Frugal Living: 25 new messages in 12 topics

Friday, July 4, 2008

25 new messages in 12 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:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Surviving high heating oil prices
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/a184bef53e828bc7?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Jul 3 2008 9:30 pm
From: "Nicik Name"

"Dave" <noway@nohow.not> wrote in message
news:g4g76q$lf1$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>
>
>>>
>>
>> Who heats their house to more than 55F-60F now?
>
> Anybody who doesn't want to freeze to death. You are aware that you can
> die of exposure at 55F, right? -Dave
only a dumb ass can.........
>

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 7:22 am
From: Stan Brown

Thu, 03 Jul 2008 23:35:01 GMT from Lou <lpogoda@verizon.net>:
>
> "Stan Brown" <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
> news:MPG.22d71cf7ddc8ba7298b6ed@news.individual.net...
> > My mold consultant told me it was necessary to heat the house to
> > at least 65 to prevent the growth of mold. (Humidity should be no
> > more than 55%, though in winter it seems to hover in the high
> > 30%s and low 40%s.)
> >
> > I have baseboard hot-water heat, and both he and a contractor
> > told me it operates most efficiently if the thermostat keeps the
> > same setting 24/7.

The contractor wasn't trying to sell me anything, by the way. He was
the teacher of a home-maintenance class offered by a local non-profit
group.

> I wonder what the definition of "most efficiently" is.

> In this context, "efficient" might mean less heat lost up the
> chimney, less unburned fuel passing through a cold furnace at
> startup in the morning.

My understanding is that the furnace uses less fuel overall to keep
the water in the hating pipes at a constant temperature than to let
it cool down by 10 or 15 degrees in the day time (when I'm at work)
and the night (when I'm in bed) and then reheat it.

My understanding is that this is true for hot-water heat but not for
forced-air, since it takes much less energy to heat air than water.

It may also be significant that my furnace heats hot water used for
washing -- the thing in the basement that looks like a water heater
is actually just a holding tank. Maybe if I had hot water heat but a
separate water heater, the efficiency would go another way.

> But it might be possible that by turning the temperature down at
> night and while the house is empty during the day results in lower
> overall costs because you're heating less of the time, even though
> those few hours in the morning/evening might have the furnace
> operating at less than peak efficiency.

I'll ask my furnace maintenance guy about this and see what he says.
Of course if I could use less energy I'd be happy about that.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA

http://OakRoadSystems.com
Shikata ga nai...

== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 12:11 pm
From: "Rod Speed"

Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote
> Lou <lpogoda@verizon.net> wrote
>> Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote

>>> My mold consultant told me it was necessary to heat the house to
>>> at least 65 to prevent the growth of mold. (Humidity should be no
>>> more than 55%, though in winter it seems to hover in the high
>>> 30%s and low 40%s.)

>>> I have baseboard hot-water heat, and both he and a contractor
>>> told me it operates most efficiently if the thermostat keeps the
>>> same setting 24/7.

> The contractor wasn't trying to sell me anything, by the way. He was the
> teacher of a home-maintenance class offered by a local non-profit group.

Then he's a fool that doesnt have a clue.

>> I wonder what the definition of "most efficiently" is.

>> In this context, "efficient" might mean less heat lost up the
>> chimney, less unburned fuel passing through a cold furnace at
>> startup in the morning.

> My understanding is that the furnace uses less fuel overall to keep
> the water in the hating pipes at a constant temperature than to let
> it cool down by 10 or 15 degrees in the day time (when I'm at work)
> and the night (when I'm in bed) and then reheat it.

Thats just plain wrong.

> My understanding is that this is true for hot-water heat but not for
> forced-air, since it takes much less energy to heat air than water.

And that is just plain wrong too.

> It may also be significant that my furnace heats hot water used for washing

Nope.

> -- the thing in the basement that looks like a water heater is
> actually just a holding tank. Maybe if I had hot water heat but
> a separate water heater, the efficiency would go another way.

Nope.

> I'll ask my furnace maintenance guy about this and see what he says.

