On 4/2/2013 10:43 PM, Mike M wrote:

Happy to hear that. It would be nice if there was a way to contribute
and have it tax deductible. I've gone 4 years now with out paying
income tax, and I enjoy not paying into the Ponzi scheme anymore then
necessary. Just a thought but might help her raise more money.


As I've said before, that was instigated by a family friend without my
knowledge or input, but from what I understand I don't think it is
possible for donations to an individual for medical purposes to be tax
deductible for the donor without the recipient being some kind of
registered 501(c) charitable organization.

I'm fairly certain that any donation is treated as a "gift" to the
recipient and as a result would not be taxable as income to the
recipient for Federal purposes.

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://plus.google.com/114902129577517371552/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

Mike M wrote in
:

On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 18:14:02 -0500, Swingman wrote:

On 3/1/2013 7:38 AM, Swingman wrote:
On 2/28/2013 10:20 PM, jtpr wrote:

You all touched me very deeply with your donations. But I cannot
tell you the effect this will have on Mel's wife.

You just got to the very heart of the matter with that last above,
Jim.

From what I can tell, and having just been given the opportunity to
observe the effect of a gift/donation on the recipient, it has made
me understand that the monetary element, regardless of the size and
while of necessary importance, turns out to be about half the
benefit.

These folks are sick, or tired, or both, and their energy levels and
ability to carry on are being taxed to the utmost.

When seeing folks, sometimes complete strangers, willing to help
_them_, you observe in the recipient the other half of that gift of
kindness and generosity: a renewed energy to carry on.

Gives that old saying, "The milk of human kindness.", a new meaning
and understanding, eh?

Reason for some very cautious optimism today with regard to my
youngest daughter. Too early to be jumping for joy, but after a month
of Interferon treatment, an MRI yesterday (yep, on Easter Sunday)
indicated that tumors appear to be slowly regressing, and that bone
growth is progressing.

Once again, thanks to all of you here who donated on her behalf, can't
tell you how much that means to all of us.

Happy to hear that. It would be nice if there was a way to contribute
and have it tax deductible. I've gone 4 years now with out paying
income tax, and I enjoy not paying into the Ponzi scheme anymore then
necessary. Just a thought but might help her raise more money.

Mike M

Because this is to help a specific individual, rather than a charitable
cause, it is not tax deductible. That does not imply that Give Forward
isn't a noble and charitbale way to give, just that tax law doesn't let
it be "charitable" for tax purposes.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

On 4/2/2013 10:43 PM, Mike M wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 18:14:02 -0500, Swingman wrote:

On 3/1/2013 7:38 AM, Swingman wrote:
On 2/28/2013 10:20 PM, jtpr wrote:

You all touched me very deeply with your donations. But I cannot tell
you the effect this will have on Mel's wife.

You just got to the very heart of the matter with that last above, Jim.

From what I can tell, and having just been given the opportunity to
observe the effect of a gift/donation on the recipient, it has made me
understand that the monetary element, regardless of the size and while
of necessary importance, turns out to be about half the benefit.

These folks are sick, or tired, or both, and their energy levels and
ability to carry on are being taxed to the utmost.

When seeing folks, sometimes complete strangers, willing to help _them_,
you observe in the recipient the other half of that gift of kindness and
generosity: a renewed energy to carry on.

Gives that old saying, "The milk of human kindness.", a new meaning and
understanding, eh?

Reason for some very cautious optimism today with regard to my youngest
daughter. Too early to be jumping for joy, but after a month of
Interferon treatment, an MRI yesterday (yep, on Easter Sunday) indicated
that tumors appear to be slowly regressing, and that bone growth is
progressing.

Once again, thanks to all of you here who donated on her behalf, can't
tell you how much that means to all of us.

Happy to hear that. It would be nice if there was a way to contribute
and have it tax deductible. I've gone 4 years now with out paying
income tax, and I enjoy not paying into the Ponzi scheme anymore then
necessary. Just a thought but might help her raise more money.

Mike M


You have to discount the fact that you may not get a tax advantage when
helping some one else out. I don't like paying taxes either but I won't
let that stop me from helping someone. sometimes you just have to think
of how much help you would be giving.

