25 new messages in 8 topics - digest

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

25 new messages in 5 topics - digest

misc.consumers.frugal-living
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en

misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* Bush To Let Illegal Aliens Get $40 Digital TV Coupons - 18 messages, 8
authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/f941e4a655a77d3f?hl=en
* Update on installing kitchen cabinets from China - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/8e261cfd209cb855?hl=en
* Payday Advance Help Financial Emergency - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/98807272715767de?hl=en
* Payday Advance For MY Financial Emergency - 3 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/ce44cd864bffc1f4?hl=en
* Disney Mobile calls it Quits - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/db605ad0907838b0?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Bush To Let Illegal Aliens Get $40 Digital TV Coupons
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/f941e4a655a77d3f?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 12:49 pm
From: "Rod Speed"

FDR <nospam@asdfkdskkl.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> FDR <nospam@asdfkdskkl.com> wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Don <one-if-by-land@concord.com> wrote
>>>>> Jerry Okamura wrote

>>>>>> Tell me "who" is serious about solving the illegal immigration problem.

>>>>> Can you accurately describe the problem?

>>>> Yep, that there are illegals in the country who arent allowed to be there.

>>> Why?

>> Because they have decided that its better than the country they came from.

> I mean, why is it illegal?

Because that country decided that they dont want to
allow anyone who wants to migrate there to do that.

> Other than paying taxes and alleging some oath which means diddly anyway, what's the difference?

See above.

>>>>> You see, in order to solve a problem you must first define it precisely.

>>>> Depends on the problem, that isnt necessary with most problems.

>>>>> Its not possible to solve an undefined problem.

>>>> Wrong again, some problems fix themselves. One obvious example of that is people having too many kids. Thats fixes
>>>> itself in all modern first world countrys without any public policy, let alone actually defining the problem.

>>> Can you tell that to the Chinese?

>> No need, they worked that out for themselves and realised that china isnt a first world country and that that problem
>> wouldnt fix itself there any time soon.

>> It did work fine in Singapore tho.

== 2 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 12:57 pm
From: bearclaw@cruller.invalid

In article <041020071414487804%takebackamerica@2008.com>,
Audie Murphy's Ghost <takebackamerica@2008.com> wrote:

> In article <1191521103.568232.199540@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
> Ted <tedorn44@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Remove the stinking illegals and you will find persons willing to
> > pick the crops.
>
> Fine! When are you volunteering? Or are we going to get one of
> those "I spent half my life picking crops" lies?

Heh. I spent some time picking apples in Washington. I hope I never
have to do it again. That's where I met the kids of some "illegal"
immigrants. Lived with one for a while. Watched her go from Cesar
Chavez demonstrations to college and-- last I heard-- she is an
engineer for IBM. Her sister-- an unmarried mother who was on welfare
for a time-- is now a doctor of vocational rehab, owns several rental
properties and has paid back California for every dime she ever got
from her welfare benefits. Both of them now have families with kids of
their own attending college.

Yeah, boy. Those immigrants are just killing us. Deport 'em all, *and*
their ancestors, retroactive back to the 1830's or so.

== 3 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 1:07 pm
From: clams casino

bearclaw@cruller.invalid wrote:

>
>Yeah, boy. Those immigrants are just killing us. Deport 'em all, *and*
>their ancestors, retroactive back to the 1830's or so.
>
>

Only the ones who arrived illegally.

What part of illegal is not illegal?

== 4 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 1:21 pm
From: bearclaw@cruller.invalid

In article <b7qcg316rrqfhdmgud6gpg2ui2b67spk0q@4ax.com>,
Vic Smith <thismailautodeleted@comcast.net> wrote:

> Of course the penurious sods here just want Mexicans to cheaply mow
> their damn lawns. They're too fucking white to do that themselves.

LOL. I had to laugh because I once made a pretty good living at lawn and
yard care. Bearclaw's LawN Order. I'm really glad I don't have to do
that anymore, too.

> And then there are those race-to-the-bottom free market capitalist
> scum who are too busy thinking of how to score an extra buck to even
> bother with race. GWB and Chambers of Commerce fit in well here.

Bush wouldn't fit well anywhere but in a straitjacket.

