Once upon a time, a son of France rose, drank his bowl of cafe au lait, smoked a morning Gauloise, and made machines until lunchtime. Fortified by the lunch packed by his young bride, a carafe of vin ordinaire, and more Gauloises, in the afternoon he made more machines. The next day, and the next week, he did it all over again. Those machines traveled all over the world of the swingin' seventies, to kitchens from Helsinki to Hackensack, and set to work. Chopping and dicing, whirring and kneading, they worked in kitchens grand and small, just as their big commercial Robot Coupe brothers were working in the world's restaurants. Like the solid French ouvriers who made them, the machines worked and worked. The years passed, decades went by, generations came and went. The sturdy young Gaul who screwed together this food processor and riveted the engraved label to its underside grew old, stooped, and was buried in the old cemetery by the wood, next to his beloved wife. The machines he made outlive him, and may outlive their children, and their children. In 1970s France, they hadn't learned to shave thicknesses and cheapen materials so that their products would fail just after the warranties expired. Your Robot Coupe in Kitchen Aid livery was made to keep working indefinitely. It was meant to be the last food processor its owner would ever have to buy. We live in the twilight of quality consumer goods. Everything is made in China of thin plastic and pot metal, cost-engineered to fall apart after an average of X years, with a standard deviation of Y that the company's accountants compute into the warranty reserves and balance against the manufacturing cost, to achieve maximum profit for the corporate parent. There is no red wine, or indeed time for lunch, in the factories. Yes, there are sturdy machines in the factories, some even made in France. They are used to make the cheap new machines that we consumers buy. Or, that we don't buy. You can get a used bowl, lid, blades, and stem for your KFP 700 for about $50 on eBay. See link for a typical auction. Or a new work bowl for about $60 from a few companies who stock parts for old machines. Try Gourmet Depot. Obvious, as a grouchy old sentimentalist, I would keep using the old French machine instead of junking the work of our Gauloise-puffing and vin rouge-imbibing hero. But I'm not a nutter about this stuff. Why, only today I dumped a box of old stuff - 56K modems, parallel printer cables, floppy disks, Celeron processors - at the freegeek computer recycle place. But I kept the old acoustic coupler and 1200 baud modem that I used to go online with, from pay phones on dusty roads all over France. Maybe, even the side road where the factory once stood. Maybe, even the phone where our hero would call his young wife, to take her out for dinner with the francs earned from his long day of making machines. Maybe, even the sturdy machine on your kitchen counter. Here is a link that might be useful: Example

Ohhh! I know how you feel - I hate it when a favorite tool gets broken, especially when it happens due to a moments inattention. And I have a stone morter and pestle where the shape of the bowl was made just the right shape to work well - it isn't easy to find a good one sometimes. That break looks like it might repair well with glue. And that high on the handle I don't think food safety of the glue would be an issue once it is cured - if it was on the pounding end of the pestle I'd be more concerned. If that doesn't work, maybe you could find one with a pestle that would work in your mortar.

In the light of a new day, perhaps they're not THAT bad. They're never going to be my favorite feature to LOOK at perhaps, but I think they'll be wonderful to live with. I considered waiting on the backsplash to see how I felt about them, but the backsplash might make everything look better, more pulled together. The lighting is not in either, so I'm sure that will make a difference. I'm looking at it as kind of : Sometimes the best looking guy can be a joy to look at but a pain to be around, and the more average looking fella might not be as much eye candy, but he's solid and hard working and loyal, etc., etc. This is not to say those lucky enough to have beautiful granite that it's a pain to be around, it just makes me feel better ;) Plllog- Thank you for reminding me that super blingy countertops have to be kept free of all the normal kitchen "clutter" to be shown to their best advantage. Rhome- Yes, the countertops, at least in my case, were to be secondary to the island and the backsplash, and yeah, I'm second guessing myself. I'm pretty good at that! Rmkitchen- Agree with everything you said. If everything was done to the nines, instead of everything having that "wow" factor, none of it would. Pharaoh- Yeah, that's "bling"! I'm going to continue on course and have faith that once everything is done, it will be fabulous. If it's not, it will be d**n close, and I can live with that.

"You are right, but this is about extras, not CS. If SM feels that on top of CS and regular necessities SD requires (during her 50/50) that BM is expecting Dad (and therefore SM) to pay for extras, I can see her problem." The problem is that not only are there bound to be plenty of costs for "extras" that are going to be incurred in raising children (I mean, if we're considering anything beyond food ---but not necessarily FAVORITE food, just food--- and, like, Hanes 3-pack basic white tees as clothing and the cheapest uglist Walmart notebook and Dixon Ticonderoga #2 pencils as "extras")... but that the definition of "extras" is very debatable... "It would feel like BM considers her husband's money as separate and not to be used for her child, but SM's to be part of Dad's available income. Who would be purchasing the sports equipment if there was no SM, and therefore no item to borrow? Assuming Dad's income was the same, and his CS and custody the same, could he afford this item on his own, or would he ask BM to split the cost? (BM could use some of her CS, or ask her husband to help.)If both parents were still single, how would the item be procured?" I just gathered that there happened to be already in existence in the house an item of the kind that was required, which was not being used by anyone else at the time it was going to be needed. In that case, why SHOULDN'T OP's daughter be able to use it? Is it inconceivable that OP's daughter would loan something to her step-sister in a similar situation? Has that never occured before? I mean, yeah, I suppose that for everyone to be perfectly even and everything to be perfectly fair, there should be two of absolutely everything in the house for each of the girls, no matter how easily worked out a sharing plan may be... just so nobody feels like BM is "getting off scot free" or "taking advantage" of the already-purchased hockey stick (or whatever it is). But why spend the extra money (which Dad would be, since he's presumably already paid for half of his step-daughter's item, we can presume he'd be paying half of this item too) or insist or suggest that someone else (BM) spend extra money when there is a perfectly good item right there, which will not be in use, and which the user of (step-sister) has already agreed to lending? It's not costing step-sister or SP anything to lend it, and if it's damaged it won't cost them anything either b/c Dad & BM would pay for a replacement. The only reason would be to (pardon the pun) "stick it" to the person(s) who would be asked to pay for a second one, in one way or the other. Now, obviously, if the item is lost or damaged, or if OP's daughter will be using such an item more frequently in the future, then it's appropriate to purchase another. But to go around and imply that anything shared in the house that's an "extra" has to be purchased separately even for one-time use is just not very family-like. In intact families, no one would dream of proposing a waste of money (on anyone's part) or excessive consumption (and clutter?) of this sort as a general practice... I guess that's what I find so colossally sad in these blended family situations. That, as much as many SP's regard the situation like the SK's are "spoiled" b/c they have two households, it's just as often that they end up getting shafted b/c everything gets nickel-and-dimed and bickered over to death. And I'm not even really thinking about in the *material* sense, but psychologically... How do you think it feels growing up where every little item or expense you require as a kid is argued over, debated, and you're made to feel like you're such a source of financial burden and your parents arguing all the time and the expenses paid for are all conditional on how well you (or your mom) behave? Like someone's sitting there all "ca-ching! ca-ching!" every time you express a cereal preference that costs an extra 80 cents, or scowl ("deduct a dollar for the "extra"-nice notebook b/c of your attitude! I don't HAVE to do anything for you!")... and you may, perhaps, be in the regular presence of a step-sibling who (b/c his/her parents aren't divorced) doesn't face the same kind of nickel-and-diming, or you feel like you have to run a decathalon of requests and requests-for-requests to DARE to borrow the item of its "rightful" owner, whom it WAS procured for, presumably without much hubub... I CERTAINLY can understand the need to budget to the point of splitting hairs (b/c there's no choice) when funds are tight (but in OP's case it didn't sound like that was necessarily the case)... but when the situation is more comfortable, nickel-and-diming is unnecessary and rather depressing. Not to mention an enormous waste of energy and a veritable minefield packed chock-full of potential explosions at every little teensy turn. (Which, btw, ain't so great for the marriage, either...) Come up with a plan, an agreement, based on reality, decency, common sense, and what you think "family" should mean and general principles of what will/won't be split (or set a dollar amount limit, or an age limit, or limit the extracurricualr activities by quantity). Figure out and decide once and for all on the definitions of "extras" you and spouse agree on and everything should fall into place. If this can't be agreed upon between current spouses, it is not the ex-spouse's fault, and they shouldn't be dragged into the mess. If the CS arrangement is unsatisfactory to both current spouses, seek to have it changed instead of whining/nickel-and-diming/b.s. psychological games. If it's satisfactory to one spouse but not SP, or if expenditures just CANNOT be agreed upon no matter what, then maybe consider splitting finances. But acknowledge that it is the CURRENT SPOUSES who cannot agree on expenditures or come up with a workable plan, so it isn't anyone else's fault or burden to bear if you two can't work it out between yourselves.