Swingman wrote:
On 4/2/2013 10:43 PM, Mike M wrote:

Happy to hear that. It would be nice if there was a way to contribute
and have it tax deductible. I've gone 4 years now with out paying
income tax, and I enjoy not paying into the Ponzi scheme anymore then
necessary. Just a thought but might help her raise more money.


As I've said before, that was instigated by a family friend without my
knowledge or input, but from what I understand I don't think it is
possible for donations to an individual for medical purposes to be tax
deductible for the donor without the recipient being some kind of
registered 501(c) charitable organization.

I'm fairly certain that any donation is treated as a "gift" to the
recipient and as a result would not be taxable as income to the
recipient for Federal purposes.


The last time I checked (about 3 years ago), gifts up to $14,000 (per
year) were not taxable. IIRC, there may also be a cummulative limit.

On 4/3/2013 9:12 AM, Han wrote:

Because this is to help a specific individual, rather than a charitable
cause, it is not tax deductible. That does not imply that Give Forward
isn't a noble and charitbale way to give, just that tax law doesn't let
it be "charitable" for tax purposes.

Perfect example of the unfortunate necessity of laws to govern human
behavior. If this were somehow allowed, the plethora of dickheads in the
gene pool (starting with the lawyers?), would be abusing it for their
own, other than charitable, benefit.

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://plus.google.com/114902129577517371552/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

Swingman wrote in
:

On 4/3/2013 9:12 AM, Han wrote:

Because this is to help a specific individual, rather than a
charitable cause, it is not tax deductible. That does not imply that
Give Forward isn't a noble and charitbale way to give, just that tax
law doesn't let it be "charitable" for tax purposes.

Perfect example of the unfortunate necessity of laws to govern human
behavior. If this were somehow allowed, the plethora of dickheads in
the gene pool (starting with the lawyers?), would be abusing it for
their own, other than charitable, benefit.

Would be a long, long discussion if we are going to talk about what
should or should not be deductible. BIG GRIN

Just for those who don't realize it, deductions such as chariable
deductions, reduce your taxable income only, they are NOT credits
against a tax bill. This makes deductions highly regressive in their
benefits: Example: If I give $1000 to the food pantry, which is a
deductible expense, the benefit I get depends on my top marginal tax
rate. Therefore giving is most "profitable" for those whose income is
highest. Tax rates for 2013 for married filing jointly:

10% on taxable income from $0 to $17,850, plus
15% on taxable income over $17,850 to $72,500, plus
25% on taxable income over $72,500 to $146,400, plus
28% on taxable income over $146,400 to $223,050, plus
33% on taxable income over $223,050 to $398,350, plus
35% on taxable income over $398,350 to $450,000, plus
39.6% on taxable income over $450,000.

Obviously my $1000 cost me only ~$600 if I have the highest income, but
costs me $900 if I earn less than $17,850.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in
:

On 4/2/2013 10:43 PM, Mike M wrote:
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 18:14:02 -0500, Swingman wrote:

On 3/1/2013 7:38 AM, Swingman wrote:
On 2/28/2013 10:20 PM, jtpr wrote:

You all touched me very deeply with your donations. But I cannot
tell you the effect this will have on Mel's wife.

You just got to the very heart of the matter with that last above,
Jim.

From what I can tell, and having just been given the opportunity
to
observe the effect of a gift/donation on the recipient, it has made
me understand that the monetary element, regardless of the size and
while of necessary importance, turns out to be about half the
benefit.

These folks are sick, or tired, or both, and their energy levels
and ability to carry on are being taxed to the utmost.

When seeing folks, sometimes complete strangers, willing to help
_them_, you observe in the recipient the other half of that gift of
kindness and generosity: a renewed energy to carry on.

Gives that old saying, "The milk of human kindness.", a new meaning
and understanding, eh?

Reason for some very cautious optimism today with regard to my
youngest daughter. Too early to be jumping for joy, but after a
month of Interferon treatment, an MRI yesterday (yep, on Easter
Sunday) indicated that tumors appear to be slowly regressing, and
that bone growth is progressing.

Once again, thanks to all of you here who donated on her behalf,
can't tell you how much that means to all of us.

