Leona Helmsley Leaves Billions To Dogs

[ZOS23xy]

Absolutely fucking disgusting. How can anyone excuse this? 5-8 BILLION dollars.

To her dogs.

Surely a million would have covered their posh food, grooming and kennel palaces? Even that would have been an outrageous amount to any sane person.

What a fucking bitch. All the good this money could have done, and for sure, you can betcha that most of it will be hoovered away surreptitiously.

Unless she owned 100 million dogs of course.

Wasn't it Jim Bakker who had his dog reside inside an air conditioned doghouse?

Yes, I know, people should be kinder to one another. But for someone like Leona H. no one was within reach and she drove away anyone who might have given her a touch of kindness.

She was no better than Hetty Green (in the 1920's), who was worth a few million, but when her son broke his leg, she searched for a "free hospital". Her son has his leg amputated for her concerns.

People...

 

[Mr. Snakey]

I know a guy who tried to write his will on his dick. The lawyer said it wouldnt stand up in court.......

 

[Mem]

I know a guy who tried to write his will on his dick. The lawyer said it wouldnt stand up in court.......

Rumor has it that you have the Bible written on yours, and it's a hard read. :wink::biggrin1:

 

[ZOS23xy]

I know a guy who tried to write his will on his dick. The lawyer said it wouldnt stand up in court.......

Your story doesn't have a third leg to stand on....

 

[Mem]

Her parting shot proves she was no bitch at all. She could have done what the rich almost always does and keep it to themselves. They search high and low for methods to pass it on without anyone else getting their hands on it.

When she died she could have kept it to herself? That does not make any sense at all.

 

[deleted15807]

When she died she could have kept it to herself? That does not make any sense at all.

Family. Rich families.

 

[Mr. Snakey]

:biggrin1:

Rumor has it that you have the Bible written on yours, and it's a hard read. :wink::biggrin1:

Oh thats funny. I cant stop laughing.

 

[vince]

Rumor has it that you have the Bible written on yours, and it's a hard read. :wink::biggrin1:

You just need to get closer...

 

[B_Nick4444]

Not that I don't love dogs, 'cause I do.

But 5-8 billion dollars? There are many human illnesses that could benefit from 1/10th of that money. I guess she really did hate people.

the earth's number one problem, from which ALL other problems derive is human overpopulation ... accordingly, as I never contribute to human charities that would serve to extend the lives or populations of humans, I would have left it to the dogs, or the enviros ... most especially, population zero growth efforts

 

[eddyabs]

Curious. How do you know she was a 'bitch'? Misogyny is rampant here. What is the male equivalent to 'bitch'?

No misogyny implied, I'd feel that if she were male he would be a 'bastard', and just who do you think you are to accuse me of misogyny?

I think that the general consensus was and is that she was, a bitch.

Apologies if my sentiment offends you, but that just the way I feel. Deal with it.

 

[HamYai]

These people who leave money to animals are soo fucking dumb! Do they seriously think that the animal is gonna get or enjoy a penny of it? Its the lawyers & the guardians of the animal that will suck up all the cash. That money could literally save lives worldwide. Fucking assholes. Shouldn't even be legal to do such crap...

Agreed x 5 - 8 billion times.

With power comes responsibility and that much money = POWER.

So many desperate people in this world.

So many better things it could be spent on rather than the already wealthy lawyers/executors.

So many desperately ill &/or abused children to be helped, for one.

 

[eddyabs]

Agreed x 5 - 8 billion times.

With power comes responsibility and that much money = POWER.

So many desperate people in this world.

So many better things it could be spent on rather than the already wealthy lawyers/executors.

So many desperately ill &/or abused children to be helped, for one.

Straight to the point mate, well said.

 

[WifeOfBath]

First of all, it's her money to do with exactly as she wants outside of taking care of the obligations she has to taxes and paying off anything she owed on her estate. We can speculate about what a bitch this woman was and what she should have done, but in the end, it's not anyone's business but hers what she does with her money.

I don't agree with a judge changing the terms of her will so her grandchildren got money. Leaving $12 million to a dog is looney, but it was her money. I feel the same way about what happened with J. Howard Marshall and Anna Nicole Smith. Unless it's illegal, a person should be able to do whatever they want with their money either before or after death, no matter how stupid or wrong it may seem.

I'm actually glad she left so much money to animal charities. Most people will their money to humans-- I'm sure the percentage of what kind of charities people will their estates to far exceeds what is given to animals. There are plenty of charities that benefit humans. On the other hand, animal welfare isn't really high on the list for most people when making charitable donations. Animal shelters do a good thing and they always need money. As humans we have a responsibility to the animals that we domesticated and/or pushed out of their habitats. Sadly, most people don't see this. If this misanthropic old rich lady wants to give her money to animals, good for her and good for the animals.

This is nothing like seeing a sick child and a sick dog and taking care of the dog. Even so, in that situation you'd have 10 people helping the child and maybe one trying to help the dog. But it's not the same. If you're so concerned about saving children what are you donating to childrens' charities?