Waste of time, he clearly doesnt have a clue.

> Of course if I could use less energy I'd be happy about that.

== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 12:27 pm
From: William Souden

Rod Speed wrote:
> Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote
>> Lou <lpogoda@verizon.net> wrote
>>> Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote
>
>>>> My mold consultant told me it was necessary to heat the house to
>>>> at least 65 to prevent the growth of mold. (Humidity should be no
>>>> more than 55%, though in winter it seems to hover in the high
>>>> 30%s and low 40%s.)
>
>>>> I have baseboard hot-water heat, and both he and a contractor
>>>> told me it operates most efficiently if the thermostat keeps the
>>>> same setting 24/7.
>
>> The contractor wasn't trying to sell me anything, by the way. He was the
>> teacher of a home-maintenance class offered by a local non-profit group.
>
> Then he's a fool that doesnt have a clue.
>
>>> I wonder what the definition of "most efficiently" is.
>
>>> In this context, "efficient" might mean less heat lost up the
>>> chimney, less unburned fuel passing through a cold furnace at
>>> startup in the morning.
>
>> My understanding is that the furnace uses less fuel overall to keep
>> the water in the hating pipes at a constant temperature than to let
>> it cool down by 10 or 15 degrees in the day time (when I'm at work)
>> and the night (when I'm in bed) and then reheat it.
>
> Thats just plain wrong.
>
>> My understanding is that this is true for hot-water heat but not for
>> forced-air, since it takes much less energy to heat air than water.
>
> And that is just plain wrong too.
>
>> It may also be significant that my furnace heats hot water used for washing
>
> Nope.
>
>> -- the thing in the basement that looks like a water heater is
>> actually just a holding tank. Maybe if I had hot water heat but
>> a separate water heater, the efficiency would go another way.
>
> Nope.
>
>>> But it might be possible that by turning the temperature down at
>>> night and while the house is empty during the day results in lower
>>> overall costs because you're heating less of the time, even though
>>> those few hours in the morning/evening might have the furnace
>>> operating at less than peak efficiency.
>
>> I'll ask my furnace maintenance guy about this and see what he says.
>
> Waste of time, he clearly doesnt have a clue.

Whatever you say, welfare boy.
>
>> Of course if I could use less energy I'd be happy about that.
>
>

== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 12:59 pm
From: krw

In article <MPG.22d7fc27b4a0188d98b6f2@news.individual.net>,
the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm says...
> Thu, 03 Jul 2008 23:35:01 GMT from Lou <lpogoda@verizon.net>:
> >
> > "Stan Brown" <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
> > news:MPG.22d71cf7ddc8ba7298b6ed@news.individual.net...
> > > My mold consultant told me it was necessary to heat the house to
> > > at least 65 to prevent the growth of mold. (Humidity should be no
> > > more than 55%, though in winter it seems to hover in the high
> > > 30%s and low 40%s.)
> > >
> > > I have baseboard hot-water heat, and both he and a contractor
> > > told me it operates most efficiently if the thermostat keeps the
> > > same setting 24/7.
>
> The contractor wasn't trying to sell me anything, by the way. He was
> the teacher of a home-maintenance class offered by a local non-profit
> group.

That may be, but he's clearly clueless about heat transfer. There
is a lot of such misinformation around. I can believe such things
with other forms of heat, not because the science changes, rather
the psychology. Some heat, for instance, has a very long recovery
time. If this isn't taken into account for people will tend to
change the thermostat too often and "chase" the ideal temperature,
wasting a lot of energy. Baseboard hot-water isn't such a system.

> > I wonder what the definition of "most efficiently" is.
>
> > In this context, "efficient" might mean less heat lost up the
> > chimney, less unburned fuel passing through a cold furnace at
> > startup in the morning.
>
> My understanding is that the furnace uses less fuel overall to keep
> the water in the hating pipes at a constant temperature than to let
> it cool down by 10 or 15 degrees in the day time (when I'm at work)
> and the night (when I'm in bed) and then reheat it.