Happy to hear that. It would be nice if there was a way to
contribute and have it tax deductible. I've gone 4 years now with
out paying income tax, and I enjoy not paying into the Ponzi scheme
anymore then necessary. Just a thought but might help her raise more
money.

Mike M


You have to discount the fact that you may not get a tax advantage
when helping some one else out. I don't like paying taxes either but
I won't let that stop me from helping someone. sometimes you just
have to think of how much help you would be giving.

+1

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

"Swingman" wrote

As I've said before, that was instigated by a family friend without my
knowledge or input, but from what I understand I don't think it is
possible for donations to an individual for medical purposes to be tax
deductible for the donor without the recipient being some kind of
registered 501(c) charitable organization.

I'm fairly certain that any donation is treated as a "gift" to the
recipient and as a result would not be taxable as income to the recipient
for Federal purposes.

As explained to me by my accountant, I am certainly not one, this is how it
works.

You have a limit to how much you can "gift" anybody per year and per
lifetime. Anything above that means you have to pay tax. The recipient
rarely pays this tax. But you can make a "direct contribution" toward
tuition and medical expenses. These do not count against the above
mentioned limits. But the funds must be paid DIRECTLY to the educational
institution or medical facility/provider. There is no tax write off
involved in any of these scenarios. You would need to make a donation to a
federally (IRS) recognized charity for that to happen.

Again, I am not an accountant nor do I play one on television.

On 4/3/2013 10:00 AM, Han wrote:
Swingman wrote in
:

On 4/3/2013 9:12 AM, Han wrote:

Because this is to help a specific individual, rather than a
charitable cause, it is not tax deductible. That does not imply that
Give Forward isn't a noble and charitbale way to give, just that tax
law doesn't let it be "charitable" for tax purposes.

Perfect example of the unfortunate necessity of laws to govern human
behavior. If this were somehow allowed, the plethora of dickheads in
the gene pool (starting with the lawyers?), would be abusing it for
their own, other than charitable, benefit.

Would be a long, long discussion if we are going to talk about what
should or should not be deductible. BIG GRIN

Just for those who don't realize it, deductions such as chariable
deductions, reduce your taxable income only, they are NOT credits
against a tax bill. This makes deductions highly regressive in their
benefits: Example: If I give $1000 to the food pantry, which is a
deductible expense, the benefit I get depends on my top marginal tax
rate. Therefore giving is most "profitable" for those whose income is
highest. Tax rates for 2013 for married filing jointly:

10% on taxable income from $0 to $17,850, plus
15% on taxable income over $17,850 to $72,500, plus
25% on taxable income over $72,500 to $146,400, plus
28% on taxable income over $146,400 to $223,050, plus
33% on taxable income over $223,050 to $398,350, plus
35% on taxable income over $398,350 to $450,000, plus
39.6% on taxable income over $450,000.

Obviously my $1000 cost me only ~$600 if I have the highest income, but
costs me $900 if I earn less than $17,850.


Another reason that the poor should be under the 39.6" tax rate and the
rich under the 10% rate, The poor would benefit more than the rich for
charitable contributions. :~O

On 4/3/2013 9:20 AM, Leon wrote:

You have to discount the fact that you may not get a tax advantage when
helping some one else out. I don't like paying taxes either but I won't
let that stop me from helping someone. sometimes you just have to think
of how much help you would be giving.

His was simply a remark on how much more could be raised if that were
the case ... and I agree that could be a large factor in any decision to
donate.

That said, and judging from Mike's generous donation to a complete
stranger, I'm absolutely certain, and without doubt whatsoever, that tax
destructibility wasn't a factor in his decision to do so ... but
instead, an act of big heart and an inherent kindness.

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://plus.google.com/114902129577517371552/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in
:

On 4/3/2013 10:00 AM, Han wrote:
Swingman wrote in
:

On 4/3/2013 9:12 AM, Han wrote:

Because this is to help a specific individual, rather than a
charitable cause, it is not tax deductible. That does not imply
that Give Forward isn't a noble and charitbale way to give, just
that tax law doesn't let it be "charitable" for tax purposes.

