Newber-Friendly

[patentparanyc]

Originally posted by Fugee
All the more reason to break your designer label addiction.

If you are going to buy cashmere sweaters while you are still losing weight, it only makes sense to buy more reasonably priced ones and avoid the ultra-expensive designer ones. Actually this advice covers most clothing expeditures until you are at the weight where you want to stay.

One assumes that to feed my addiction I have to take away from my kids. I make sure the kids are completely satisfied before spending--or I simply do not spend. Actually, I'm happy with Ann Taylor and am thinking about getting my cashmere from there.

[nononono]

Originally posted by Fugee
All the more reason to break your designer label addiction.

If you are going to buy cashmere sweaters while you are still losing weight, it only makes sense to buy more reasonably priced ones and avoid the ultra-expensive designer ones. Actually this advice covers most clothing expeditures until you are at the weight where you want to stay.

Warning, warning! Buying at the lowest point (ie., the ideal) is a bad, bad idea. Trust me - I have a number of taken-in size 0P suits gathering dust*. True, sweaters have some more flexibility, but at times I do wish my penchant for form-fitting this or that had been tempered when I was in the bottom of the adult sizes. On the other hand, true, size Ms when you'll ultimately settle comfortably at an S (if not an XS) are unappealing as well. Overall, I'd suggest saving the big buys for the size/weight you'll likely stay, ideal or not. Or, just be reasonable most all the time!


*And oh! that XS 22" Ferragamo belt....

[nononono]

Originally posted by patentparanyc
One assumes that to feed my addiction I have to take away from my kids. I make sure the kids are completely satisfied before spending--or I simply do not spend. Actually, I'm happy with Ann Taylor and am thinking about getting my cashmere from there.

On the other hand, fewer designer buys = less OT = more time with the kids, no?

[patentparanyc]

Originally posted by nononono
Warning, warning! Buying at the lowest point (ie., the ideal) is a bad, bad idea. Trust me - I have a number of taken-in size 0P suits gathering dust*. True, sweaters have some more flexibility, but at times I do wish my penchant for form-fitting this or that had been tempered when I was in the bottom of the adult sizes. On the other hand, true, size Ms when you'll ultimately settle comfortably at an S (if not an XS) are unappealing as well. Overall, I'd suggest saving the big buys for the size/weight you'll likely stay, ideal or not. Or, just be reasonable most all the time!


*And oh! that XS 22" Ferragamo belt....

I think to guestimate high or low is a bad idea. Some of my sweaters [silk nylon blends] hang on me now. My most recent silk sweaters are a size smaller and are fine. I think high end purchases should be put on hold, agreed. My 6P suits are like dead to me now. Shoes and bags always fit, especially Ferragamo [except with pregnancy and feet, they swell]

[patentparanyc]

Originally posted by nononono
On the other hand, fewer designer buys = less OT = more time with the kids, no?

The OT is to hedge against unforseen expenses. shit blows out on the car, for example. a vet bill of 300 is another. kid registration for football, over 200 not including equipment. The purchases are to keep me from going postal. I don't drink a ton it's my one vice and we pay cash.

Personally, I've never bought the whole be a savings martyr thing..I don't shop so much that it becomes the consuming drain of our money....a few sweaters here and there ain't gonna kill us, it is the bills that drain the money most, as with most families, no?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
\

In many BFF relationships, the BFs attend events together, for example, the WS. For now, I will continue to answer all calls from the 248.

I had to take a number in the 666 as part of a deal I made. Hitler, Fringey, B.I.G, Rep. Foley, Jimmy Carter, Martha Stewart- we're all in the 666 for various reasons: Represent!

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Asian Sock Puppet?

good. but be honest. how many other acronyms did you come up with first?

[patentparanyc]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
good. but be honest. how many other acronyms did you come up with first?

get your mind out of the gutter, hankie.

[patentparanyc]

FYI--your PM box is full. Clear it out?

[bold_n_brazen]

Originally posted by patentparanyc
FYI--your PM box is full. Clear it out?

Okay. Sure thing. I'm on it.

[Tables R Us]

Gotti Junior's lawyer says little Gotti wants a job where he can work with children.

That left Mr. Gotti, who has acknowledged through his lawyers that he ran the Gambino family during stretches of the 1990’s, to return to a life as normal as his name will allow. At the end of his third trial in September, he told reporters he wanted to “move on” and expressed a desire to work with children.

NYTimes

[Tables R Us]

A Cali judge dismissed flashing charges against a 40 year old woman for flashing a 14 year old kiddie.

Superior Court Judge Robert W. Armstrong said earlier in the week that the law only mentions someone who "exposes his person." "It's gender specific," Armstrong said.

AP Wire

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I had to take a number in the 666 as part of a deal I made. Hitler, Fringey, B.I.G, Rep. Foley, Jimmy Carter, Martha Stewart- we're all in the 666 for various reasons: Represent!

I was referring to the hourly bootie calls your wife hits me up with....word!

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by bold_n_brazen
Okay. Sure thing. I'm on it.

Is this the way to do it?

Was all that shitty diaper stuff on The FB really on a Sat night? Begezzus.

[dc_chef]

Originally posted by Tables R Us
A Cali judge dismissed flashing charges against a 40 year old woman for flashing a 14 year old kiddie.




AP Wire

Maybe Californians got this one right.