Clearly wrong. The heat needed is proportional to the difference
(indoor to outdoor) in temperature. Less heat is needed for any
hours where you can lower that differential. Baseboard hot-water
recovers relatively fast so there isn't a huge lag so heat isn't
wasted "hunting". A setback thermostat can easily deal with this
sort of heat (simply lead the set times by a half hour or so).

> My understanding is that this is true for hot-water heat but not for
> forced-air, since it takes much less energy to heat air than water.

The same "excess energy" comes back out of the water as went in.
That "excess energy" is still heating the house, even when
throttling back. If you dumped the heat outside, maybe but it isn't
a lot of water in any case.

> It may also be significant that my furnace heats hot water used for
> washing -- the thing in the basement that looks like a water heater
> is actually just a holding tank. Maybe if I had hot water heat but a
> separate water heater, the efficiency would go another way.

Nope. Same deal. The water in the furnace is hot all the time
anyway (in yours, even in the summer). The only water that can "go
cold" is in the pipes to the baseboard radiatiors; not a lot of
water. As I said, that heat isn't lost anyway.

> > But it might be possible that by turning the temperature down at
> > night and while the house is empty during the day results in lower
> > overall costs because you're heating less of the time, even though
> > those few hours in the morning/evening might have the furnace
> > operating at less than peak efficiency.
>
> I'll ask my furnace maintenance guy about this and see what he says.
> Of course if I could use less energy I'd be happy about that.

Don't worry about it at all. Just use a setback thermostat and be
comfortable. What wastes energy is the "hunting" (over
temperature). For every 1F you set the thermostat back you may save
about 3% in your heat bill. If you can set back ten degrees for
twelve hours that's a 15% savings that will *NOT* be wasted by
heating the water in the pipes later.

--
Keith

==============================================================================
TOPIC: DTV Converter box major snafu in the US
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/5479512ec399c625?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 12:19 am
From: lord202

YOU CAN BUY A DLP 5O INCH TV FOR 1000 AS OF TODAY . ENUFF SAID.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Saving electricity
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/7dc95ccaf7b6381e?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 1:27 am
From: artsy6@gmail.com

Any tips?

What do you think of this?:

http://michaelbluejay.com/electricity/

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 2:22 am
From: "Rod Speed"

artsy6@gmail.com wrote:

> Any tips?

> What do you think of this?:

> http://michaelbluejay.com/electricity/

That the silly bugger needs a haircut.

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 4:33 am
From: clams_casino

artsy6@gmail.com wrote:

>Any tips?
>
>What do you think of this?:
>
>
>

I think it's spam.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Frugal solar panels?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/a5212de70d56c37d?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 2:10 am
From: Gordon

"OhioGuy" <none@none.net> wrote in news:g4ip4v$536$1@aioe.org:

>>Your best investment with solar is thermal used to offset >heating and
>>hot water
>
> I second that, especially if you don't live in the Southwest, or if
> you
> live anywhere that has numerous cloudy days.
>
> Due to the higher efficiency of solar water heating panels, you can
> get
> good returns even in places like Ohio, where solar panels don't make
> much sense. (at current efficiency ratings anyway) Even on cloudy
> days, there is often enough solar radiant energy to heat water for
> showers, etc.
>

Don't forget about passive solar. I have the great advantage to
live in a house with three large south facing windows. Durring the
spring and fall I hardly ever run the heat.

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 10:18 am
From: Dennis

On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 11:10:48 +0200 (CEST), Gordon
<gonzo@alltomyself.com> wrote:

>Don't forget about passive solar. I have the great advantage to
>live in a house with three large south facing windows. Durring the
>spring and fall I hardly ever run the heat.

Perhaps you tolerate large termperature swings (or a lower average
temperature) better than me. I live in the same area/climate as you,
have a well-insulated home (built in 1996 to better-than-code specs)
with large SE-facing windows, and I ran the furnace plenty this
spring. We keep the thermostat set at 68F 24/7 during heating season.

Dennis (evil)
--
The honest man is the one who realizes that he cannot
consume more, in his lifetime, than he produces.