Perfect example of the unfortunate necessity of laws to govern human
behavior. If this were somehow allowed, the plethora of dickheads in
the gene pool (starting with the lawyers?), would be abusing it for
their own, other than charitable, benefit.

Would be a long, long discussion if we are going to talk about what
should or should not be deductible. BIG GRIN

Just for those who don't realize it, deductions such as chariable
deductions, reduce your taxable income only, they are NOT credits
against a tax bill. This makes deductions highly regressive in their
benefits: Example: If I give $1000 to the food pantry, which is a
deductible expense, the benefit I get depends on my top marginal tax
rate. Therefore giving is most "profitable" for those whose income
is highest. Tax rates for 2013 for married filing jointly:

10% on taxable income from $0 to $17,850, plus
15% on taxable income over $17,850 to $72,500, plus
25% on taxable income over $72,500 to $146,400, plus
28% on taxable income over $146,400 to $223,050, plus
33% on taxable income over $223,050 to $398,350, plus
35% on taxable income over $398,350 to $450,000, plus
39.6% on taxable income over $450,000.

Obviously my $1000 cost me only ~$600 if I have the highest income,
but costs me $900 if I earn less than $17,850.


Another reason that the poor should be under the 39.6" tax rate and
the rich under the 10% rate, The poor would benefit more than the rich
for charitable contributions. :~O

Yeah, sure ... You go first, mate

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 11:13:56 -0500, Swingman wrote:

On 4/3/2013 9:20 AM, Leon wrote:

You have to discount the fact that you may not get a tax advantage when
helping some one else out. I don't like paying taxes either but I won't
let that stop me from helping someone. sometimes you just have to think
of how much help you would be giving.

His was simply a remark on how much more could be raised if that were
the case ... and I agree that could be a large factor in any decision to
donate.

That said, and judging from Mike's generous donation to a complete
stranger, I'm absolutely certain, and without doubt whatsoever, that tax
destructibility wasn't a factor in his decision to do so ... but
instead, an act of big heart and an inherent kindness.

Thank you and your assumption is correct. I have all of my family
almost converted to doing charitable contributions for Xmas rather
then spending money on things we don't need. My sisters usually give
things they have canned from their gardens and I give things I've made
in the shop. Generally just enjoy some gag gifts and a great prime
rib dinner.

Mike M

On 4/3/2013 11:25 AM, Han wrote:
Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in
:

On 4/3/2013 10:00 AM, Han wrote:
Swingman wrote in
:

On 4/3/2013 9:12 AM, Han wrote:

Because this is to help a specific individual, rather than a
charitable cause, it is not tax deductible. That does not imply
that Give Forward isn't a noble and charitbale way to give, just
that tax law doesn't let it be "charitable" for tax purposes.

Perfect example of the unfortunate necessity of laws to govern human
behavior. If this were somehow allowed, the plethora of dickheads in
the gene pool (starting with the lawyers?), would be abusing it for
their own, other than charitable, benefit.

Would be a long, long discussion if we are going to talk about what
should or should not be deductible. BIG GRIN

Just for those who don't realize it, deductions such as chariable
deductions, reduce your taxable income only, they are NOT credits
against a tax bill. This makes deductions highly regressive in their
benefits: Example: If I give $1000 to the food pantry, which is a
deductible expense, the benefit I get depends on my top marginal tax
rate. Therefore giving is most "profitable" for those whose income
is highest. Tax rates for 2013 for married filing jointly:

10% on taxable income from $0 to $17,850, plus
15% on taxable income over $17,850 to $72,500, plus
25% on taxable income over $72,500 to $146,400, plus
28% on taxable income over $146,400 to $223,050, plus
33% on taxable income over $223,050 to $398,350, plus
35% on taxable income over $398,350 to $450,000, plus
39.6% on taxable income over $450,000.

Obviously my $1000 cost me only ~$600 if I have the highest income,
but costs me $900 if I earn less than $17,850.


Another reason that the poor should be under the 39.6" tax rate and
the rich under the 10% rate, The poor would benefit more than the rich
for charitable contributions. :~O

Yeah, sure ... You go first, mate

LOL!!!

