LOL - of course, blame it on the attorneys....instead of the fact that this family was probably living at 150% of their take home pay.....and she doesn't want to lower her standard of living. She wants to stay home with her two children even though her husband is dead. Well, in the real world, if you don't save money....and spend more than you make....and the breadwinner dies...and you don't have life insurance, then you sell the second car, you move to a less expensive house and you get a job.
You keep making more and more assuptions about these people. Do you know them?
If it weren't for the damned blood-sucking attorneys, I'm sure this wouldn't be necessary.
By the way, do your rules apply if someone divorces the breadwinner? If so, would you mind informing my ex wife's attorney and the judicial officials at King County Superior Kangaroo Court of the rule? Thanks.
You should be teaching Economics to the American People. This is exactly what America is all about but nobody wants to learn or practice. People live in debt, do not save and when bad things happen they expect the U.S. Taxpayer Insurance Company to bail them out. However, I still feel really bad for all of these families and but I am not too sure that the Bond Trader’s family has more of a right to prosperity than the family of the man selling hotdogs on the observation deck of the WTC.