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 12:09 pm
From: Jeff

OhioGuy wrote:
>> Your best investment with solar is thermal used to offset >heating and hot
>> water
>
> I second that, especially if you don't live in the Southwest, or if you
> live anywhere that has numerous cloudy days.
>
> Due to the higher efficiency of solar water heating panels, you can get
> good returns even in places like Ohio, where solar panels don't make much
> sense. (at current efficiency ratings anyway) Even on cloudy days, there is
> often enough solar radiant energy to heat water for showers, etc.
>
> Of course, the very best way to make an investment that pays for itself
> is to build an underground or earth banked house.

No doubt you've seen the earth banked rest stations on some of Ohio's
Interstates.

On another note, there's increasing interest in homebrew concentrating
solar electric generation. No one yet has made the breakthrough design.
I think it's out there... You can use the "waste" heat for hot water and
home heating. If you have some land, there's fertile ground here.

Jeff

This gives you passive
> heating and cooling, using the earth itself as a massive heatsink. In the
> case of an earth banked house, it can also be relatively inexpensive, since
> you just have a plain wall without many of the usual expensive exterior
> options.
>
>

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 2:47 pm
From: Gordon

Dennis <dgw80@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:2fms64dorqcl8ce87jnfugpcsbtgb460rf@4ax.com:

> On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 11:10:48 +0200 (CEST), Gordon
> <gonzo@alltomyself.com> wrote:
>
>>Don't forget about passive solar. I have the great advantage to
>>live in a house with three large south facing windows. Durring the
>>spring and fall I hardly ever run the heat.
>
> Perhaps you tolerate large termperature swings (or a lower average
> temperature) better than me. I live in the same area/climate as you,
> have a well-insulated home (built in 1996 to better-than-code specs)
> with large SE-facing windows, and I ran the furnace plenty this
> spring. We keep the thermostat set at 68F 24/7 during heating season.
>
>
> Dennis (evil)
> --
> The honest man is the one who realizes that he cannot
> consume more, in his lifetime, than he produces.

Normally I just run the heat for about 20-30 minutes in the
morning to blow the chill off the house (I like to sleep in
a cool house). Then i turn it off and let the sun maintain
the temp.

This year has been different. The crappy cloudy weather
has forced me to run the heat more than I would normally
like. My gas and electric bills bear that out. But then,
one year does not a trend make.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: returning electrical item to Argos
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/056c40394c1bbf63?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 2:26 am
From: "john west"

Needing a small battery charger for torch (flashlight) batteries, two
members of our family bought one at nearly the same time as each other.

Although not used the charger bought from Argos was taken out of its sealed
packaging. We wish to return one since we dont need two; and the one from
Argos is by far the easiest to return in terms of making a journey, and
would also qualify for their 14 day return scheme.

I have heard Argos customer services desk tell customers that to return
electrical items, they must be;
unused and unopened. Although not used, since it's unopened it would not
be possible to prove it's not been used.

Have I understood this situation correctly? Thanks for any advice on
returning this charger to Argos.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: What's the most frugal stock right now?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/e679f289ca85f247?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 4:19 am
From: nicksanspam@ece.villanova.edu

"OhioGuy" <none@none.net>

>... thought it would be fun to see what others out there think right now.

XSUNX has nice backing and technologies...

Nick

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 10:05 am
From: "AllEmailDeletedImmediately"

"catalpa" <catalpa@entertab.org> wrote in message
news:aigbk.315$713.242@trnddc03...
>
> "Vic Smith" <thismailautodeleted@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:b0fq64tunvf1m1se1ri91ipagspuj0itgg@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 09:22:34 -0500, "OhioGuy" <none@none.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't usually ask others for stock advice, but thought it would be
>>> fun
>>>to see what others out there think right now. I'm in a position to pick
>>>a
>>>couple of stocks as investments in my IRA, and I like to use a value
>>>approach. In other words, I look for companies that are currently out of
>>>favor, or that the market has sold off more than would seem to be
>>>warranted,
>>>given long term prospects for the company.
>>>
>>> I just loaded up on a couple of inexpensive big pharma stocks, and
>>> would
>>>like to balance those out with stocks from other sectors. Anyone have
>>>any
>>>suggestions for an undervalued stock that is likely to bounce back at
>>>least
>>>20% over the next couple of years? (preferably one with little or no
>>>debt,
>>>and a stock price that is less than 10x cash flow)
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>
>> GM
>
> He meant 10x cash flow coming in, not going out.

i've read that of all the us car makers, gm is the only one set to turn
around.

