Hi graywings, I started reading this thread without noting the dates the posts were written. Dave, I don't want to put you on the spot, but I am wondering how the accounts you spoke of in 2007, the 72c Guaranteed Savings accounts (equity-indexed fixed life contract, or annuity contract) have weathered over the last three years. Heh... you can "put me on the spot" in this regard *ANY* time ;~) Both the equity indexed life & annuity products have *VERY* strongly outperformed the unprotected stock index markets over the same periods of time (since 2007. In fact, going back from today to almost as far as you'd like.) Their design is that they capture & credit any annual upside (to a maximum gain,) and lock that amount permanently to your credit. On any years with a downside, your account sits tight with no losses at all (guaranteed by the insured backings of the company reserves and the state's guarantee association (each state's equivalent of a regional "FDIC" in essence.) If you put $100,000 in the S&P 500 for the last decade, you'd actually be holding a bit LESS than $100,000 today (not deducting the tax or management fees that may also be applied.) The same $100,000 in an insured indexing account would be approximately $211,768, net of everything (taxes & fees,) *OR* about an average annual tax-free rate of return of 7.06% Alternatively, those folks who decided to take their working capital OUT of growth, and put it into their real estate equity, have been double-stung; Not only have they gained nothing toward retirement, their equity values have decayed from 10-30% (depending on the area.) The clients who've been with us the last 3-5 years have been rather relieved, ecstatic, and pleasantly bored, all at the same time. Its a very nice financial reality to provide. Cheers, Dave Donhoff Leverage Planner (PS. to re-paraphrase celticmoon; When everyone else's retirement nest-egg is drowning deep underwater... its kinda nice to be riding on the back of a "duck" ;~)

Thank you everyone for weighing in with your thoughts. I can just kick myself that I didn't seek advice from this forum when we were choosing paints for our whole house. I just love Wilmington Tan and feel it would look better than the Oat Straw we have presently--DH likes it also. I do agree with caroleoh that Tyler Taupe pairs best with the Oat Straw, but for this room the one I prefer it the Wilmington Tan so am glad to read a few others here think similarly. It's hard to think of repainting the other rooms just now, but perhaps we will phase over to the WT over time. We paid to have the house professionally painted, but this time around it will be DIY. While I've not chosen a rug, I've thought about it and looked at some. Even though this room is formal, it still needs to fairly kid proof (we have three ourselves ranging in age from six to 14, and most of our friends have children also) so I tend towards rugs that are darker in color without an ivory/taupe/gold background. Particularly if I were to put the WT on the walls and with the existing WT and sofa, I feel the rug would be an area to bring in more color so with that in mind I'm hoping I'll still have some options open. I'm also wondering with a more neutral backdrop, if it will allow the chairs to become the focal point along with the fireplace. Les, you are never a pain. I truely appreciate your insights as well as everyone else who has replied to my threads. Here are a couple of distance shots that I hope will give you a better feel. As it was later in the day, it worked better to put the sample boards lower. Notice, I've also tried to drape the drapery fabric as I know once it's hung in folds and how the light plays on the sheen of the material also gives it a different look. I'm really getting very curious to see my drapes. They have such a lovely weight to them and with the lining and the leading edge trim, I'm hoping they will meet my expectations. This has been the biggest splurge in this whole LR/DR remodel--and the next I imagine will be the rugs.

