• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Millions left to a dog...

How is the dog going to spend it?

"Supermarket! Send me ten case of your best dog food?"
 
If I had that kind of money, I'd just set up a trust to make sure that my animals were well cared for for the rest of their lives. I sure wouldn't leave the whole wad to them. My Min Pin Sassy would just spend it all on stuffed toys.

View attachment 10805
 
Calm down C9G. People leave thier estates all the time to their pets, but in reality the money goes into trust accounts, and the like. As noted, how's does a pet spend the money? It won't just sit there, not in today's lawyer infested culture.
children dying of hunger in THIS country
U.S. is the only country where the poor are overweight, but that for another thread.
 
Piglet said:
Calm down C9G. People leave thier estates all the time to their pets, but in reality the money goes into trust accounts, and the like. As noted, how's does a pet spend the money? It won't just sit there, not in today's lawyer infested culture.
children dying of hunger in THIS country
U.S. is the only country where the poor are overweight, but that for another thread.
Click to expand...

I would agree with C9Gal on this. I don't expect everyone to agree with me on this however, I find it rather sad that an animal has to occupy the sole position in a person's life to warrant being that person's primary and maybe total beneficiary to their money. Humans are by and large happiest with other humans. Animals are a supplement to human love affection.

While many poor in this country are overweight, their are children dying of malnutrition and illnesses in this country. The point is, and I believe this is what C9G may have meant, is that there are so many ways in which the money could benefit mankind so much more, than leaving it in a trust to an animal that can only benefit from a small portion of the money.

What if the money was left to medical research, put into a scholarship fund in the person's (or dog's) name for needy children who have the abilities to attend college and then make a real contribution to the world, or even given to an organization like the SPCA.

I think any of these possibilities would have benefited the world much more than giving it to the dog.
 
Frequently when an animal is named as a beneficiary of an estate (money), the state probate court will assign a trustee (a competant and appropriate individual, an animal shelter organization, sometimes a specialized veterinarian) to administer the care, feeding and sheltering of the animal if no family members are able or approved to take care of it.

If the animal dies or is adopted into a competant care scenario - the state keeps the rest of the money ! It does not follow the animal, otherwise the adoption motives would be legitimately suspect. Animals , remember, do not have the same rights as humans.

Plus, apart from the occasional criminal neglect/homicide case of child starvation committed by a deviant parent - I'd like to know where these "starving" childeren in America are also ! I don't mean malnourished or sick - the term "dying of hunger" in this country was used. . . were you speaking metaphorically, C9G ?


:running:
 
Toastmaker said:
Frequently when an animal is named as a beneficiary of an estate (money), the state probate court will assign a trustee (a competant and appropriate individual, an animal shelter organization, sometimes a specialized veterinarian) to administer the care, feeding and sheltering of the animal if no family members are able or approved to take care of it.

If the animal dies or is adopted into a competant care scenario - the state keeps the rest of the money ! It does not follow the animal, otherwise the adoption motives would be legitimately suspect. Animals , remember, do not have the same rights as humans.

Plus, apart from the occasional criminal neglect/homicide case of child starvation committed by a deviant parent - I'd like to know where these "starving" childeren in America are also ! I don't mean malnourished or sick - the term "dying of hunger" in this country was used. . . were you speaking metaphorically, C9G ?


:running:
Click to expand...

Yes I was Toastmaker! I probably should have used the comment " when we have children living at the lowest poverty level" instead. Wrong choice of words on my part :)


And also, I agree with your comment about "animals not having the same rights as humans".
 
jmig said:
I would agree with C9Gal on this. I don't expect everyone to agree with me on this however, I find it rather sad that an animal has to occupy the sole position in a person's life to warrant being that person's primary and maybe total beneficiary to their money. Humans are by and large happiest with other humans. Animals are a supplement to human love affection.

While many poor in this country are overweight, their are children dying of malnutrition and illnesses in this country. The point is, and I believe this is what C9G may have meant, is that there are so many ways in which the money could benefit mankind so much more, than leaving it in a trust to an animal that can only benefit from a small portion of the money.

What if the money was left to medical research, put into a scholarship fund in the person's (or dog's) name for needy children who have the abilities to attend college and then make a real contribution to the world, or even given to an organization like the SPCA.

I think any of these possibilities would have benefited the world much more than giving it to the dog.
Click to expand...

John~ You have expressed it way better than I would ever have! Thank you Sir! I could not agree with you more!
Well said!
 
Uh woof woof, woof woof.
Bow wow, arf arf.
Grrrrrrrr.
Ok where's my millions? I promise to share with my twin here.
 
cheezyflier said:
there are Appalachian poor who are about as impovershed as one can be in this country.
Click to expand...


Yes, I know this first hand, I have grown up in Eastern Ky, and here in Dayton, But I have never seen the painful conditions as in This region, anywhere else in our country..

Yes, I think it is very FOOLISH to leave money to a animal, as has been said..
There are Humans that could use this Blessing...

But we do have the right still to make stupid desisions, Thanks Be to God..

Don't let them know this in Goverment, they will for sure write another useless, stupid law saying we can't make stupid choices..OPPPS..:icon_lol:
 
cheezyflier said:
there are Appalachian poor who are about as impovershed as one can be in this country.
Click to expand...

Bred and born in Appalachia. Grew up there too. Dirt poor doesn't describe it....as even the dirt was repossessed by the banks years ago.

Would I leave millions to my dogs...NO! They would just blow it on Milk Bones and chew toys.

OBIO
 
You dogs had better be on best behavior, rich or not. Any dog who pees or craps in this forum is out of here!

:jump:

Dogs can't do this :ernae: I don't care how rich they are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top