----------------------
"I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice
cannot sleep forever."--Thomas Jefferson

"Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide
everything." -- Josef V. Stalin

www.myspace.com/bodybuildinggranny

heavy on the country music. if you don't like country, scroll down for
some surprises.

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 5:11 pm
From: "Brad Naylor"

"Vic Smith" <thismailautodeleted@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:b0fq64tunvf1m1se1ri91ipagspuj0itgg@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 09:22:34 -0500, "OhioGuy" <none@none.net> wrote:
>
>
> GM

Gag Me

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Sacramento won't fine couple who let lawn die
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/0314470d4c656520?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 10:51 am
From: Ablang

Sacramento won't fine couple who let lawn die
By Matt Weiser - mweiser at sacbee.com

Published 12:00 am PDT Thursday, July 3, 2008
Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A1

http://www.sacbee.com/378/story/1057802.html

Sacramento city officials on Wednesday admitted their code enforcement
policies may not be drought-friendly, and said they won't fine the
couple featured in Wednesday's Bee who let their front lawn die to
save water.

The story prompted a torrent of outrage from the public, who
overwhelmingly supported Anne Hartridge and Matt George, the east
Sacramento couple cited by city code enforcers after they stopped
watering their lawn.

More than 160 readers commented on The Bee's Web site as of 5 p.m.
Wednesday, from as far away as San Diego. Dozens called or e-mailed
the city.

"When you think about all the water being wasted everywhere, it's
horrible they would go after that poor woman," said Ursula Crabtree of
Carmichael. "If this person is being persecuted, something is wrong
with the system."

Steve Caraway, a Sacramento sales representative for Forever Lawn,
offered to pay the couple's fine and sell them an artificial turf at
cost. But he didn't know the city's codes forbid artificial turf in
front yards.

"That's odd because we have quite a few of them in Sacramento," he
said. "That is pretty crazy."

Ron Riola, who lives near McKinley Park, said he sees people
gratuitously wasting water every time he walks his dog, which he does
at least twice a day.

He said he has reported more than 100 cases of water waste to the city
in the past six years, and said none has been corrected.

"I wish I didn't have the time to do it because my blood pressure
would be lower," said Riola, who is retired. "It literally has to be
thousands and thousands of gallons wasted every day, all the time. You
see it and you just shake your head."

The city's director of code enforcement, Max Fernandez, told The Bee
on Wednesday the front-yard rules allow more flexibility than the code
language indicates.

The code states explicitly that front yards "shall be landscaped,
irrigated and maintained." This would seem to preclude yards that are
simply mulched, like Hartridge's, or those that use cactuses or other
drought-tolerant plants requiring no water.

"The key word is a 'maintained' front yard," Fernandez said. If a yard
is being tended and is not a nuisance, he said, it's OK.

He said his department has begun preparing a flier to give to people
who have chosen to let their lawns die so they will know their
landscaping options to comply with city rules. That should be
available next week.

Complaints about front yards have increased this year, he said, but
many pertain to foreclosed homes, not water savers. He said it's
important to have clear policies that treat each fairly.

He said Hartridge and her husband would not be fined.

"The mulch and hydrangeas and stuff like that is quite all right," he
said of the couple's yard. "If this drought continues, we're going to
have to change our policies when we get complaints like this."

City Councilman Steve Cohn said the code enforcement officer in this
case may have been "overzealous." He plans to meet with Hartridge and
George next week to discuss their situation, and said city codes may
need revising to be drought-friendly.

"I agree it's outrageous," Cohn said. "I think we probably would need
to revisit the ordinance if we want to make it clear that people don't
have to water at all."

