all the money to his own kids, disinheriting yours. 2) Widow gets remarried and doesn't sign prenup. They get divorced and he takes part of her inheritance (probably state dependant). 3) widow gets remarried, he spends all the money then they get divorced leaving her with nothing. Yes, there are ways to mitigate. You probably want a trust. Talk with a good estate attorney (I am not an attorney).

Back to top

?

'); //-->

fishndoc

Joined: 11 Apr 2007
Posts: 2113
Location: Kennesaw, GA

Back to top

?

'); //-->

Watty

Joined: 10 Oct 2007
Posts: 1077

Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 10:22 pm?? ?Post subject:
Quote: A couple nightmare scenarios that I considered: 1) widow gets remarried and then passes away. New husband now gets everything and either spends it all or leaves all the money to his own kids, disinheriting yours. I have seen this one happen with what was apparentely a faily large estate, the wierd thing was that he actually had more money than she did but he was just greedy. With that amount of money you really need to work with an estate planning lawyer to set up a trust, even if she is able to handle the money now using your instruction when she is 80 she may not beable to manage it.

Back to top

?

'); //-->

Source: http://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=83052&start=0&mrr=1317003724

mariano rivera mariano rivera anderson cooper dadt repeal comedy central roast neal schon neal schon