But I take your point, and I admit freely that I am concerned about the
aging of America, including me. There are not enough workers coming up
to maintain production in an economy expected to support the cornucopia
of ailments of old age and dotage. The government is doing nothing to
prepare for this. It's like they are paralyzed. Or stupid. Or
incompetent. And hey, they are all practically to a man, strenuously
opposed to "illegal" immigration.

And so emotional, heavily-race-charged calls for the expulsion of those
who can fill the labor gap strike me as more than a little shortsighted.
It strikes me as "doing something because we can", rather than "doing
something because it's right and good and effective". Very much like the
Iraq invasion. And look where that's got us.

== 5 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 1:29 pm
From: bearclaw@cruller.invalid

In article <tQwNi.296159$BX3.195739@newsfe13.lga>,
clams casino <PeterGriffin@drunkin-clam.com> wrote:

> bearclaw@cruller.invalid wrote:
>
> >
> >Yeah, boy. Those immigrants are just killing us. Deport 'em all, *and*
> >their ancestors, retroactive back to the 1830's or so.
> >
> >
>
> Only the ones who arrived illegally.
>
> What part of illegal is not illegal?

Well, their parents were "illegal", at least as you think of it. And
there are plenty on the "deport 'em all" side who would have no problem
at all kicking them and their kids out. In this case, that would mean
one fewer IBM engineers and one fewer doctors of vocational rehab
working here in the great US.

I could draw out this analogy until the anti-immigrant crowd starts
looking like the Khmer Rouge (although Tom Tancredo *does* bear a
certain resemblance to Pol Pot), but hey! At least Cambodia had pretty
secure borders when they were in charge... oh, wait a minute... never
mind.

== 6 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 2:12 pm
From: clams casino

bearclaw@cruller.invalid wrote:

>In article <tQwNi.296159$BX3.195739@newsfe13.lga>,
> clams casino <PeterGriffin@drunkin-clam.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>bearclaw@cruller.invalid wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Yeah, boy. Those immigrants are just killing us. Deport 'em all, *and*
>>>their ancestors, retroactive back to the 1830's or so.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Only the ones who arrived illegally.
>>
>>What part of illegal is not illegal?
>>
>>
>
>Well, their parents were "illegal", at least as you think of it. And
>there are plenty on the "deport 'em all" side who would have no problem
>at all kicking them and their kids out. In this case, that would mean
>one fewer IBM engineers and one fewer doctors of vocational rehab
>working here in the great US.
>
>
>

I won't profess to be an expert on immigration / speak for all, but my
ancestors all arrived via the legal route (Ellis Island).

Furthermore all my coworkers & friends from other countries arrived here
through legal channels with most eventually taking on US citizenship.

Somehow, I can't imagine wanting to seek out a doctor who climbed over
the fence, nor can I imagine my employer hiring scientists & engineers
who arrived via the trunk of a car.

Hint - there are legal ways to inter the country and illegal ways.

What part of illegal is difficult for you to understand?

== 7 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 2:13 pm
From: FDR

Rod Speed wrote:
> FDR <nospam@asdfkdskkl.com> wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>> FDR <nospam@asdfkdskkl.com> wrote
>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>> Don <one-if-by-land@concord.com> wrote
>>>>>> Jerry Okamura wrote
>
>>>>>>> Tell me "who" is serious about solving the illegal immigration problem.
>
>>>>>> Can you accurately describe the problem?
>
>>>>> Yep, that there are illegals in the country who arent allowed to be there.
>
>>>> Why?
>
>>> Because they have decided that its better than the country they came from.
>
>> I mean, why is it illegal?
>
> Because that country decided that they dont want to
> allow anyone who wants to migrate there to do that.

But they do. Millions didn't come here magically. The government may
have written the law but they really didn't mean it.