He also said the Utilities Department may need more resources to
handle water waste calls.

The department's conservation unit has seven employees. Five are
inspectors who respond to complaints: three part-time and two full-
time. One of the full-time jobs is vacant.

Julie Friedman, the city's water conservation administrator, said her
staff gets about 1,000 water-waste complaints annually and responds to
each within one day. The department prefers to get such complaints on
its billing number, (916) 808-5454.

The first response is to meet with the property owner to explain the
violation or leave an informational door hanger. There is no follow-up
unless complaints continue on the same address.

The department gives water wasters up to three warnings before
considering a penalty. Then they could be fined up to five times their
water rate and even have their water service turned off. Both
penalties are very rare.

"The city usually bends over backwards to help people and educate
people," said Friedman.

For her part, Hartridge was glad to hear she won't have to spend "half
a mortgage payment" on a city fine.

"I feel thrilled that the city is taking it seriously," she said.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 10:55 am
From: Ablang

Sacramento couple fined for not watering lawn
The Associated Press

Last Updated 1:49 pm PDT Wednesday, July 2, 2008

http://www.sacbee.com/114/story/1056752.html

SACRAMENTO -- It seems there's a penalty for trying to conserve water
in Sacramento.

A couple who stopped watering their front lawn last month has been
cited for creating a public nuisance and is facing a $746 fine.

Anne Hartridge and Matt George say they let their lawn die after the
governor declared a statewide drought on June 4.

A city official says the dead lawn violates a city code requiring
front yards to be irrigated, landscaped and maintained.

The husband and wife bought their home in east Sacramento so they
could bike to work and shops. They have solar panels, efficient
appliances and dry their laundry on a clothesline.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: How many here own food freezer?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/79858a8bd8f90308?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 10:57 am
From: "ares"

I think mine's over 20 years old; I think it's about 16 ft3 or maybe 20 but
love the convenience and family eats a lot.... I could make bulk dinners and
freeze in trays for later nuking. I think Holiday brand made by Amana......
has been trouble free, unlike my refrigerators, as well.
I do a total defrost once a year. Chest freezer. Fewer trips to store and
ability to buy in bulk on sale, like everyone else....
ares

==============================================================================
TOPIC: +r,+e Rich or Stupid? +r,+e0*
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/114d5818c5a9e02c?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 12:29 pm
From: "Barajas"

Must Read Book:

"Will The Next Liar Please Stand Up"

http://www.SoupNaziSecrets.com/ng2.html

^^%MN'DjI3d[jU0

==============================================================================
TOPIC: The Most Expensive Hotel in The World
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/9761cbc7c371efab?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 2:50 pm
From: Al Bundy

On Jul 3, 1:35 pm, David <david7...@rediffmail.com> wrote:
> The Most Expensive Hotel in The Worldhttp://hotel-blah-blah-arab.blogspot.com

See, I always thought the most expensive hotel was the one Mike Tyson
stayed in that night when he refused to walk Ms. Washington to the
curb instead of kicking her to the curb.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 3:59 pm
From: Wilma6116@gmail.com

On Jul 3, 10:35 am, David <david7...@rediffmail.com> wrote:
> The Most Expensive Hotel in The Worldhttp://hotel-burj-al-arab.blogspot.com

The towels were so fluffy, I had trouble fitting them in my suitcase.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: How can you save the earth
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/1d458d007e4a37ee?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 2:55 pm
From: Al Bundy

On Jul 1, 2:06 pm, David <david7...@rediffmail.com> wrote:
> How can you save the earthhttp:

The earth will have to save itself without my help.
Man and what we do is as natural as the birds and the bees.
Let the earth adjust.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Earthmate GPS LT-40 review request.How good is it?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/3637ff69080b5879?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 4 2008 4:52 pm
From: decann

Would appreciate your evaluation of the Earthmate GPS LT-40.

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

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

Frugal Living

Blog Archive

Friday, July 4, 2008

25 new messages in 12 topics - digest

No comments: