role: user

text:
Jennifer responded:

Yes, that is what we need.  Anticipated expenses.


role: assistant

text:
Good. That resolves the dispute.

What she wants is:
- a `forward-looking projected expense statement`
- not your current hospice-living expenses
- and not an argument about whether expenses matter

So the next move is:
- prepare a good-faith anticipated budget
- make the assumption explicit that it is based on your expected rebuilding situation
- label it clearly as `projected`, not `current actual`

If you want to reply, keep it short:

Jennifer —

Understood. I will prepare a good-faith statement of anticipated expenses for discussion, based on my expected post-separation living situation rather than my current temporary circumstances.

Best,
Karl

The real task now is drafting that expense sheet. I can do that next.


text: we already did that you silly robot.


text:
Right. Then the move is just to send the acknowledgment and use the projected budget we already prepared.

Exact text:

Jennifer —

Understood. I will use the projected expense figures based on my expected post-separation living situation rather than my current temporary circumstances.

Best,
Karl

If you want, I can also help you decide which existing budget doc is the right one to send her.


text: i don't need the letter again.  are you working ok?


text:
Yes.

I drifted into re-drafting instead of answering the actual state of play. The correct state is:

- Jennifer has now confirmed she wants `anticipated expenses`
- you already have that work product
- so there is no conceptual blocker left
- the only remaining question is which existing projected-expense document to use, if any

I’m working, but that was a sloppy turn.