>
>> Other than paying taxes and alleging some oath which means diddly anyway, what's the difference?
>
> See above.
>
>>>>>> You see, in order to solve a problem you must first define it precisely.
>
>>>>> Depends on the problem, that isnt necessary with most problems.
>
>>>>>> Its not possible to solve an undefined problem.
>
>>>>> Wrong again, some problems fix themselves. One obvious example of that is people having too many kids. Thats fixes
>>>>> itself in all modern first world countrys without any public policy, let alone actually defining the problem.
>
>>>> Can you tell that to the Chinese?
>
>>> No need, they worked that out for themselves and realised that china isnt a first world country and that that problem
>>> wouldnt fix itself there any time soon.
>
>>> It did work fine in Singapore tho.
>
>

== 8 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 3:00 pm
From: bearclaw@cruller.invalid

In article <NMxNi.9721$Bq3.8415@newsfe18.lga>,
clams casino <PeterGriffin@drunkin-clam.com> wrote:

> I won't profess to be an expert on immigration / speak for all, but my
> ancestors all arrived via the legal route (Ellis Island).

As did mine. But so what? Our ancestors didn't have a 2,000-mile
frontier to walk across, either. If they had, things might have looked a
lot different to you.

> Furthermore all my coworkers & friends from other countries arrived here
> through legal channels with most eventually taking on US citizenship.

I'm not sure if that speaks to the size of your circle or who you choose
as friends, but either way, anecdotes are a very unreliable way of
making public policy.

> Somehow, I can't imagine wanting to seek out a doctor who climbed over
> the fence, nor can I imagine my employer hiring scientists & engineers
> who arrived via the trunk of a car.

Again, *your* employer. Your imagination. Do you think national policies
should be made on such a narrow basis? There are plenty of employers who
seek out and retain foreigners. IIRC, a majority of those who
perpetrated the 9/11 events were initially here on work or student
visas. How much good did documentation do there?

As far as your characterization of immigrant doctors, scientists and
engineers, it is unworthy of response. I bet if you or your family
needed urgent medical care, you wouldn't spend a lot of time worrying
about how the doctor came to be where you needed him or her. I bet you
don't ask about the origins of the researcher who created the drugs that
keep you alive or relieve your pain. I bet the citizenship status of the
scientist who invented the flame-retardant that kept your kitchen from
going up in flames never crossed your mind.

No, it's only the farmworker, the janitor, the grass cutters, the least
able among us that get the once-over with the jaundiced immigration eye.
Why? Because they are the weak ones, the ones least likely to return a
punch. So the mob can feel like heroes, when in fact they are just a mob.

Yeah, I get concerned when mob action starts to appear legitimate.

I think focusing on "illegal" immigrants is a waste of time and money,
but I probably wouldn't mind as much if it wasn't couched in such a
militant, vigilante milieu. That's where my suspicions of something much
darker than mere enforcement of law comes into play. When I hear the
rants and threats of violence and the stupid appeals to nationalism,
that's when I know I'm dealing with people who aren't thinking and who
don't want anyone else to think, either.

== 9 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 3:07 pm
From: bearclaw@cruller.invalid

In article <NMxNi.9721$Bq3.8415@newsfe18.lga>,
clams casino <PeterGriffin@drunkin-clam.com> wrote:

> What part of illegal is difficult for you to understand?

The part where the focus is on a specific group and not applied to all
equally. The part where the motive of the law is vague and clouded and
subject to sudden change. The part that encourages the attitude of guilt
before innocence. The part that necessitates the burden of proof of
citizenship, even for those born here. That's already happening, thanks
to anti-immigration nuts. You can't get a job anymore unless you can
produce two forms of citizenship. What is *that*?

All that proves is that those who would easily question their neighbor's
patriotism now want an easy way to cast doubt on their neighbor's
citizenship. Yet another divisive tactic by those who would tear this
country apart.

== 10 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 3:21 pm
From: "Rod Speed"

FDR <nospam@asdfkdskkl.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> FDR <nospam@asdfkdskkl.com> wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> FDR <nospam@asdfkdskkl.com> wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>> Don <one-if-by-land@concord.com> wrote
>>>>>>> Jerry Okamura wrote

>>>>>>>> Tell me "who" is serious about solving the illegal immigration problem.

>>>>>>> Can you accurately describe the problem?

>>>>>> Yep, that there are illegals in the country who arent allowed to be there.

>>>>> Why?

>>>> Because they have decided that its better than the country they came from.

>>> I mean, why is it illegal?

>> Because that country decided that they dont want to
>> allow anyone who wants to migrate there to do that.

> But they do.

Not voluntarily, just because of the cost of keeping all the illegals out.

> Millions didn't come here magically. The government may have written the law but they really didn't mean it.