On 4/3/2013 11:13 AM, Swingman wrote:
On 4/3/2013 9:20 AM, Leon wrote:

You have to discount the fact that you may not get a tax advantage when
helping some one else out. I don't like paying taxes either but I won't
let that stop me from helping someone. sometimes you just have to think
of how much help you would be giving.

His was simply a remark on how much more could be raised if that were
the case ... and I agree that could be a large factor in any decision to
donate.

That said, and judging from Mike's generous donation to a complete
stranger, I'm absolutely certain, and without doubt whatsoever, that tax
destructibility wasn't a factor in his decision to do so ... but
instead, an act of big heart and an inherent kindness.



Totally agree but some times you "just do" rather than think. Did not
mean that to sound derogatory!

On 4/3/2013 11:35 AM, Mike M wrote:
On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 11:13:56 -0500, Swingman wrote:

On 4/3/2013 9:20 AM, Leon wrote:

You have to discount the fact that you may not get a tax advantage when
helping some one else out. I don't like paying taxes either but I won't
let that stop me from helping someone. sometimes you just have to think
of how much help you would be giving.

His was simply a remark on how much more could be raised if that were
the case ... and I agree that could be a large factor in any decision to
donate.

That said, and judging from Mike's generous donation to a complete
stranger, I'm absolutely certain, and without doubt whatsoever, that tax
destructibility wasn't a factor in his decision to do so ... but
instead, an act of big heart and an inherent kindness.

Thank you and your assumption is correct. I have all of my family
almost converted to doing charitable contributions for Xmas rather
then spending money on things we don't need. My sisters usually give
things they have canned from their gardens and I give things I've made
in the shop. Generally just enjoy some gag gifts and a great prime
rib dinner.

Mike M



I saw it that way too but not every one thinks that way.

On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 12:10:42 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 4/3/2013 11:13 AM, Swingman wrote:
On 4/3/2013 9:20 AM, Leon wrote:

You have to discount the fact that you may not get a tax advantage when
helping some one else out. I don't like paying taxes either but I won't
let that stop me from helping someone. sometimes you just have to think
of how much help you would be giving.

His was simply a remark on how much more could be raised if that were
the case ... and I agree that could be a large factor in any decision to
donate.

That said, and judging from Mike's generous donation to a complete
stranger, I'm absolutely certain, and without doubt whatsoever, that tax
destructibility wasn't a factor in his decision to do so ... but
instead, an act of big heart and an inherent kindness.



Totally agree but some times you "just do" rather than think. Did not
mean that to sound derogatory!

I didn't take it that way Leon, and I pretty much did it because that
evening I was in the mood to help someone out. Swingman pretty much
nailed it so everything is good. I could remember when this started
and reading what Karl went through with the health insurance
providers. I'm going to refrain from starting a conversation on
health insurance but I was happy to help even with out the tax
deduction.

Mike M

Mike M wrote:
On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 12:10:42 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 4/3/2013 11:13 AM, Swingman wrote:
On 4/3/2013 9:20 AM, Leon wrote:

You have to discount the fact that you may not get a tax advantage when
helping some one else out. I don't like paying taxes either but I won't
let that stop me from helping someone. sometimes you just have to think
of how much help you would be giving.

His was simply a remark on how much more could be raised if that were
the case ... and I agree that could be a large factor in any decision to
donate.

That said, and judging from Mike's generous donation to a complete
stranger, I'm absolutely certain, and without doubt whatsoever, that tax
destructibility wasn't a factor in his decision to do so ... but
instead, an act of big heart and an inherent kindness.



Totally agree but some times you "just do" rather than think. Did not
mean that to sound derogatory!

I didn't take it that way Leon, and I pretty much did it because that
evening I was in the mood to help someone out. Swingman pretty much
nailed it so everything is good. I could remember when this started
and reading what Karl went through with the health insurance
providers. I'm going to refrain from starting a conversation on
health insurance but I was happy to help even with out the tax
deduction.

Mike M

Good to know Mike.

On 4/1/2013 6:14 PM, Swingman wrote:
On 3/1/2013 7:38 AM, Swingman wrote:
On 2/28/2013 10:20 PM, jtpr wrote:

You all touched me very deeply with your donations. But I cannot tell
you the effect this will have on Mel's wife.