I very much enjoyed the series "Call the Midwife." I have watched up to season 3. It was so refreshing to watch a show that doesn't overlook the hardships that women have faced, and to some degree still face. I live in Canada, and have seen a lot of US/Cdn TV which usually features wealthy and perfect conditions, beautiful movie stars, with little to no reality, and without touching on female perspectives. I saw a mention earlier about the lack of slums in Canada. I can only speak to the history of western Canada, which was mostly rural. In the 1950s, Western Canada enjoyed a high standard of living where there was ample food, although, my father did say that if you spent all your money on frivolous things you could starve. Before that, especially during the Great Depression, my grandfather had a sister who died because the family couldn't afford the medicine for her, and his mother saved for years after to pay the hospital for her daughter's death there. They lived in fear that the bank would take their house, but almost every house was in foreclosure in their area, Vancouver BC. My grandfather had a dairy cow he quite liked, and a garden, so it seems that western Canada was quite rural, even in the cities at that time, possibly with the exception of Chinatown, where the Chinese Canadians there had things quite rough. Today in Canada there seems to be a greater divide between rich and poor especially in the larger cities. Some of the issues in the book and movie still go on today, for example, abuse of women, children, losing a child, (although not as common today) being judged by others, mental illness after pregnancy and the great love we as mothers have for our children. I found it interesting that Jennifer Worth said most families lived near their parents, brothers and sisters, usually moving two streets away from where they grew up at most. Here in Canada we don't seem to have that closeness with family. Also there is a lot of privacy here and I think many mothers can feel isolated or suffer in silence. I don't live near my family because the housing prices and lack of jobs paying over minimum wage makes it very difficult to live there. Worh had another comment on the older people being rehomed to better living conditions, but that many of them died because they missed their friends and family and they didn't have that support. I found it interesting, and I think nowadays here in Canada, people's values are more about money than relationships which is sad too. In that way, the community of East London seemed to be better.

When my remodel is done, my DW will be at the end of a run, next to the wall. It will probably add a minute, maybe two, to the unload time as all but the daily dishes/cutlery/glassware will be a tad farther of a walk to put away. But I don't care as the advantages will totally outweigh the disadvantages. I disagree with your KD. Strongly. I currently have my DW between my sink and range and it is the most hated thing in my kitchen. Everybody hates it, not just me. And when I say everybody, I mean my parents (who owned this house before me), my sister and her entire family, and my entire family. Plus all our kid's spouses. That's 14 people who have all voiced hatred for the DW placement. When my niece's husband, who was a chef before he became an engineer, heard we were remodeling the kitchen actually called me up to remind me to move that damn DW. And he's only cooked in it a few times. I remember he commented that it's poor placement from both a chef's and engineer's perspective (for whatever that's worth, lol). That is the only time he's actually ever called me. At the time, I didn't know where else to put it but the good folks here guided me to the new location. In fact, if the DW placement was good to begin with, I would probably have just redecorated my kitchen instead of remodeling. Of course, I'm getting other good things out of the remodel (like a prep sink) but I'm pretty frugal and would have probably saved the expense of it all if the DW placement hadn't been so annoying. If you use the sink on the window wall for prepping most often because you're facing the fabulous view (and who wouldn't?), the DW will NOT be able to be left open for immediate loading. You will need to keep the door closed most of the time and pop it open to load. If you're prepping and someone is loading/unloading or even just popping it open quickly to pop something in, it often coincides with the moment I need to get some water for my prepping. If you had a much longer counter between sink and cooktop, it might make some sense. But you don't. It will be crowded. And note that I have 54" between sink and range so I have more space to move over when that DW door is open. You have only 39". 36" is the MINIMUM recommended by the NKBA. You really can't afford to lose work space there if you want to use it for prepping. Of course, you will have the option of moving over to the other sink to do that but then that also adds extra unnecessary steps. And if you are prepping and have to move over for someone to do stuff with the DW, you might as well move all your prep work there because it also cuts into the available counter space unless you don't mind leaning instead of standing in front of what you're prepping. I don't understand the view argument. If you use your DW properly, as DW manufacturer's recommend, you'll be spending little time at the sink as you should scrape, not rinse, before loading. Washing fruit and veg doesn't take long. I wish I could remember the statistics exactly but studies have shown that prep time is something like 70% of the time spent in the kitchen with the remainder divided between cooking (like when you're standing at the stove, not counting unattended oven time) and cleaning up. So the majority of your time will be in the prep area, not in front of the sink or at the DW. For that short period of time, you won't miss the view. Ha! Can you tell I feel strongly about this? It's your kitchen. I would never do it in my kitchen. I hope you won't regret your decision.