Corse they do. Get a foreigner to try showing up at the border and telling
the goon that you want to migrate into the country. They will be told they cant.

>>> Other than paying taxes and alleging some oath which means diddly
>>> anyway, what's the difference?
>>
>> See above.
>>
>>>>>>> You see, in order to solve a problem you must first define it
>>>>>>> precisely.
>>
>>>>>> Depends on the problem, that isnt necessary with most problems.
>>
>>>>>>> Its not possible to solve an undefined problem.
>>
>>>>>> Wrong again, some problems fix themselves. One obvious example
>>>>>> of that is people having too many kids. Thats fixes itself in
>>>>>> all modern first world countrys without any public policy, let
>>>>>> alone actually defining the problem.
>>
>>>>> Can you tell that to the Chinese?
>>
>>>> No need, they worked that out for themselves and realised that
>>>> china isnt a first world country and that that problem wouldnt fix
>>>> itself there any time soon.
>>
>>>> It did work fine in Singapore tho.

== 11 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 3:23 pm
From: clams casino

bearclaw@cruller.invalid wrote:

>In article <NMxNi.9721$Bq3.8415@newsfe18.lga>,
> clams casino <PeterGriffin@drunkin-clam.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>What part of illegal is difficult for you to understand?
>>
>>
>
>The part where the focus is on a specific group and not applied to all
>equally.
>

Any examples of which (illegal) groups are being over looked?

>The part where the motive of the law is vague and clouded and
>subject to sudden change.
>

In 99.999999999999999999% of the cases, one is either here legally or
illegally. What's so clouded?

>The part that encourages the attitude of guilt
>before innocence. The part that necessitates the burden of proof of
>citizenship, even for those born here. That's already happening, thanks
>to anti-immigration nuts. You can't get a job anymore unless you can
>produce two forms of citizenship. What is *that*?
>
>

Progress. It's about time.

Our son recently applied for a passport. Not only did they require his
birth certificate, but they needed know my and my wife's date of birth /
place of birth.

Excellent. It's about time.

== 12 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 3:25 pm
From: nobody@junk.min.net

In <hinbg3ldbon17eg5028v5fc2r123adfr7g@4ax.com>, on 10/05/07
at 02:09 AM, Rob Jensen <ShutUpRob@aol.com> said:

>The real criminals, the real thiefs, are the corporations. Until they
>have no incentive to use illegals, illegals will continue to be abused
>and exploited and US standards of living will continue to go down. So
>the appropriate punishment is to hold the corporations accountable for
>their crimes against both sets of victims -- not just the illegals (whose
>exploitation is IMO bad enough), but more importantly, but also the
>American people and the damage those psychopathic MBAs have inflicted on
>the country with what really is *their* ongoing crime.

And it's the corporations that control the politicians - of both parties -
which is why the illegal immigration issue is all talk. Neither party
wants to bite the corporate hands that feed them.

Alan

--

----------------------------------------------------------------------
** Please use address alanh77[at]comcast.net to reply via e-mail. **

Posted using registered MR/2 ICE Newsreader #564 and eComStation 1.21

BBS - The Nerve Center Telnet FidoNet 261/1000 tncbbs.no-ip.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------

== 13 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 3:28 pm
From: cloud dreamer

clams casino wrote:

>
> Our son recently applied for a passport. Not only did they require his
> birth certificate, but they needed know my and my wife's date of birth /
> place of birth.
>
> Excellent. It's about time.

That's more likely due to new requirements re terrorism, not immigration
fraud.

..

--

We must change the way we live,
or the climate will do it for us.

== 14 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 3:32 pm
From: Audie Murphy's Ghost

In article <RPyNi.107992$GO6.96142@newsfe21.lga>, clams casino
<PeterGriffin@drunkin-clam.com> wrote:

> bearclaw@cruller.invalid wrote:
>
> >In article <NMxNi.9721$Bq3.8415@newsfe18.lga>,
> > clams casino <PeterGriffin@drunkin-clam.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>What part of illegal is difficult for you to understand?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >The part where the focus is on a specific group and not applied to all
> >equally.
> >
>
> Any examples of which (illegal) groups are being over looked?
>
> >The part where the motive of the law is vague and clouded and
> >subject to sudden change.
> >
>
> In 99.999999999999999999% of the cases, one is either here legally or
> illegally. What's so clouded?
>
> >The part that encourages the attitude of guilt
> >before innocence. The part that necessitates the burden of proof of
> >citizenship, even for those born here. That's already happening, thanks
> >to anti-immigration nuts. You can't get a job anymore unless you can
> >produce two forms of citizenship. What is *that*?
> >
> >
>
> Progress. It's about time.
>
>
>
> Our son recently applied for a passport. Not only did they require his
> birth certificate, but they needed know my and my wife's date of birth /
> place of birth.
>
> Excellent. It's about time.

