Lunch Break: Trouble is dead
by LauraLoo
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ml6HCEkvM-Y[/youtube]
If this isn’t one of the most nauseating stories in the last 5 years…
Trouble, the Maltese who was the second largest inheriter of the late Leona Hemlsey’s fortune, recently died. As you may or may not recall, Leona disinherited 2 of her grandchildren and wanted to leave her $12 million fortune to Trouble. However, a judge reduced the pooch’s paltry portion to $2 million and her brother got to keep the lion’s share of $10 million.
Also, a separate thought related to Trouble – an interesting observation I made this week regarding the security detail for “elitists” (or those who think they are). Living in the Chicagoland area, I am one of many taxpayers who is OUTRAGED that Alderman Ed Burke (by court order years ago) still has 6 security men serving him 24/7. And Chicago’s former Mayor Richard M. Daley, as he demanded, continues to have at taxpayer expense a security team 24/7. Now, back to Trouble, this pooch had a security team at a cost of $100,000 a year while living in a hotel very well.
Finally, for those of you who don’t have discretionary income to go to a posh spa or salon on a weekly basis, Trouble’s fluffy white coat was continually “guccied and poochied” for $8,000 a year (or $153 week). Gag.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Well, on the upside, at least she kept a lot of humans employed looking after the dog. On the other hand, she could have employed a lot of humans who feed starving members of our own species.
I really think it is people’s own business what they do with their money or who they leave it to after they die.
But really, if she liked animals so much I don’t see why she wouldn’t leave a bit to the dog and the rest to a good charity.
Did you miss the part where it said that the bulk of her $4 billion estate was left to charity? People can do what they want with their money–I fail to understand this site’s obsession with what other people choose to do with their own money. It isn’t up for debate. Wider society has, and should have, no say in how people chose to spend or allocate their money after death so long as it remains within the bounds of legality.
Enigma,
Calm down. Nobody here is proposing legislation. Blogs are for commentary, which is what Jill has done. As for nobody having a say in how people leave their money, social commentary serves to vet issues (no pun re: Trouble), and influence people’s decision making. Perhaps someone reading this thread may decide to reorient their priorities when planning their estate.
@Engima, I didn’t say she had to spend it any way at all. I actually said the opposite. I just think that she could have done a lot of good for a lot of animals and still left quite a bit for her dog. I wasn’t judging, just commenting.
that’s disturbing; a dog does not understand what money is.
My will leaves sufficient money to take care of any existing pets for the remainder of their lives. It is only responsible. And indeed, my pets have brought more joy to my life than 99% of the humans I have encountered.
My nephews are also remembered in my will, so don’t go crazy.
It is a pity that rich people often have no sense of frugality. If I ever make millions, I won’t be having a different sports car for every day of the week.
TMZ is a guilty pleasure for me. They’re all very funny. But they’re also political morons IMHO! :)