You just got to the very heart of the matter with that last above, Jim.

From what I can tell, and having just been given the opportunity to
observe the effect of a gift/donation on the recipient, it has made me
understand that the monetary element, regardless of the size and while
of necessary importance, turns out to be about half the benefit.

These folks are sick, or tired, or both, and their energy levels and
ability to carry on are being taxed to the utmost.

When seeing folks, sometimes complete strangers, willing to help _them_,
you observe in the recipient the other half of that gift of kindness and
generosity: a renewed energy to carry on.

Gives that old saying, "The milk of human kindness.", a new meaning and
understanding, eh?

Reason for some very cautious optimism today with regard to my youngest
daughter. Too early to be jumping for joy, but after a month of
Interferon treatment, an MRI yesterday (yep, on Easter Sunday) indicated
that tumors appear to be slowly regressing, and that bone growth is
progressing.

Once again, thanks to all of you here who donated on her behalf, can't
tell you how much that means to all of us.

To the many of you here on the wRec who helped to make this possible,
thought I would share this.

MRI's this week show a significant reduction in tumors, and the bone
replacement shots, though extremely painful, are visibly working; the
doctors have gone from cautious optimism, to full blown optimism, to the
point of reducing the number of further treatments, and are now saying
that surgery may not be needed.

Michelle texted this from the hospital last night, just before the 49th
treatment:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...63444507445314

(in typical female fashion, that unicorn has been through every one of
the 49 treatments with her and, instead of a long face and a 'woe is me'
attitude, she has dressed as if going to a birthday party for most of
them ... the young lady has as much fortitude and bravery has any Navy
SEAL).

Thanks again guys ... you know who you are.

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://plus.google.com/114902129577517371552/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

On 10/5/2013 8:57 AM, Swingman wrote:
On 4/1/2013 6:14 PM, Swingman wrote:
On 3/1/2013 7:38 AM, Swingman wrote:
On 2/28/2013 10:20 PM, jtpr wrote:

You all touched me very deeply with your donations. But I cannot tell
you the effect this will have on Mel's wife.

You just got to the very heart of the matter with that last above, Jim.

From what I can tell, and having just been given the opportunity to
observe the effect of a gift/donation on the recipient, it has made me
understand that the monetary element, regardless of the size and while
of necessary importance, turns out to be about half the benefit.

These folks are sick, or tired, or both, and their energy levels and
ability to carry on are being taxed to the utmost.

When seeing folks, sometimes complete strangers, willing to help _them_,
you observe in the recipient the other half of that gift of kindness and
generosity: a renewed energy to carry on.

Gives that old saying, "The milk of human kindness.", a new meaning and
understanding, eh?

Reason for some very cautious optimism today with regard to my youngest
daughter. Too early to be jumping for joy, but after a month of
Interferon treatment, an MRI yesterday (yep, on Easter Sunday) indicated
that tumors appear to be slowly regressing, and that bone growth is
progressing.

Once again, thanks to all of you here who donated on her behalf, can't
tell you how much that means to all of us.

To the many of you here on the wRec who helped to make this possible,
thought I would share this.

MRI's this week show a significant reduction in tumors, and the bone
replacement shots, though extremely painful, are visibly working; the
doctors have gone from cautious optimism, to full blown optimism, to the
point of reducing the number of further treatments, and are now saying
that surgery may not be needed.

Michelle texted this from the hospital last night, just before the 49th
treatment:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...63444507445314


(in typical female fashion, that unicorn has been through every one of
the 49 treatments with her and, instead of a long face and a 'woe is me'
attitude, she has dressed as if going to a birthday party for most of
them ... the young lady has as much fortitude and bravery has any Navy
SEAL).

Thanks again guys ... you know who you are.



Great news! And is that a unicorn???? I thought it was Pandy in pink!
:~)

On 10/5/2013 9:57 AM, Swingman wrote:
On 4/1/2013 6:14 PM, Swingman wrote:
On 3/1/2013 7:38 AM, Swingman wrote:
On 2/28/2013 10:20 PM, jtpr wrote:

You all touched me very deeply with your donations. But I cannot tell
you the effect this will have on Mel's wife.

