disease resistance -- then again I have had many heirlooms side by side with hybrid that seems to do just as well and then again they have been around for 100+ yrs -- natural selection maybe!!! ***** it all depends on which specific diseases you're referring to. The foliage diseases are THE most common tomato diseases and NO variety, OP or hybrid has any significant tolerance to those diseases. There are a couple of varieties that have low level tolerance to Early Blight ( A. solani), but that's only of use to the large commercial farmer who can spray every maybe 6-7 days instead of maybe 3-4 days, so are of no use, really, to the home gardener. So one won't see any significant difference at all between hybrids and OP's when it comes to the common foliage diseases. Carolyn

The author obviously didn't do his homework or was just doing a puff piece because he neglected to ask Mr. Carl about Viking's recent relationship with Asian juggernaut LG. I see a few problems with their strategy long term: watering down a high line or luxury brand rarely works, you ruin the very thing that got you to the show - quality and exclusivity. while they claim to practice kaizan - I just think those country boys can't figure it out. Many of their products still have quality issues. Their built in fridges still have defects that were in the product from day one. Not good for image as a "quality manuf. " they've done a piss poor job marketing their metal cabinets - I see more LaCornue metal cabs than I do St. Charles/Viking and they cost 5 times as much. Still unclear what their Asian partner strategy is.

Carol, I found your post a few weeks ago on a search. For some reason, I keep thinking about your questions and the advice you got, and I finally decided to log on and comment. Here are a few comments about your post: 1) You make a good point about being able to get better returns with mutual funds over a MM. 2-3% is very achievable. On the other hand, it is also quite possible to lose 2-3% - or more- with mutual funds. This is the trade-off between risk and reward that is inherent in investing. Typically fixed income investments, such as MM, T-bills, and government bonds are called "risk free" investments. Equities, such as stocks, and stock mutual funds are typically considered to be riskier. In general, the "riskier" the investment, the higher the rate of return. 2) You mentioned investing in a mutual fund. Another aspect of risk/reward is diversification. Again, in general funds that are spread among several different investments are at lower risk (Dont put all your eggs in one basket). Taking this a step further, risk is reduced more by making sure the different investments are sufficiently diverse. Some examples of diversity would be bonds vs. stocks, growth stocks vs. value stocks, US stocks vs. foreign stocks, etc. 3) Everybody has a different risk tolerance. Your husband seems to be very risk averse. You seem to be more risk tolerant. The level of risk is a personal decision that both of you must feel comfortable with. 4) I would like to suggest that you visit a website called www.ifa.com. This is a company of investment advisors that specialize in mutual funds by Dimensional Fund Advisors (DFA). IÂm not suggesting you use DFA at this time. What I am suggesting is that you and your husband take the risk survey that IFA has on their website. It is free, and you donÂt have to sign up or give them your E-mail address. The risk survey is about 20 questions. The results give you an idea where you are on the risk taking spectrum. Based on the results, IFA will suggest one of 20 different portfolios that fit in with your risk tolerance. Again, I wouldnÂt necessarily suggest those portfolios for you, but they will give you a general idea of the types of investments that would be consistent with the level of risk you and your husband would like to take. I may make a few people angry, but I need to comment about the advice you have been given: First, the good advice. 1) I agree with much of what jkom51 says in the first reply. Although you probably donÂt need a CFP, it wonÂt hurt as long as you can find a good one. 2) Chisue suggested treasuries and CDs. These can be good alternatives to MM, but you should research the advantages and differences. 3) Great advice f lphacat. American Funds are "load funds". That means when you buy them, a salesman gets a commission, usually about 5.25%. If you invest $400,000, you will LOSE $21,000 immediately. The big problem with this is that there are "no load" funds out there that will do just as good if not better, and you can get them for about $30 per fund. If you have 10 funds, that would be $300 verses $21,000. Too often an advisor who is recommending a load fund has his best interests at heart instead of yours. I wouldnÂt even consider load funds if I were you. 4) Alphacat also suggested DFA funds. He is correct; almost any DFA fund runs rings around American. They are all no load and have much lower annual fees as well. On a $400,000 investment, the difference in ER between DFA and American can run $4000 per year. With compounding, this is about $60,000 over 10 years that you are giving up. 5) The absolute best advice you got was f lphacat when he recommended you go to www.fundadvice.com. Go there and read every article, especially this one (sorry, I canÂt get the link to work, so I just copied the whole address) http://www.fundadvice.com/articles/buy-hold/the-ultimate-buy-and-hold-strategy.html. Paul Merriman gives great advice to folks. He is also a financial advisor who you might want to consider. I think he will work on a percentage of assets or I know he will give advice on a per hour basis (around $200/hr). This may be your best option. For about $400 you can get some really first rate advice on how best to invest. For disclosure purposes, I donÂt invest with Merriman, but I do read his site quite often. Also, for disclosure, all my IRA assets are invested in DFA funds. Now for the bad advice: 1) The average investor has absolutely no business investing in individual stocks. If you put your money in 10 mutual funds you are invested in 10,000 stocks. Now if one of your stocks goes bankrupt, would you rather lose $40,000 ($400,000/10 stocks) or $4 ($400,000/10,000 stocks). This goes back to diversification. You just canÂt minimize the risk enough with individual stocks. 2) DonÂt bother going to Morningstar.com, or Forbes, or Money . Frankly I consider most of what they put out to be financial ography. They are trying to entice and tempt you with the "hot" stock, the " " stock, the investment that will make you filthy rich. But if you go back and look at last yearÂs "hottie" chances are it is a dog this year. For now, read everything you can at fundadvice.com. Another good site is www.diehards.org. That is a forum primarily by index investors. Go there and post the same message you put on this web, and you will get some fantastic advice (much better than I can give you). Just a few more comments. 1) The best portfolio for you and your husband will probably be one that includes MM, bond funds, and stock funds. Again, your risk tolerance will determine the best portfolio for you. 2) One more article at fundadvice.com is this one. http://www.fundadvice.com/portfolio.html Merriman provides several suggested portfolios with different fund families such as Vanguard and Fidelity. Most of these funds are index funds. Some are managed funds, but all are no load with low fees. 3) Many people prefer index funds. These funds track an index such as the S&P 500 or others. They typically have lower fees than managed funds and studies show that managed fund usually underperform index funds over the long term. You can get a good explanation of this at fundadvice.com 4) You asked for a few good funds. Several are listed in the site referenced in #2 above. 5) Good luck with your investment . Jeff

My mom saved a ton of stuff when I was in elementary. Then her filing cabinet got full and she weeded it down with my help (I was maybe middle school age). So now I have maybe an inch-high stack of school papers/art projects, and I think that's more than plenty. (I also have my old yearbooks, pictures etc, but I don't think they fall into a "stuff to be weeded" pile.) As for your questions: "First, should I merge all of these mini-piles into one room?" I wouldn't. I can't ever manage to sit down and go through a mountain of papers. I'd rather grab one mini-pile, sort through it, and then put it away. "Do I go through these piles/papers first and divide them into two (one pertaining to each child?) " I would think that it should be divided by child so that they can easily be passed on to them years from now. "Or, as I handle each paper, do I decide "School" vs "Non-School" and then break it down to each child? " No. Why would you? Are you going to store it seperately? Ideally, you'd have only the most important keepsakes and there wouldn't be many so it'd be easy to go through later and find all "nonschool" stuff if need be. "Or, do I decide "Keep" or "Toss" as I go through these piles? And if I do it this way, does the "Keep" pile get sorted?" Just Keep or Toss for now. If it really bugs you later, you can always sort it later. "I'm thinking that then I will separate each kid's stuff into the elementary school years, the middle school years, and then the high school years. ...Should I create folders for each grade and then put school and non-school items in those folders? " Wow, it sounds like you're keeping a lot more than one sample per year!! Even if there's say 3 papers with with "thoughtful comments" on it, that's a maximum of 24 pieces of paper for all of elementary school! I just think you're making an overly complex system. Go through the piles, pick out the best stuff. Write the child's name and grade on each piece of paper if it's not on there already. Stick it in a box, label the box, and call it done! The benefits of a simple system are: 1) Better chance of actually doing it 2) if you really really feel the urge to subdivide the keepsakes by year, it can be easily done. But honestly I think that if you need to do that then you've kept too much.