Did you even think to question why they might want to know where you
and your wife were born? I guess not; you drank the Kool-Aid long ago.
What's next? Are you going to have to prove paternity?

Here's a hint: Your origins were none of their business and are, in
fact, irrelevant to your son's status, as long as he can prove he was
born in the U.S.

== 15 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 3:52 pm
From: bearclaw@cruller.invalid

In article <RPyNi.107992$GO6.96142@newsfe21.lga>,
clams casino <PeterGriffin@drunkin-clam.com> wrote:

> Any examples of which (illegal) groups are being over looked?

How about the guys that piloted the planes into the WTC?

> In 99.999999999999999999% of the cases, one is either here legally or
> illegally. What's so clouded?

Hmm. The same as the percentage of made-up statistics on Usenet. What a
coincidence.

Clouded? Why do you ask?

> Progress.

Especially if you spend your day looking in the rear-view mirror.

> Our son recently applied for a passport. Not only did they require his
> birth certificate, but they needed know my and my wife's date of birth /
> place of birth.

Wow, it's a good thing he wasn't trying to enter/leave illegally huh?
Then he would have been an idiot AND in jail.

> Excellent. It's about time.

Your son was applying for a document often used as identification.
That's a lot different than applying for a job. But, if it makes you
happy to have your blood treated as though he were guilty of something,
I guess that's all there is to say between you and me. I still think
that neither I nor any other U.S. citizen should have to involuntarily
present citizenship credentials to anyone in a position to demand them.

== 16 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 4:00 pm
From: FDR

Rod Speed wrote:
> FDR <nospam@asdfkdskkl.com> wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>> FDR <nospam@asdfkdskkl.com> wrote
>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>> FDR <nospam@asdfkdskkl.com> wrote
>>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>>> Don <one-if-by-land@concord.com> wrote
>>>>>>>> Jerry Okamura wrote
>
>>>>>>>>> Tell me "who" is serious about solving the illegal immigration problem.
>
>>>>>>>> Can you accurately describe the problem?
>
>>>>>>> Yep, that there are illegals in the country who arent allowed to be there.
>
>>>>>> Why?
>
>>>>> Because they have decided that its better than the country they came from.
>
>>>> I mean, why is it illegal?
>
>>> Because that country decided that they dont want to
>>> allow anyone who wants to migrate there to do that.
>
>> But they do.
>
> Not voluntarily, just because of the cost of keeping all the illegals out.
>
>> Millions didn't come here magically. The government may have written the law but they really didn't mean it.
>
> Corse they do. Get a foreigner to try showing up at the border and telling
> the goon that you want to migrate into the country. They will be told they cant.

Yeah, well then where are all the goons? Exactly, not enough of them.
The government isn't serious about the law. By intentionally
underfunding the border guard program they are saying it's ok to come on
on and be our guest worker for a buck an hour picking lettuce.

>
>>>> Other than paying taxes and alleging some oath which means diddly
>>>> anyway, what's the difference?
>>> See above.
>>>
>>>>>>>> You see, in order to solve a problem you must first define it
>>>>>>>> precisely.
>>>>>>> Depends on the problem, that isnt necessary with most problems.
>>>>>>>> Its not possible to solve an undefined problem.
>>>>>>> Wrong again, some problems fix themselves. One obvious example
>>>>>>> of that is people having too many kids. Thats fixes itself in
>>>>>>> all modern first world countrys without any public policy, let
>>>>>>> alone actually defining the problem.
>>>>>> Can you tell that to the Chinese?
>>>>> No need, they worked that out for themselves and realised that
>>>>> china isnt a first world country and that that problem wouldnt fix
>>>>> itself there any time soon.
>>>>> It did work fine in Singapore tho.
>
>

== 17 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 4:14 pm
From: clams casino

bearclaw@cruller.invalid wrote:

> I still think
>that neither I nor any other U.S. citizen should have to involuntarily
>present citizenship credentials to anyone in a position to demand them.
>
>

You've obviously lead a very sheltered life. Obviously you've never
left the US.

== 18 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 4:30 pm
From: "Jerry Okamura"

"Thanatos" <atropos@mac.com> wrote in message
news:atropos-0C1F55.19252804102007@news.giganews.com...
> In article <470540d8$0$4988$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
> "Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> Tell me "who" is serious about solving the illegal
>> immigration problem.
>
> Tom Tancredo. He's the only one.
>
>> And if there is someone who you think is serious about
>> "solving" the problem, what is their solution?
>
> He wrote a book called "Mortal Danger" which outlined his approach.

Okay, what do you think were the key points of his solution?

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Update on installing kitchen cabinets from China
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/8e261cfd209cb855?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 2:41 pm
From: pc

hchickpea@hotmail.com wrote:

> Hey PC, (waves) dint know you were getting cabinets. Alabama has
> more cabinet shops than you can shake a tape measure at. I've haven't
> done any detailed looking, but I think they are pretty good quality.
>
> Granite sounds good. What color is it?
>
> Our home will have the cabinets and counter pre-installed, but we've
> been appliance shopping and spent the full discretionary limit on good
> appliances. Snagged a SS Jenn-air five burner gas cooktop/electric
> double oven with convection on a closeout for $500 less than regular
> price. That puppy has got to weigh 300 lbs. Got a 25' top
> refrigerator bottom freezer from Lowes with a 10% discount plus the 1%
> cashback on the credit card. I'm tired of side-by-sides where you can
> use half the space or see what is in the back. Our previous
> side-by-side had roll-out shelves, but even that was next to useless.
> The new refrigerator and a new 20' freezer will use less than $100
> worth of power combined. :-) That'll make the garden a little more
> cost effective.
>
> I'm now in the process of fabricating the parts for the 24' x 32'
> greenhouse that I've drawn out. Hopefully, the design will work. If
> it does, it is pretty neat, if I do say so myself. I have to redeem
> myself in Mrs. Chickpea's eyes, after the fantastic potting bench Gary
> Heston made for her.
>

Hi Chickpea..waves back to you and Mrs. Chickpea!

Because my transfer didn't transpire..and with the market the way it is
now, we decided to stay put for a while and enjoy it. Thank goodness we
didn't put a deposit on the other house!

We got both the cabs and countertops from a company out of Pompano.
Because I see so many houses on a daily basis, I've spent a few years
picking people's brains. And many of them got the counters from these
folks. They've recently started importing cabs as well.

The granite came in at $23 a square foot installed. Which was great.
And the cabinets are well constructed, though perhaps not minutely
detailed..as I said in my previous post.

I've installed cabinets before. Even 'perfect' ones need tweaking.
Imperfect ones need a bit more. This does not add up to some lack of
strength or durability as a previous poster alluded to. It just took
some extra attention on our part.

Woohoo on your appliances Chickpea!

No gas here. Alas. If I were in my 'homeforever' I'd put in propane.
That damned electric company can't be trusted when storms come through.;-)

Side by sides are awful. But, we bought a counter depth one a couple of
years ago..because it was such a great deal. A few months ago the water
and ice through the door stopped working. Lowes gave us our money back.
For a free fridge I can deal with the inconvenience of plucking out
the ice myself. And we've installed a purifier at the tap. Maybe some
day we can repair the glitch ourselves.

Did you get the pantry doors on top?
Those are 'to die for'!

I envy your gardens Chickpea.
I need to do something here.
Some seeds from Mr. Joiner have been struggling along in a pot. And
Mrs. Chickpea's spider plant is doing well. But, other than that, it's
just a disgrace. LOL

..PC

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Payday Advance Help Financial Emergency
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/98807272715767de?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 3:47 pm
From: VitaminSource@gmail.com

On Oct 2, 5:36 pm, George Grapman <sfgeo...@paccbell.net> wrote:
> DevBasicMarketing Support wrote:
> > The Paycheck Today online application is fast and confidential.
> > Simply provide us with the required information about yourself,
> > your income, and your bank checking account.
>
> > Applications are pre-approved in just 30 seconds! Get started.
>
> >http://www.illinois.devbasic.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=vi...
>
> Right, I always give checking info to posters from gmail.

I viewed this website. I found it to be helpful. My information was
processes
on a secure website.

George - you should get all the facts. You troll you.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 4:10 pm
From: clams casino

VitaminSource@gmail.com wrote:

>
>
>I viewed this website. I found it to be helpful. My information was
>processes
>on a secure website.
>
>George - you should get all the facts. You troll you.
>
>
>
Ha Ha - a gmail google group poster claiming to be legit.

Yea right.................

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Payday Advance For MY Financial Emergency
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/ce44cd864bffc1f4?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 3:55 pm
From: VitaminSource@gmail.com

On Sep 30, 8:12 pm, George Grapman <sfgeo...@paccbell.net> wrote:
> clams casino wrote:
> >DevBasicMarketing Scam wrote:
>
> >> The Paycheck Today online application is fast and confidential.
> >> Simply provide us with the required information about yourself,
> >> your income, and your bank checking account.
>
> > Can there really be anyone left on earth who would fall for this scam?
>
> I requested their physical address and phone number. Guess they are
> still trying to figure out where they are.
>
> By the way, that same question throws off a lot of telemarketers.

It's funny that you guys mention a physical address. I went to this
website to see if it was legit. And it is, and It was very
informative. I went to their contact us page and found a physical
address.

I did some investigation and was pleased with the services. They
answered all of my questions. The Illinois Financial Services is on
the up-and-up.

Anyone else should check out the website for yourself. I did.

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 4:07 pm
From: clams casino

VitaminSource@gmail.com wrote:

>I did some investigation and was pleased with the services. They
>answered all of my questions. The Illinois Financial Services is on
>the up-and-up.
>
>Anyone else should check out the website for yourself. I did.
>
>
>

Now that's funny - a gmail / google group poster who sides by a spammer.

Brother-in-law?

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 4:29 pm
From: George Grapman

clams casino wrote:
> VitaminSource@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> I did some investigation and was pleased with the services. They
>> answered all of my questions. The Illinois Financial Services is on
>> the up-and-up.
>>
>> Anyone else should check out the website for yourself. I did.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> Now that's funny - a gmail / google group poster who sides by a spammer.
>
> Brother-in-law?
They are like the Lyndon LaRouche people. They are only allowed to
work in pairs.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Disney Mobile calls it Quits
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/db605ad0907838b0?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Oct 5 2007 4:09 pm
From: jgrove24@hotmail.com

On Oct 1, 1:35 am, ultim...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Sep 30, 9:10 am, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> > > In article <Xns99B98C079B5F3noonehome...@208.49.80.253>,
> > > Larry <no...@home.com> wrote:
>
> > >> Of much greater interest from the webpage is the one on Vonage's demise:
> > >>http://www.thestreet.com/s/vonages-vanishing-
> > >> act/newsanalysis/techtelecom/10381531.html?
>
> > >> They're TOAST! My condolences to Vonage users stuck with useless equipment
> > >> once the company goes dark.
>
> > > Bah. Us Sunrocket customers are old hat at that. It's yesterday's news.
>
> > Vonage provided a valuable service with its saturation advertising. It
> > made users aware of VOIP, and the ways it can be used. People that
> > travel a lot like these services since they can use VOIP to have a
> > "local" phone number when traveling, and use the hotel's free wireless
> > for calls.
>
> > However the problem was that a) Vonage was too expensive, and b) it had
> > little appeal outside the market for people that used it as a traveling
> > number type of service. Few people would ever spend anywhere close to
> > $25/month on long distance. That's 1000 minutes on OneSuite, 1250
> > minutes on TalkLoop. And of course most people have unlimited off-peak
> > long distance on their cell phone plans.
>
> I think Cell Phones are starting to kill off the land lines en masse.

The "kill off" from tumors of the sheeple should start happening
within the next 5-10 years, viola..no Social Security "deficit".

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "misc.consumers.frugal-living"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to misc.consumers.frugal-living-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com?hl=en