You just got to the very heart of the matter with that last above, Jim.

From what I can tell, and having just been given the opportunity to
observe the effect of a gift/donation on the recipient, it has made me
understand that the monetary element, regardless of the size and while
of necessary importance, turns out to be about half the benefit.

These folks are sick, or tired, or both, and their energy levels and
ability to carry on are being taxed to the utmost.

When seeing folks, sometimes complete strangers, willing to help _them_,
you observe in the recipient the other half of that gift of kindness and
generosity: a renewed energy to carry on.

Gives that old saying, "The milk of human kindness.", a new meaning and
understanding, eh?

Reason for some very cautious optimism today with regard to my youngest
daughter. Too early to be jumping for joy, but after a month of
Interferon treatment, an MRI yesterday (yep, on Easter Sunday) indicated
that tumors appear to be slowly regressing, and that bone growth is
progressing.

Once again, thanks to all of you here who donated on her behalf, can't
tell you how much that means to all of us.

To the many of you here on the wRec who helped to make this possible,
thought I would share this.

MRI's this week show a significant reduction in tumors, and the bone
replacement shots, though extremely painful, are visibly working; the
doctors have gone from cautious optimism, to full blown optimism, to the
point of reducing the number of further treatments, and are now saying
that surgery may not be needed.

Michelle texted this from the hospital last night, just before the 49th
treatment:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...63444507445314


(in typical female fashion, that unicorn has been through every one of
the 49 treatments with her and, instead of a long face and a 'woe is me'
attitude, she has dressed as if going to a birthday party for most of
them ... the young lady has as much fortitude and bravery has any Navy
SEAL).

Thanks again guys ... you know who you are.

That's good news, I hope more good news to come.. Good luck.

--
Jeff

On 05/10/2013 10:57 AM, Swingman wrote:
On 4/1/2013 6:14 PM, Swingman wrote:
On 3/1/2013 7:38 AM, Swingman wrote:
On 2/28/2013 10:20 PM, jtpr wrote:

You all touched me very deeply with your donations. But I cannot tell
you the effect this will have on Mel's wife.

You just got to the very heart of the matter with that last above, Jim.

From what I can tell, and having just been given the opportunity to
observe the effect of a gift/donation on the recipient, it has made me
understand that the monetary element, regardless of the size and while
of necessary importance, turns out to be about half the benefit.

These folks are sick, or tired, or both, and their energy levels and
ability to carry on are being taxed to the utmost.

When seeing folks, sometimes complete strangers, willing to help _them_,
you observe in the recipient the other half of that gift of kindness and
generosity: a renewed energy to carry on.

Gives that old saying, "The milk of human kindness.", a new meaning and
understanding, eh?

Reason for some very cautious optimism today with regard to my youngest
daughter. Too early to be jumping for joy, but after a month of
Interferon treatment, an MRI yesterday (yep, on Easter Sunday) indicated
that tumors appear to be slowly regressing, and that bone growth is
progressing.

Once again, thanks to all of you here who donated on her behalf, can't
tell you how much that means to all of us.

To the many of you here on the wRec who helped to make this possible,
thought I would share this.

MRI's this week show a significant reduction in tumors, and the bone
replacement shots, though extremely painful, are visibly working; the
doctors have gone from cautious optimism, to full blown optimism, to the
point of reducing the number of further treatments, and are now saying
that surgery may not be needed.

Michelle texted this from the hospital last night, just before the 49th
treatment:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1113554...63444507445314


(in typical female fashion, that unicorn has been through every one of
the 49 treatments with her and, instead of a long face and a 'woe is me'
attitude, she has dressed as if going to a birthday party for most of
them ... the young lady has as much fortitude and bravery has any Navy
SEAL).

Thanks again guys ... you know who you are.


Thanks for the update, and it is even better that it is good news. I
often think about her when I see your posts (I am a father too.) What a
marathon of treatment she is enduring.

cheers ...

brian

Brian Hoyt
Stillwater Lake, Nova Scotia
Canada, B3Z 1G2

Change the world one loan at a time - visit Kiva.org to find out how