If you feel so upset by what she did, you go out and make a ton of money and leave it to whatever cause you like. I'm sure if she left the money to a human cause you don't approve of, you'd bitch about that too. It's still not your money.

 

[D_Kaye Throttlebottom]

The terms of the trust changed because the appointed guardian of her dog took a pass at taking care of him. Leona asked her brother or her grandson to care for the dog. They refused, so the dog went to another guardian. That guardian is salaried 60K a year. They pay for the dog's round the clock security, grooming, feeding etc.

It was the change of the guardian that left the award of the trust amount in the air. So gripe and moan all you want - giving 12 million to care for your dog seems nuts, but if you think a close family member is caring for the dog, at least there is that buffer. When it's turned over to someone else they requested that the trust amount be reduced, so that the salaried guardian of the dog is not given an excess of the dog's life expectancy.

Law Blog - WSJ.com : Trouble for Trouble! Judge Knocks $10 Mil from Helmsley Dog's Take

 

[deleted15807]

First of all, it's her money to do with exactly as she wants outside of taking care of the obligations she has to taxes and paying off anything she owed on her estate. We can speculate about what a bitch this woman was and what she should have done, but in the end, it's not anyone's business but hers what she does with her money.

I don't agree with a judge changing the terms of her will so her grandchildren got money. Leaving $12 million to a dog is looney, but it was her money. I feel the same way about what happened with J. Howard Marshall and Anna Nicole Smith. Unless it's illegal, a person should be able to do whatever they want with their money either before or after death, no matter how stupid or wrong it may seem.

I'm actually glad she left so much money to animal charities. Most people will their money to humans-- I'm sure the percentage of what kind of charities people will their estates to far exceeds what is given to animals. There are plenty of charities that benefit humans. On the other hand, animal welfare isn't really high on the list for most people when making charitable donations. Animal shelters do a good thing and they always need money. As humans we have a responsibility to the animals that we domesticated and/or pushed out of their habitats. Sadly, most people don't see this. If this misanthropic old rich lady wants to give her money to animals, good for her and good for the animals.

This is nothing like seeing a sick child and a sick dog and taking care of the dog. Even so, in that situation you'd have 10 people helping the child and maybe one trying to help the dog. But it's not the same. If you're so concerned about saving children what are you donating to childrens' charities?

If you feel so upset by what she did, you go out and make a ton of money and leave it to whatever cause you like. I'm sure if she left the money to a human cause you don't approve of, you'd bitch about that too. It's still not your money.

EXACTLY. Every paragraph right on target.

From a Darwinian standpoint humans are not in jeopardy at all.
http://math.berkeley.edu/~galen/popclk.html

How long can the clock tick before the whole thing collapses on itself? Each tick of the clock means less for every living thing. Rodents, insects and tasty animals like chickens and cows will make it. We'll keep those around since they're so delicious to eat.

I do volunteer work at an animal shelter in one of the richest states in the US. And we have no money for a new shelter, no money for health care for the pets, no money for a new mobile adoption bus, no money for you name it. We will gladly accept Leona's donation.

 

[D_Relentless Original]

Her parting shot proves she was no bitch at all. She could have done what the rich almost always does and keep it to themselves. They search high and low for methods to pass it on without anyone else getting their hands on it.

Exactly, good point and the fact is, its her money, she could do what she wanted with it and she did, lets hope its honoured.

 

[D_Relentless Original]

First of all, it's her money to do with exactly as she wants outside of taking care of the obligations she has to taxes and paying off anything she owed on her estate. We can speculate about what a bitch this woman was and what she should have done, but in the end, it's not anyone's business but hers what she does with her money.

I don't agree with a judge changing the terms of her will so her grandchildren got money. Leaving $12 million to a dog is looney, but it was her money. I feel the same way about what happened with J. Howard Marshall and Anna Nicole Smith. Unless it's illegal, a person should be able to do whatever they want with their money either before or after death, no matter how stupid or wrong it may seem.

I'm actually glad she left so much money to animal charities. Most people will their money to humans-- I'm sure the percentage of what kind of charities people will their estates to far exceeds what is given to animals. There are plenty of charities that benefit humans. On the other hand, animal welfare isn't really high on the list for most people when making charitable donations. Animal shelters do a good thing and they always need money. As humans we have a responsibility to the animals that we domesticated and/or pushed out of their habitats. Sadly, most people don't see this. If this misanthropic old rich lady wants to give her money to animals, good for her and good for the animals.

This is nothing like seeing a sick child and a sick dog and taking care of the dog. Even so, in that situation you'd have 10 people helping the child and maybe one trying to help the dog. But it's not the same. If you're so concerned about saving children what are you donating to childrens' charities?

If you feel so upset by what she did, you go out and make a ton of money and leave it to whatever cause you like. I'm sure if she left the money to a human cause you don't approve of, you'd bitch about that too. It's still not your money.

Absolutely spot on 100%