Monday, November 24, 2008

misc.consumers.frugal-living - 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:

* Bed Bath & Beyond - ridiculous gifts, laughable prices - 5 messages, 5
authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3145bb7ec51f39ae?hl=en
* 10 Things the Food Industry Doesn't Want You to Know - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/255b376899016709?hl=en
* Doorbell always uses electricity! - 15 messages, 7 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3198294a289e9e57?hl=en
* anyone make a wifi finder with internet telephone capabilities? - 2 messages,
1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/81d9c571716583a4?hl=en
* Hello From New Member - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/e9263bed5078e2a6?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Bed Bath & Beyond - ridiculous gifts, laughable prices
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3145bb7ec51f39ae?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 4:21 pm
From: Bert Hyman


In news:i8gmi4hlq2n4sq3c0qt8034qb7r2qjpug3@4ax.com Patricia Martin
Steward <patstew@noteranews.com> wrote:

> And finally, my favorite: a "do-it-yourself electric BACK HAIR SHAVER
> for $40!!!!

Maybe they're trying to pick up the slack left by Sharper Image.

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com


== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 4:25 pm
From: Vic Smith


On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 19:16:26 -0500, Patricia Martin Steward
<patstew@noteranews.com> wrote:

>Got their flyer in the mail today, and I was laughing out loud at some
>of the "gifts" they're selling (I'm rounding prices up on those ending
>in .99):
>
>wine chiller - $100 (I put mine in the fridge for free)
>single-serve coffee brewer - $200 (my four-cup Mr. Coffee cost $14.99)
>espresso maker - $230
>knife set - $200
>Aerogarden to grow herbs - $150
>Proper Positioning bed pillow - $80
>Braun shaver - $250 AFTER rebate
>
>And finally, my favorite: a "do-it-yourself electric BACK HAIR SHAVER
>for $40!!!!
>
>I can only think they had this printed before the economy went down
>the drain.

Some common stuff seems pretty high too.
I was just pricing maple cutting boards, and dough boards.
In fact I just got my wife a dough board and the thing cost 28 bucks,
38 with shipping. Hers recently broke when she was tenderizing pork
chops.
Probably not too frugal.
But it guarantees she'll keep the pierogi coming.
That's a lot of value right there.

--Vic


== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 4:35 pm
From: itsjoannotjoann@webtv.net


On Nov 24, 6:25 pm, Vic Smith <thismailautodele...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> Some common stuff seems pretty high too.
> I was just pricing maple cutting boards, and dough boards.
> In fact I just got my wife a dough board and the thing cost 28 bucks,
> 38 with shipping.  Hers recently broke when she was tenderizing pork
> chops.
> Probably not too frugal.
>
>
They have 20% off coupons all the time and you can use 5 at a time for
5 purchases. They also have no expiration date even though one is
actually printed on the coupon. The coupons can save you a nice bit
of change.


== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 5:28 pm
From: BeaForoni


On Nov 24, 4:16 pm, Patricia Martin Steward <pats...@noteranews.com>
wrote:
> Got their flyer in the mail today, and I was laughing out loud at some
> of the "gifts" they're selling (I'm rounding prices up on those ending
> in .99):
>
> wine chiller - $100 (I put mine in the fridge for free)
> single-serve coffee brewer - $200 (my four-cup Mr. Coffee cost $14.99)
> espresso maker - $230
> knife set - $200
> Aerogarden to grow herbs - $150
> Proper Positioning bed pillow - $80
> Braun shaver - $250 AFTER rebate
>
> And finally, my favorite:  a "do-it-yourself electric BACK HAIR SHAVER
> for $40!!!!
>
> I can only think they had this printed before the economy went down
> the drain.
>
> --
> "This is our moment. This is our time - to put our people back to work and open doors of opportunity for our kids;
> to restore prosperity and promote the cause of peace; to reclaim the American Dream and reaffirm that fundamental
> truth - that out of many, we are one; that while we breathe, we hope, and where we are met with cynicism, and doubt,
> and those who tell us that we can't, we will respond with that timeless creed that sums up the spirit of a people:
> Yes We Can."          President-elect Barack Obama, November, 4, 2008
> ** Posted fromhttp://www.teranews.com**

You notice higher prices and I'm seeing lower prices. Gas for under
$2.00 a gallon. Then I saw a commercial for Chrysler, it had Sebring
convertibles for around $9,000 and PT Cruisers for less than $10,000.
Wish I had some money.


== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 6:22 pm
From: NoSpamForMe@LousyISP.gov


Patricia Martin Steward <patstew@noteranews.com> wrote:

>Got their flyer in the mail today, and I was laughing out loud at some
>of the "gifts" they're selling (I'm rounding prices up on those ending
>in .99):

>wine chiller - $100 (I put mine in the fridge for free)

And if your fridge is full? Given the proliferation of "refrigerate
after opening" on everything that's not too hard to do. Besides where
are you going to store the bottles? The "wine cellar" doesn't cost
much more than a new cabinet from (say) Ikea. Of course the
electricity to run it makes it uneconomical but you can always leave
the thing unplugged and just fire it up over the holidays.

>single-serve coffee brewer - $200 (my four-cup Mr. Coffee cost $14.99)

And if you happen to be a yuppie rushing off to his power job raping
the economy what use are the other 3 cups? Let's also not forget that
these "single serve" items are puck machines so the speed of making
that one cup vastly exceeds your el-cheapo anachronism... "Mr. Coffee"
indeed!

>espresso maker - $230

Much too cheap. A good espresso maker is in the $1500 and up range
although over about $5000 the improvements are mainly in the volume
(e.g., six cups at a time). The el-cheapo $230 machine doesn't have
the power to make a good espresso. Check out the "crema" (the froth on
the top); in a good machine there'll be a visible strong long-lasting
head: on a #230 special you'll be lucky to get any at all. This lack
of power manifests itself in cappuccino too. Insufficient power means
a lack of tight bubbles in the milk. Look at Dunkin' Donuts
cappuccino: dirty dishwater! OTOH lots of no-taste-buds Americans
actually prefer Dunkin' Donuts. Probably the ones who have Mr. Coffee
machines <g>.

>knife set - $200

What's wrong with this. You do realize you get what you pay for. The
poor quality of the 99 cent stores's chef's knife will soon become
apparent, something that's of critical importance if you're NOT a
world class chef.

>Aerogarden to grow herbs - $150

This one I agree with. The kids bought us one of these last year. I
wanted to junk it immediately after they left but the wife persuaded
me to keep it for a few months. Then we junked it! And these kids knew
that my wife keeps window boxes of herbs that she brings inside each
winter. Why would we need a herb garden?

>Proper Positioning bed pillow - $80

I don't know what this is.

>Braun shaver - $250 AFTER rebate

Sounds a little expensive.

>And finally, my favorite: a "do-it-yourself electric BACK HAIR SHAVER
>for $40!!!!

Ah, but you're not thinking like a now-unemployed (hopefully) mortgage
broking yuppie. He has to shave his back for his date with Mrs
Potential Yuppette. He could go to the spa where they'll do it for him
or he could use this machine. I mean how else do you expect him to
reach between his shoulder blades? Of course as a present this could
be a little like giving someone a box of deodorants. Get the hint!

>I can only think they had this printed before the economy went down
>the drain.

Probably but they have to unload all those imports in the pipeline.
Look for some big reductions.


==============================================================================
TOPIC: 10 Things the Food Industry Doesn't Want You to Know
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/255b376899016709?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 4:28 pm
From: Vic Smith


On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 00:15:46 +0000 (UTC), don@manx.misty.com (Don
Klipstein) wrote:

>In article <ggetu3$t94$1@aioe.org>, h wrote:
>>
>>"tyuj" <tyuj@apam.com> wrote in message
>>news:6p09ksF5jufhU1@mid.individual.net...
>
> "tyuj" appears to me to be Rod Speed.

Ya think?
Hope that's not a pig ignorant lie.
If so
Your problem.

etc,etc.


== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 5:10 pm
From: "h"

"Seerialmom" <seerialmom@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b6dc861d-f083-4174-97f6-1e3597841c14@x16g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 24, 10:21 am, "tyuj" <t...@apam.com> wrote:
> h <tmcl...@searchmachine.com> wrote
>
> > SoCalMike <mikein562athotm...@hotmail.com> wrote
> >> h wrote
> >>> Tim Campbell <timc...@sbcglobal.net> wrote
> >>>> 10 Things the Food Industry Doesn't Want You to Know
> >>> All you really need to do is declare high fructose corn syrup unfit
> >>> for human consumption, like most other civilized
> >>> countries.
> >> which countries have banned it? what are their obesity rates?
> > Canada and I believe most Latin American countries.
>
> You're wrong/lying.
>
> > I don't know if it's completely banned in the EU, but they have strict
> > quotas on the production of non-sugar
> > (sucrose/cane) sweeteners,
>
> Pig ignorant lie.
>
> > so it can't be used much if at all in Europe.
>
> Another pig ignorant lie.
>
> > HFCS should not be consumed by humans.
>
> Another pig ignorant lie.
>
> > I can't believe anyone would eat anything with that poison in it.
>
> Your problem.
>
> > It's not like it even tastes good. Yuck.
>
> Your problem.

>>Is this Rod Speed in disguise??

Sounds like. I plonked Rod ages ago, but I seem to remember him loving the
phrase "pig ignorant lie". Of course, that could have been some other
plonker.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Doorbell always uses electricity!
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3198294a289e9e57?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 4:36 pm
From: don@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein)


In <koihi45tsffjvtj65ks30lpr9r7hbu0dqd@4ax.com>, letterman@inv*.* wrote:

>The thing is, there is a doorbell that does not need any electrical
>power. Simply mount a nice looking brass bell on the wall next to the
>door, using a bracket. Drill a small hole in the wall a couple feet
>above the bell, and attach a piece of nylon string to the bell. Push
>the other end of the string thru the hole in the wall and let it hang
>outside. Put a nice wooden bead on the end of the string. Then place
>a sign that reads "PULL STRING FOR DOORBELL".
>
>Cost: The price of the bell, bracket, string and bead. No further
>costs for life, and no electrical energy needed ever.

You just reminded me of the doorbell at "Neighborhood Bike Works", AKA
"The Bike Church". That outfit uses some space at a church.

There is a sign sying, as best as I remember: "Pull brake lever to ring
doorbell".

They have a handlebar mounted onto something or other close to the
handrail for the stairway for that offbeat entrance into the church
complex. The brake lever is connected to a brake cable, that is routed
through a small diameter hole in the exterior wall. Apparently, the other
end of the brake cable pulls the lever on a bicycle bell that is suitably
mounted.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)


== 2 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 4:48 pm
From: "Craig M"


Raising the frequency also is easier to rectify and filter the sine wave
out, to give DC voltage.

"Gary H" <garyh@notspammable.invalid> wrote in message
news:hocli49h4tdjpafvbcn88cpa4ngaduug44@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:17:33 -0500, George <george@nospam.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> >But the Chi Coms need to meet our requirements if it is sold here. I
> >can't remember the last time I saw a new walwart that wasn't a much more
> >efficient switcher design instead of an inefficient transformer.
>
> The new wall-warts are smaller, but it's NOT by eliminating the
> transformer. These new ones begin with an AC-to-AC converter, that
> operates on line voltage and raises the frequency. A higher frequency
> requires a smaller transformer.
>
> "Switcher" refers to a more efficient voltage regulator, that controls
> the DC output by turning it on and off rather than by wasting power
> like a linear regulator (as in older wall warts) does. This also makes
> it smaller by reducing the need for a heat sink.


== 3 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 5:22 pm
From: don@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein)


In <40c66d71-3ccd-4ec0-9c63-d8a772443a55@x14g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
meow2222@care2.com wrote:

>Jim Redelfs wrote:
<SNIP what was already said>
>
>The other point worth making is that the power and cost figures for
>standby power are routinely exaggerated.

The ones I mentioned in this thread are actual measurements. I have a
watt meter!

> Those with political interest
>in having everyone else unplug everything are either not competent in
>the subject, or are happy to be lses than honest to try to motivate
>others to unplug.
>
>And of course, biggest of all... youve only got one life, try to spend
>the time doing something useful. Speaking of which.... later.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)


== 4 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 5:38 pm
From: The Daring Dufas


Don Klipstein wrote:
> In <koihi45tsffjvtj65ks30lpr9r7hbu0dqd@4ax.com>, letterman@inv*.* wrote:
>
>> The thing is, there is a doorbell that does not need any electrical
>> power. Simply mount a nice looking brass bell on the wall next to the
>> door, using a bracket. Drill a small hole in the wall a couple feet
>> above the bell, and attach a piece of nylon string to the bell. Push
>> the other end of the string thru the hole in the wall and let it hang
>> outside. Put a nice wooden bead on the end of the string. Then place
>> a sign that reads "PULL STRING FOR DOORBELL".
>>
>> Cost: The price of the bell, bracket, string and bead. No further
>> costs for life, and no electrical energy needed ever.
>
> You just reminded me of the doorbell at "Neighborhood Bike Works", AKA
> "The Bike Church". That outfit uses some space at a church.
>
> There is a sign sying, as best as I remember: "Pull brake lever to ring
> doorbell".
>
> They have a handlebar mounted onto something or other close to the
> handrail for the stairway for that offbeat entrance into the church
> complex. The brake lever is connected to a brake cable, that is routed
> through a small diameter hole in the exterior wall. Apparently, the other
> end of the brake cable pulls the lever on a bicycle bell that is suitably
> mounted.
>
> - Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

My favorite doorbell buttons:

http://tinyurl.com/yr7e8k

http://tinyurl.com/6a9fwj

TDD


== 5 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 5:40 pm
From: Sam E


On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 05:27:10 +1100, "Rod Speed"
<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

[snip]

>
>They dont have any transformer that uses power all the time.

Possible with any wall-wart you add a switch to. Making it automatic
would be tricky, without power to turn it back on.

>
>> "Switcher" refers to a more efficient voltage regulator,
>
>Wrong. It always refers to what you listed above.
>

That's one of the many varieties of "always" that are strangely
non-inclusive. Maybe you've never heard of "switching regulators", but
I have a lot.

The AC-to-AC converter allows a smaller, lighter transformer (which I
expect draws less power with 0 load).. Perhaps you mistake "low power"
for "no power". That sort of mistake is very common.

[snip]


== 6 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 5:44 pm
From: don@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein)


In <jim.redelfs-A71F17.08411224112008@news.west.cox.net>, Jim Redelfs said:

>In <slrngik5tt.2cu.don@manx.misty.com>, don@manx.misty.com wrote:
>
>> A household's idling load from low power constant loads
>> can somewhat easily be 30 watts or more.
>
>At .10/kWh, that amounts to ~$26.30/year.

And if I can reduce that by 60-75% or so with 2-3 power strips?

>I can EASILY live with that. If that figure were to triple, I might
>CONSIDER eliminating "idling load". (Nice term, BTW)
>
>I would more likely follow my own advice and hang out to dry a few loads
>of laundry that would otherwise be dried in the electric clothes dryer.

Many apartment buildings forbid outdoor clothes drying. If I was
very severely frugal in such places, I would use indoor clotheslines when
temperature and humidity are favorable for such.

Thankfully I have yet to experience having any of my clothes dried in an
electric clothes dryer at age well into the 40's. My experience is that
clothes driers got their heat from natural gas - although in one apartment
building I lived in, with electric stoves as opposed to gas ones, the
driers had a "fuel oil" odor.

Also consider that in the metro areas of NYC, Philadelphia and Chicago,
most residential electricity costs more like 14 cents per KWH. And in the
portion of the Philly area served by what was formerly PECO, during a
defined summer period monthly consumption past 500 or 600 or whatever KWH
gets billed at more like 18 cents per KWH.

(From memory - I did not actually drag into my view my electric bill
for last August. I will do so if my figures from my memory are disputed.)

Getting aggressive against "idling load" can somewhat easily reduce
power consumption by close to 10 KWH per month, plus another 2, maybe even
3 KWH per month during air conditioning season. At 18 cents or even if it
is 16 cents per KWH in most of the Philly area for electricity consumption
past 500-600 KWH per month during air conditioning season, I see a couple
bucks per month in savings. At other times of the year, I see $1.25-$1.50
per month in savings from being aggressive against "phantom load" in/near
Philly, NYC and Chicago.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)


== 7 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 5:45 pm
From: Mark Lloyd


On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:48:06 -0600, "Craig M"
<craig_6444@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>Raising the frequency also is easier to rectify and filter the sine wave
>out, to give DC voltage.
>

Yes, and there's also less iron in a high-frequency transformer,
making it lighter.

BTW, I have a new USB hub with a 5V2.1A wall wart that's MUCH lighter
than the "brick" we would have had once.

>"Gary H" <garyh@notspammable.invalid> wrote in message
>news:hocli49h4tdjpafvbcn88cpa4ngaduug44@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:17:33 -0500, George <george@nospam.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> >But the Chi Coms need to meet our requirements if it is sold here. I
>> >can't remember the last time I saw a new walwart that wasn't a much more
>> >efficient switcher design instead of an inefficient transformer.
>>
>> The new wall-warts are smaller, but it's NOT by eliminating the
>> transformer. These new ones begin with an AC-to-AC converter, that
>> operates on line voltage and raises the frequency. A higher frequency
>> requires a smaller transformer.
>>
>> "Switcher" refers to a more efficient voltage regulator, that controls
>> the DC output by turning it on and off rather than by wasting power
>> like a linear regulator (as in older wall warts) does. This also makes
>> it smaller by reducing the need for a heat sink.
>
--
31 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"The government of the United States is not, in
any sense, founded on the Christian religion."

== 8 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 5:53 pm
From: don@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein)


In <25e0d9b9-8c38-43f1-bf19-0814a1c84df3@v13g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
hallerb@aol.com wrote:

>On Nov 23, 10:25=EF=BF=BDpm, d...@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein) wrote:

<What I said in favor of switching off idling loads>

>tv life expectancy and othewr deevices may be less,turned off from
>thermal cycle shock.

I find that highly overrated. I even find extrapolation from burnouts
of incandescent lightbulbs - disproportionately upon cold start. However,
incandescent lightbulbs that have aged into a condition unable to survive
a cold start have their remaining hours already numbered (in lower double
digits), and the main relevant filament failure mode progresses at a rate
that accelerates worse than exponentially!

>DTV boxes use idle time to download guide updates and other utilities.

Mine is constantly powered so far since I have yet to powerstrip it (and
my TV). I have yet to notice it being updated for anything since 1 hour
after I first successfully used it!

I oughtta get off my butt and get a power strip for my TV and my DTV
box!

>its not a free lunch

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)


== 9 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 6:12 pm
From: don@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein)


In <slrngikde2.ij9.aznomad.3@ip70-176-155-130.ph.ph.cox.net>, AZ Nomad said:
>On 11/24/08 04:51:49 +0 UTC, Don Klipstein <don@manx.misty.com> wrote:
>>In article <0p3ki4pdd1pm2ojaqa7qer3h3r69f27dql@4ax.com>, Jim Elbrecht said:
>>>On 11/23/08 15:18:47 -0800, "Bill" <billnomailnospamx@yahoo.com> said:
>>>
>>>>I've gone through my home and examined *every* electrical gadget,
>>>>appliance, etc.
>>>>
>>>>98% of the products I have use electricity when not being used! 98%!!!!
>>>-snip-
>>>
>>>I would be interested in seeing your list of 50 or 100 items and
>>>especially interested in seeing how much electricity they use.
>><SNIP from here>
>
>> If it's merely 60-70% of everything and their usage-while-off is 3-5% of
>>electric bill of 1/4-1/3 of people with electric bills, that is still
>>significant!
>
>Not really. You get far better return on your time and money by going
>after the 95-97%. Turn lights off when not in use.

I already do that.

> Unclog the line from the dryer.

I have yet to live where dryer exhaust lines spend any significant time
being clogged, and I have yet to know anyone allowing me to detect such
clogs!

> Go with a more efficient water heater and fridge if they're ancient.

I agree here - mainly for the fridge!

Spending a thousand dollars worth of time and supplies
>to trim off $2/month is insanity.

Spending $20-$30 in a high-spending-in-this-area-year is actually
frugal. If that is insane, then I am proudly insane!

> It is the high wattage items that matter. Not three dozen quarter watt
>items that don't add up to 5 watts or to a whole ten dollars a year.

But my contention is that "phantom loads" consist highly of items
drawing 1/2 watt, 1 watt, 2 watts, and in one instance 4-5 watts (my
computer when "off"), and in another instance 10-11 watts when off (my
TV).

I see sanity rather than insanity to buy a couple power strips to chip
down electric bill by $2 per month!

I also see how such contention of mine does not dispute need to reduce
energy consumption in "more major" areas!

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)


== 10 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 6:20 pm
From: don@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein)


In article <ggdejc$312a$1@mail.fiawol.org>, J. Cochran wrote:
>In article <6ou6mrF5apobU1@mid.individual.net>,
>Bill <billnomailnospamx@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>I've gone through my home and examined *every* electrical gadget, appliance,
>>etc.
>>
>>98% of the products I have use electricity when not being used! 98%!!!!
>>
>>Things which have no reason to use power when off! Things which used to have
>>a regular on/off switch.
>>
>>Seems to me someone wants me to be using more electricity!
>>
>>So I post on the internet that I am shutting this stuff off and I get a good
>>number of responses NOT wanting me to do this!
>
>And I can easily tell you why.
>Take a close look at your first article in this rather long thread.
>Now using just that article, don't you see a rather nasty potential for
>injuring or killing someone?
>
>So the immediate reaction from the people reading is
>
>"What an IDIOT! He wants to save a couple of cents per month at the risk
>of potentially killing someone! I have got to stop someone else from doing
>something this stupid and also potentially harming someone else"

Did not the idea suggested here involve "Romex" and an appropriate
v120V-rated pushbutton switch?

>Then later in the tread, you mention actually using a GFCI and wiring
>everything to code, etc., etc., etc. But you totally ignore anything
>involving return on investment. In order to save pennies, you spend 10s of
>dollars. Not a rational choice, but it is your choice.

Savings can easily amount to $1.50-$2 per year. Deepending on value of
labor to accomplish such, possibly even in a family's "entertainment
buidget", at least some families can find such a project to be more
worthwhile than earning money to put into "safer" investments/savings.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)


== 11 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 7:01 pm
From: "Rod Speed"


Sam E <no.email@all.invalid> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> Gary H <garyh@notspammable.invalid> wrote
>>> George <george@nospam.invalid> wrote

>>>> But the Chi Coms need to meet our requirements if it is sold here. I
>>>> can't remember the last time I saw a new walwart that wasn't a much
>>>> more efficient switcher design instead of an inefficient transformer.

>>> The new wall-warts are smaller, but it's NOT by eliminating the
>>> transformer. These new ones begin with an AC-to-AC converter,
>>> that operates on line voltage and raises the frequency. A higher
>>> frequency requires a smaller transformer.

>> They dont have any transformer that uses power all the time.

> Possible with any wall-wart you add a switch to. Making it
> automatic would be tricky, without power to turn it back on.

Makes a lot more sense to use a modern switchmode wallwart instead.

>>> "Switcher" refers to a more efficient voltage regulator,

>> Wrong. It always refers to what you listed above.

> That's one of the many varieties of "always" that are strangely non-inclusive.

I meant to say 'also' not 'always'. I dont proof read my posts.

> Maybe you've never heard of "switching regulators",

Fraid so.

> but I have a lot.

> The AC-to-AC converter allows a smaller, lighter transformer
> (which I expect draws less power with 0 load)..

You dont know they are AC to AC.

> Perhaps you mistake "low power" for "no power".

I never said anything about no power.

> That sort of mistake is very common.

There is no mistake except with the use of the word always.


== 12 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 7:03 pm
From: don@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein)


In article <bmhki49saq83nargbpombl5l59qev7eic2@4ax.com>, Vic Smith wrote:
>On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:37:48 -0500 (EST), jdc@mail.fiawol.org (J.
>Cochran) wrote:
>
>>In article <6ou6mrF5apobU1@mid.individual.net>,
>>Bill <billnomailnospamx@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>I've gone through my home and examined *every* electrical gadget, appliance,
>>>etc.
>>>
>>>98% of the products I have use electricity when not being used! 98%!!!!
>>>
>>>Things which have no reason to use power when off! Things which used to have
>>>a regular on/off switch.
>>>
>>>Seems to me someone wants me to be using more electricity!
>>>
>>>So I post on the internet that I am shutting this stuff off and I get a good
>>>number of responses NOT wanting me to do this!
>>
>>And I can easily tell you why.
>>Take a close look at your first article in this rather long thread.
>>Now using just that article, don't you see a rather nasty potential for
>>injuring or killing someone?
>>
>>So the immediate reaction from the people reading is
>>
>>"What an IDIOT! He wants to save a couple of cents per month at the risk
>>of potentially killing someone! I have got to stop someone else from doing
>>something this stupid and also potentially harming someone else"
>>
>>Then later in the tread, you mention actually using a GFCI and wiring
>>everything to code, etc., etc., etc. But you totally ignore anything
>>involving return on investment. In order to save pennies, you spend 10s of
>>dollars. Not a rational choice, but it is your choice.
>
>I take issue with your assertion that this a long thread.
>We haven't even begun to put a value on "Pride of Ownership."
>Forget about the 120 volt welcome to strangers.
>That's a distraction from the real issue.
>Which is "Pride of Ownership."
>Whether it be your home or the apartment you are renting, consider
>this: The first impression you make on a visitor is your door, your
>doormat, and your doorbell or knocker.

I surely got a positive impression from the "Bike Church" in that area!
Use human power to burn off a few of the exxcessive calories that
Americans usually take in!

>Also your house/apartment numbering if you care to be found.

That I surely agree with!

>Take care of them and they will take care of you.

Do unto others what you want others to do unto you - the "Golden Rule"!
Whether you consider that originated by an embodiment of the Lord of All
Gods or by a "mere major prophet" (my words) or by someone who merely
managed to "channel The Force" about 2,000 years ago...

>I'm giving my daughter a new door mat for Christmas.
>Its color complements her home decor.
>Not the usual "Welcome."
>It says "Go Away."
>She may not think it appropriate. I leave the decision in her hands.

I like the non-worded doormats.

I also like the sign in the window of the front door (or posted on the
front door if the front door lacks a window and is owned by a landlord and
permitted by the landlord): NEVER MIND THE DOG - BEWARE OF OWNER! Such
as owner of the dog, or owner of defensive weapon should dogs only be
allowed on basis of "guide animals". The sign along that route usually
has a picture of close-range view down-the-barrel view of a large caliber
revolver. I do note that the "owner in question" often carries a handgun
other than a revolver, so I consider merely carrying a handgun of any kind
negates "any grounds of false advertising" on basis of mechanism or
caliber size of whatever sidearm is carried by the "owner" that warns that
a handgun is warned against in a posting!

>Whatever she decides, a doormat is the smile your entryway presents to
>the world at large. But maybe not that one.
>This doormat costs 5 bucks.
>Yes, for as little as 5 bucks you can present an image to the world
>that says what you want it to say.

I would still want my doormat to, if anything as to what it says,
"Please wipe your shoes here"!
Sign at eye level on the front door should say where permissible,
"Never Mind The Dog - Beware Of Owner!", along with a picture of
down-the-barrel view of a handgun.
Otherwise, have a sign saying "Beware Of Dog" - preferably with a
"Photoshopped" "somewhat reasonable" image of your dog (or the one you
don't actually have) causing grievous injury to someone, preferably in a
way likely to result in a hospital admission and days in the Intensive
Care Unit!

>That's many years of the transformer electricity savings being
>discussed. And much more valuable IN THE LONG RUN.
>Return on investment?
>What price "Pride of Ownership?" That's real ROI.
>Until the depths are plumbed trying our best to answer the real
>question - What price "Pride of Ownnership" - it is fruitless to waste
>time on transformer pennies.
>That's my strong belief. Others may disagree.

<SNIP a bit from here>

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)


== 13 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 7:07 pm
From: don@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein)


In <334b57d1-782f-4d7d-b5a8-1038bc7f3495@s20g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
meow2222@care2.com wrote:

<SNIP to link quoted>

>proper analysis:
>http://www.wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=3DCFL_Lamps

I followed such link and my results were:

"There is currently no text in this page, you can search for this page
title in other pages or edit this page."

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)


== 14 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 7:16 pm
From: don@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein)


In article <C_ydnWF-CvyZmrbUnZ2dnUVZ_vninZ2d@posted.visi>, Dave Garland wrote:
>hallerb@aol.com wrote:
> > the outlet strip likely has a power on light of some sort wasting
>> power when its on..
>
>But not when it's off :) And that power is probably returned manyfold
>by virtue of the fact that the light reminds you that the other things
>plugged in are continuing to use power, so you turn it off sooner.
>
>In any case, mostly the power-on light is a switch with something like a
>built-in NE-2 (1/17 watt) bulb. No big deal.
>
>> individually the amount wasted is likely small, however nationwide for
>> everyone it must add up and waste is waste.....
>
>It's true. But we need to maintain a sense of proportionality. A
>single person running central air sucks as much power (3-20KW) as
>150,000 outlet strip indicator lights.

Sometimes true, usually less than true since a power strip light
consumes often around 1/4 watt. Merely 80,000 of such "lighted power
strips" (my words) amounts to high end of your range for "central air".

Also consider that "air conditioning" by most who have such is in a
minority of each year.

And furthermore, when "phantom loads" consume several watts, during air
conditioning season the A/C burden is increased by a few watts.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty,com)


== 15 of 15 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 7:24 pm
From: clare@snyder.on.ca


On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 01:22:33 +0000 (UTC), don@manx.misty.com (Don
Klipstein) wrote:

>In <40c66d71-3ccd-4ec0-9c63-d8a772443a55@x14g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
>meow2222@care2.com wrote:
>
>>Jim Redelfs wrote:
><SNIP what was already said>
>>
>>The other point worth making is that the power and cost figures for
>>standby power are routinely exaggerated.
>
> The ones I mentioned in this thread are actual measurements. I have a
>watt meter!
>
>> Those with political interest
>>in having everyone else unplug everything are either not competent in
>>the subject, or are happy to be lses than honest to try to motivate
>>others to unplug.
>>
>>And of course, biggest of all... youve only got one life, try to spend
>>the time doing something useful. Speaking of which.... later.
>
> - Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)


I have quite an assortment of "wall warts" and other assorted power
supplies for devices that have been discarded over the years.

All of them work.
I tested 19 of them for idle current draw on a digital meter that
reeds to the closes 0.01 amp.
6 of the 19 registered no parasitic draw at all, and the rest varied
from .02 to .06 amps

Additionally:

My PC draws .05A
The charger for my Craftsman battery drill draws 0.05A

Both battery chargers for nicads / nimh batteries showed no idle
current at all.

A 200watt Variac shows no draw at all.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: anyone make a wifi finder with internet telephone capabilities?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/81d9c571716583a4?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 4:43 pm
From: Seerialmom


On Nov 20, 7:11 pm, Shawn Hirn <s...@comcast.net> wrote:
> In article <gg4ddp$uu...@aioe.org>, OhioGuy <n...@none.net> wrote:
> > > Not for $200 but closer to $299-359 you can buy one of those nifty new
> > > micro PC's.  I picked up one at Target recently.  The Asus EeePC runs
>
> >    Hmm - was hoping for something a bit smaller.  Anyone used a pocket
> > pc with voip?
>
> >    Doesn't absolutely HAVE to be Yahoo Messenger, but I would prefer it
> > to be able to use any available Windows CE app.  If I don't like one, I
> > could try something else.
>
> An Apple iPhone or an iPod touch might do what you want.

iPod Touch is definitely a "not" because it doesn't have a microphone
connector; just a speaker. Not sure about the iPhone.


== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 4:45 pm
From: Seerialmom


On Nov 23, 4:52 pm, SoCalMike <mikein562athotm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> OhioGuy wrote:
> >   I'm wondering if anyone makes some sort of pocket pc that is wifi
> > enabled, and has enough 'horsepower' to run Yahoo Messenger?
>
> >   I'd like something like that that would work with a plain vanilla
> > headset, and let me do voice calls over the Internet whenever the thing
> > finds an open wifi hotspot.
>
> >   Obviously, I can buy a laptop for $400 that will do this, but I was
> > hoping that by now there would be something smaller with the same
> > capabilities, and hopefully cheaper. ($200 or less)
>
> >   Can anyone point me in the right direction?
>
> >                                                Thanks!
>
> maybe not what youre looking for, but the acer netbook is a 2lb laptop
> and costs about $350. small, light weight, but not pocket sized.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I'm tellin' ya...it's a nifty looking device and if it's bought at
Costco you've got an automatic extended warranty as well. Plus the
keyboard is just the right size, not too small and not full sized.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Hello From New Member
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/e9263bed5078e2a6?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 4:46 pm
From: Seerialmom


On Nov 24, 10:42 am, fruitpie <debmmm2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Nov 24, 10:32 am, Dennis <dg...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 19:36:27 -0600, hchick...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > >On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 16:08:40 -0800 (PST), fruitpie
> > ><debmmm2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > >>Hi,
>
> > >>I'm new to this site because I thought I could learn something.  But,
> > >>it seems the site is spammed with tennis shoe sales.  Is this normal
> > >>or does this site really have interactive discussions?
>
> > >It used to.  Set your filters to delete nike and rod, and you might
> > >see enough legit posts to continue.
>
> > >Was there something in particular you wanted to know?
>
> > I've been wondering where to find the best sales on tennis shoes.  Any
> > ideas?
>
> > Dennis (evil)
> > --
> > "There is a fine line between participation and mockery" - Wally
>
> Oh Dennis, you are evil.  I don't exactly have any questions yet but I
> am sure I will.  I hope to move to Mexico in the next 15 months (to
> retire) and will want to look into different ways to use energy when
> building a home.  But, with the way things are in the states right
> now, it may be longer then 15 months before I retire.  Thanks for the
> filter suggestion.  I will have to try that.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Not to try and discourage you from this newsgroup but there are some
"alternate" websites that address what you're looking for. Treehugger
comes to mind.


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

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

misc.consumers.frugal-living - 25 new messages in 10 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:

* Doorbell always uses electricity! - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3198294a289e9e57?hl=en
* Hello From New Member - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/e9263bed5078e2a6?hl=en
* 10 Things the Food Industry Doesn't Want You to Know - 8 messages, 6 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/255b376899016709?hl=en
* streaming adult videos - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/5cd6152e02bf3e9a?hl=en
* do you plant to lower your indoor temp this winter? - 4 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/a259dedc39c3ba0d?hl=en
* The Constitution of the Kingdom of God, Earth (www.grishenkoff.com) - 2
messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/108ccf116ffbeab9?hl=en
* Bailout costs every taxpayer $24,000.00. Are Americans just fat sheeple? - 3
messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/a7c77e2271603a4f?hl=en
* Microsoft Owes Vista Owners a Free Replacement that Works - Petition to
Microsoft - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/39cd08f7148038d7?hl=en
* If Detroit automakers sink.... - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/5f444322ed08bcda?hl=en
* Bed Bath & Beyond - ridiculous gifts, laughable prices - 2 messages, 2
authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3145bb7ec51f39ae?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Doorbell always uses electricity!
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3198294a289e9e57?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 10:27 am
From: "Rod Speed"


Gary H <garyh@notspammable.invalid> wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:17:33 -0500, George <george@nospam.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> But the Chi Coms need to meet our requirements if it is sold here. I
>> can't remember the last time I saw a new walwart that wasn't a much
>> more efficient switcher design instead of an inefficient transformer.

> The new wall-warts are smaller, but it's NOT by eliminating the
> transformer. These new ones begin with an AC-to-AC converter,
> that operates on line voltage and raises the frequency. A higher
> frequency requires a smaller transformer.

They dont have any transformer that uses power all the time.

> "Switcher" refers to a more efficient voltage regulator,

Wrong. It always refers to what you listed above.

> that controls the DC output by turning it on and off rather than by
> wasting power like a linear regulator (as in older wall warts) does.
> This also makes it smaller by reducing the need for a heat sink.


== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 11:57 am
From: Dave Garland


hallerb@aol.com wrote:
> the outlet strip likely has a power on light of some sort wasting
> power when its on..

But not when it's off :) And that power is probably returned manyfold
by virtue of the fact that the light reminds you that the other things
plugged in are continuing to use power, so you turn it off sooner.

In any case, mostly the power-on light is a switch with something like a
built-in NE-2 (1/17 watt) bulb. No big deal.

> individually the amount wasted is likely small, however nationwide for
> everyone it must add up and waste is waste.....

It's true. But we need to maintain a sense of proportionality. A
single person running central air sucks as much power (3-20KW) as
150,000 outlet strip indicator lights. A single load of clothes in an
electric dryer uses as much power (6KWH) as 12 outlet strip indicator
lights do in a year. So while we don't want to completely ignore the
small stuff, the bulk of our effort needs to be reducing the use of
those power hogs.

Dave

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Hello From New Member
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/e9263bed5078e2a6?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 10:42 am
From: fruitpie


On Nov 24, 10:32 am, Dennis <dg...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 19:36:27 -0600, hchick...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 16:08:40 -0800 (PST), fruitpie
> ><debmmm2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>Hi,
>
> >>I'm new to this site because I thought I could learn something.  But,
> >>it seems the site is spammed with tennis shoe sales.  Is this normal
> >>or does this site really have interactive discussions?
>
> >It used to.  Set your filters to delete nike and rod, and you might
> >see enough legit posts to continue.
>
> >Was there something in particular you wanted to know?
>
> I've been wondering where to find the best sales on tennis shoes.  Any
> ideas?
>
> Dennis (evil)
> --
> "There is a fine line between participation and mockery" - Wally

Oh Dennis, you are evil. I don't exactly have any questions yet but I
am sure I will. I hope to move to Mexico in the next 15 months (to
retire) and will want to look into different ways to use energy when
building a home. But, with the way things are in the states right
now, it may be longer then 15 months before I retire. Thanks for the
filter suggestion. I will have to try that.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: 10 Things the Food Industry Doesn't Want You to Know
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/255b376899016709?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 8 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 11:01 am
From: Ron Peterson


On Nov 21, 2:42 pm, "h" <tmcl...@searchmachine.com> wrote:
> "Tim Campbell" <timc...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>
> news:afc3411b-48e8-4b16-b757-fe2d47126a9e@x38g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>
> >10 Things the Food Industry Doesn't Want You to Know
>
> All you really need to do is declare high fructose corn syrup unfit for
> human consumption, like most other civilized countries.

The ban is on hydrofluorocarbons, not high fructose corn syrup.

--
Ron

== 2 of 8 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 11:19 am
From: "h"

"tyuj" <tyuj@apam.com> wrote in message
news:6p09ksF5jufhU1@mid.individual.net...
>h <tmclone@searchmachine.com> wrote
>> SoCalMike <mikein562athotmail@hotmail.com> wrote
>>> h wrote
>>>> Tim Campbell <timcall@sbcglobal.net> wrote
>
>>>>> 10 Things the Food Industry Doesn't Want You to Know
>
>>>> All you really need to do is declare high fructose corn syrup unfit for
>>>> human consumption, like most other civilized countries.
>
>>> which countries have banned it? what are their obesity rates?
>
>> Canada and I believe most Latin American countries.
>
> You're wrong/lying.
>
>> I don't know if it's completely banned in the EU, but they have strict
>> quotas on the production of non-sugar (sucrose/cane) sweeteners,
>
> Pig ignorant lie.
>
>> so it can't be used much if at all in Europe.
>
> Another pig ignorant lie.
>
>> HFCS should not be consumed by humans.
>
> Another pig ignorant lie.
>
>> I can't believe anyone would eat anything with that poison in it.
>
> Your problem.
>
>> It's not like it even tastes good. Yuck.
>
> Your problem.

You must work for the corn refiner's conglomerate, and therefore feel the
need to offer insults along with your lies. PLONK.


== 3 of 8 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 11:30 am
From: Dave Garland


h wrote:
> I don't know if it's
> completely banned in the EU, but they have strict quotas on the production
> of non-sugar (sucrose/cane) sweeteners, so it can't be used much if at all
> in Europe.

If so, I suspect the reason is less related to health, than to the fact
that European farmers grow sugar beets rather than sugar cane. Farm
lobbies are strong everywhere.

Dave


== 4 of 8 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 11:43 am
From: "up yours"


h <tmclone@searchmachine.com> wrote
> tyuj <tyuj@apam.com> wrote
>> h <tmclone@searchmachine.com> wrote
>>> SoCalMike <mikein562athotmail@hotmail.com> wrote
>>>> h wrote
>>>>> Tim Campbell <timcall@sbcglobal.net> wrote

>>>>>> 10 Things the Food Industry Doesn't Want You to Know

>>>>> All you really need to do is declare high fructose corn syrup
>>>>> unfit for human consumption, like most other civilized countries.

>>>> which countries have banned it? what are their obesity rates?

>>> Canada and I believe most Latin American countries.

>> You're wrong/lying.

>>> I don't know if it's completely banned in the EU, but they have strict quotas on the production of non-sugar
>>> (sucrose/cane) sweeteners,

>> Pig ignorant lie.

>>> so it can't be used much if at all in Europe.

>> Another pig ignorant lie.

>>> HFCS should not be consumed by humans.

>> Another pig ignorant lie.

>>> I can't believe anyone would eat anything with that poison in it.

>> Your problem.

>>> It's not like it even tastes good. Yuck.

>> Your problem.

> You must work for the corn refiner's conglomerate,

You're lying, as always.

> and therefore feel the need to offer insults along with your lies.

Corse you never ever do anything like that yourself, eh ?

> PLONK.

Fat lot of good that will ever do you, you stupid plonker.


== 5 of 8 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 11:58 am
From: "h"

"Dave Garland" <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote in message
news:w6-dndHH0L5bnbbUnZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d@posted.visi...
>h wrote:
>> I don't know if it's
>> completely banned in the EU, but they have strict quotas on the
>> production
>> of non-sugar (sucrose/cane) sweeteners, so it can't be used much if at
>> all
>> in Europe.
>
> If so, I suspect the reason is less related to health, than to the fact
> that European farmers grow sugar beets rather than sugar cane. Farm
> lobbies are strong everywhere.
>

I believe that's the case. The reason they have the quotas is to protect
their own industries, but the side benefit is that there is less HFCS in the
EU. Now, I'm certainly not a fan of sugar nor any other processed carbs, but
sugar is less un-healthy than HFCS. The upside is that it's pretty easy to
avoid all of that crap by simply not buying processed foods.


== 6 of 8 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 1:36 pm
From: Seerialmom


On Nov 21, 12:14 pm, Tim Campbell <timc...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> 10 Things the Food Industry Doesn't Want You to Know
>
> Two nutrition experts argue that you can't take marketing campaigns at
> face value. -
>
> By Adam Voiland, U.S. News & World Report -
>
> With America's obesity problem among kids reaching crisis proportions,
> even junk food makers have started to claim they want to steer
> children toward more healthful choices. In a study released earlier
> this year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported
> that about 32 percent of children were overweight but not obese, 16
> percent were obese, and 11 percent were extremely obese. Food giant
> PepsiCo, for example, points out on its Web site that "we can play an
> important role in helping kids lead healthier lives by offering
> healthy product choices in schools." The company highlights what it
> considers its healthier products within various food categories
> through a "Smart Spot" marketing campaign that features green symbols
> on packaging. PepsiCo's inclusive criteria—explained here—award spots
> to foods of dubious nutritional value such as Diet Pepsi, Cap'n Crunch
> cereal, reduced-fat Doritos, and Cheetos, as well as to more
> nutritious products such as Quaker Oatmeal and Tropicana Orange
> Juice.But are wellness initiatives like Smart Spot just marketing
> ploys? Such moves by the food industry may seem to be a step in the
> right direction, but ultimately makers of popular junk foods have an
> obligation to stockholders to encourage kids to eat more—not less—of
> the foods that fuel their profits, says David Ludwig, a pediatrician
> and the co-author of a commentary published in a recent Journal of the
> American Medical Association that raises questions about whether big
> food companies can be trusted to help combat obesity. Ludwig and
> article co-author Marion Nestle, a professor of nutrition at New York
> University, both of whom have long histories of tracking the food
> industry, spoke with U.S. News and highlighted 10 things that junk
> food makers don't want you to know about their products and how they
> promote them.
>
> 1. Junk food makers spend billions advertising unhealthy foods to
> kids.According to the Federal Trade Commission, food makers spend some
> $1.6 billion annually to reach children through the traditional media
> as well the Internet, in-store advertising, and sweepstakes. An
> article published in 2006 in the Journal of Public Health Policy puts
> the number as high as $10 billion annually. Promotions often use
> cartoon characters or free giveaways to entice kids into the junk food
> fold. PepsiCo has pledged that it will advertise only "Smart Spot"
> products to children under 12.
>
> 2. The studies that food producers support tend to minimize health
> concerns associated with their products.In fact, according to a review
> led by Ludwig of hundreds of studies that looked at the health effects
> of milk, juice, and soda, the likelihood of conclusions favorable to
> the industry was several times higher among industry-sponsored
> research than studies that received no industry funding. "If a study
> is funded by the industry, it may be closer to advertising than
> science," he says.
>
> 3. Junk food makers donate large sums of money to professional
> nutrition associations.The American Dietetic Association, for example,
> accepts money from companies such as Coca-Cola, which get access to
> decision makers in the food and nutrition marketplace via ADA events
> and programs, as this release explains. As Nestle notes in her blog
> and discusses at length in her book Food Politics (University of
> California Press, 2007), the group even distributes nutritional fact
> sheets that are directly sponsored by specific industry groups. This
> one, for example, which is sponsored by an industry group that
> promotes lamb, rather unsurprisingly touts the nutritional benefits of
> lamb.The ADA's reasoning: "These collaborations take place with the
> understanding that ADA does not support any program or message that
> does not correspond with ADA's science-based healthful-eating messages
> and positions," according to the group's president, dietitian Martin
> Yadrick. "In fact, we think it's important for us to be at the same
> table with food companies because of the positive influence that we
> can have on them."
>
> 4. More processing means more profits, but typically makes the food
> less healthy.Minimally processed foods such as fresh fruits and
> vegetables obviously aren't where food companies look for profits. The
> big bucks stem from turning government-subsidized commodity crops—
> mainly corn, wheat, and soybeans—into fast foods, snack foods, and
> beverages. High-profit products derived from these commodity crops are
> generally high in calories and low in nutritional value.
>
> 5. Less-processed foods are generally more satiating than their highly
> processed counterparts.Fresh apples have an abundance of fiber and
> nutrients that are lost when they are processed into applesauce. And
> the added sugar or other sweeteners increase the number of calories
> without necessarily making the applesauce any more filling. Apple
> juice, which is even more processed, has had almost all of the fiber
> and nutrients stripped out. This same stripping out of nutrients, says
> Ludwig, happens with highly refined white bread compared with stone-
> ground whole wheat bread.
>
> 6. Many supposedly healthy replacement foods are hardly healthier than
> the foods they replace.In 2006, for example, major beverage makers
> agreed to remove sugary sodas from school vending machines. But the
> industry mounted an intense lobbying effort that persuaded lawmakers
> to allow sports drinks and vitamin waters that—despite their slightly
> healthier reputations—still can be packed with sugar and calories.
>
> 7. A health claim on the label doesn't necessarily make a food
> healthy.Health claims such as "zero trans fats" or "contains whole
> wheat" may create the false impression that a product is healthy when
> it's not. While the claims may be true, a product is not going to
> benefit your kid's health if it's also loaded with salt and sugar or
> saturated fat, say, and lacks fiber or other nutrients. "These claims
> are calorie distracters," adds Nestle. "They make people forget about
> the calories." Dave DeCecco, a spokesperson for PepsiCo, counters that
> the intent of a labeling program such as Smart Spot is simply to help
> consumers pick a healthier choice within a category. "We're not trying
> to tell people that a bag of Doritos is healthier than asparagus. But,
> if you're buying chips, and you're busy, and you don't have a lot of
> time to read every part of the label, it's an easy way to make a
> smarter choice," he says.
>
> 8. Food industry pressure has made nutritional guidelines confusing.As
> Nestle explained in Food Politics, the food industry has a history of
> preferring scientific jargon to straight talk. As far back as 1977,
> public health officials attempted to include the advice "reduce
> consumption of meat" in an important report called "Dietary Goals for
> the United States." The report's authors capitulated to intense
> pushback from the cattle industry and used this less-direct and more
> ambiguous advice: "Choose meats, poultry, and fish which will reduce
> saturated fat intake." Overall, says Nestle, the government has a hard
> time suggesting that people eat less of anything.
>
> 9. The food industry funds front groups that fight anti-obesity public
> health initiatives.Unless you follow politics closely, you wouldn't
> necessarily realize that a group with a name like the Center for
> Consumer Freedom has anything to do with the food industry. In fact,
> Ludwig and Nestle point out, this group lobbies aggressively against
> obesity-related public health campaigns—such as the one directed at
> removing junk food from schools—and is funded, according to the Center
> for Media and Democracy, primarily through donations from big food
> companies such as Coca-Cola, Cargill, Tyson Foods, and Wendy's.
>
> 10. The food industry works aggressively to discredit its
> critics.According to the new JAMA article, the Center for Consumer
> Freedom boasts that "[our strategy] is to shoot the messenger. We've
> got to attack [activists'] credibility as spokespersons." Here's the
> group's entry on Marion Nestle.The bottom line, says Nestle, is quite
> simple: Kids need to eat less, include more fruits and vegetables in
> their diet, and limit the junk food.

I thought you were going to say that: "SOYLENT GREEN IS PEOPLE!" :p


== 7 of 8 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 1:38 pm
From: Seerialmom


On Nov 24, 10:21 am, "tyuj" <t...@apam.com> wrote:
> h <tmcl...@searchmachine.com> wrote
>
> > SoCalMike <mikein562athotm...@hotmail.com> wrote
> >> h wrote
> >>> Tim Campbell <timc...@sbcglobal.net> wrote
> >>>> 10 Things the Food Industry Doesn't Want You to Know
> >>> All you really need to do is declare high fructose corn syrup unfit for human consumption, like most other civilized
> >>> countries.
> >> which countries have banned it? what are their obesity rates?
> > Canada and I believe most Latin American countries.
>
> You're wrong/lying.
>
> > I don't know if it's completely banned in the EU, but they have strict quotas on the production of non-sugar
> > (sucrose/cane) sweeteners,
>
> Pig ignorant lie.
>
> > so it can't be used much if at all in Europe.
>
> Another pig ignorant lie.
>
> > HFCS should not be consumed by humans.
>
> Another pig ignorant lie.
>
> > I can't believe anyone would eat anything with that poison in it.
>
> Your problem.
>
> > It's not like it even tastes good. Yuck.
>
> Your problem.

Is this Rod Speed in disguise??


== 8 of 8 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 4:15 pm
From: don@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein)


In article <ggetu3$t94$1@aioe.org>, h wrote:
>
>"tyuj" <tyuj@apam.com> wrote in message
>news:6p09ksF5jufhU1@mid.individual.net...

"tyuj" appears to me to be Rod Speed. Extremely unlikely working for
the corn industry, admittedly retired, apparently on a disability
pension for a mental condition. He has been known to use alternate
handles to get around killfiles.

- Don Klipstein (don@mistyu.com)

==============================================================================
TOPIC: streaming adult videos
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/5cd6152e02bf3e9a?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 12:44 pm
From: Freedom Is Not Free


On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 09:29:37 -0800 (PST), vorphey@gmail.com wrote:
Information related to '78.140.130.0 - 78.140.130.255'
inetnum: 78.140.130.0 - 78.140.130.255
netname: WEBAZILLA
descr: WebaZilla
remarks: INFRA-AW
country: NL
admin-c: WZNL1-RIPE
tech-c: WZNL1-RIPE
status: ASSIGNED PA
mnt-by: WZNET-MNT
source: RIPE # Filtered
role: WebaZilla RIPE Manager
address: WebaZilla B.V.
address: Postbus 19115
address: 3501DC Utrecht
address: Netherlands
phone: +31612253464
fax-no: +31303100299
e-mail: noc@webazilla.com
mnt-by: WZNET-MNT
admin-c: BK5536-RIPE
tech-c: BK5536-RIPE
tech-c: KV1670-RIPE
nic-hdl: WZNL1-RIPE
source: RIPE # Filtered
% Information related to '78.140.128.0/18AS35415'

==============================================================================
TOPIC: do you plant to lower your indoor temp this winter?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/a259dedc39c3ba0d?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 12:42 pm
From: "'nam vet."


In article <VScWk.15360$qh4.3006@newsfe04.iad>,
clams_casino <PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:

> chilisincarne@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >I usually have about 73F indoors, but now with the expensive heating
> >costs ive been thinking of maybe going a bit lower.
> >So last week i tried sinking it all the way down to 60F and see how it
> >felt, and it was unbelievably damn COLD! I had to wear socks and t-
> >shirt while sleeping LOL!
> >Maybe something around 66F would be better?
> >
> >Have you experimented with lower indoor temp? What is a alrite lowest
> >temp?
> >
> >
>
> You should probably drop in stages. During the summer, we are quite
> comfortable at 75F, but find around 67F to be quite comfortable in the
> winter. A lot will depend on how much / type of clothing you typically
> wear. Do consider programmable thermostats, especially if you have
> multi-zone heating / cooling.
>
> We set the temp downstairs back to 63 over night & ramp it up to 67
> after 5am. Upstairs, we set it back to 63 during the day & keep the
> doors closed so the downstairs isn't simply heating the upstairs during
> the day where we ramp it to 67 after 7 pm. It ramps down to 66 after 9
> am. When not around during the day, we typically set the temp back
> down to 63 & reset when we return. The gradual increase tends to
> be just as comfortable vs. walking into a 67F home. We also ramp up
> the downstairs temp up 2F at 4pm (from 66 to 68) to offset the typical
> sun set chill, setting it back down to 63 overnight at around 9 pm.
> For some reason, 66F can be quite comfortable during the day, but it
> becomes chilly as the sun sets.
>
> It may sound involved, but it's a cycle that we've developed over the
> years that's left to the programmable thermostats, except for the manual
> adjustments downstairs when we leave for extended periods during the
> day. Having the downstairs thermostat near the exit to the garage makes
> it an easy task.

We have the wood stove and it's Radiant Heat. we love it and wood warms
you many times ; getting it, cutting it, stacking and burning it.
I hope everyone has discovered flannel sheets for the bed. Wonderful.
And we make our own Polar fleece hats. A lot of your body heat goes out
through you head.
And every year we do an additional thing to lower our carbon foot-print.
Insulate, more double glazing if needed. etc.
Good luck, group. and wear brighter more colorful clothing. Keeps the
spirits up. and Smile at someone you pass on the street. They'll wonder
what you're up to.
--
When the Power of Love,replaces the Love of Power.
that's Evolution.


== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 1:16 pm
From: "Rod Speed"


'nam vet. <georgewkspam@humboldt1.com> wrote:
> In article <VScWk.15360$qh4.3006@newsfe04.iad>,
> clams_casino <PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:
>
>> chilisincarne@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> I usually have about 73F indoors, but now with the expensive heating
>>> costs ive been thinking of maybe going a bit lower.
>>> So last week i tried sinking it all the way down to 60F and see how
>>> it felt, and it was unbelievably damn COLD! I had to wear socks and
>>> t- shirt while sleeping LOL!
>>> Maybe something around 66F would be better?
>>>
>>> Have you experimented with lower indoor temp? What is a alrite
>>> lowest temp?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> You should probably drop in stages. During the summer, we are quite
>> comfortable at 75F, but find around 67F to be quite comfortable in
>> the winter. A lot will depend on how much / type of clothing you
>> typically wear. Do consider programmable thermostats, especially
>> if you have multi-zone heating / cooling.
>>
>> We set the temp downstairs back to 63 over night & ramp it up to 67
>> after 5am. Upstairs, we set it back to 63 during the day & keep
>> the doors closed so the downstairs isn't simply heating the upstairs
>> during the day where we ramp it to 67 after 7 pm. It ramps down to
>> 66 after 9 am. When not around during the day, we typically set the
>> temp back down to 63 & reset when we return. The gradual
>> increase tends to be just as comfortable vs. walking into a 67F
>> home. We also ramp up the downstairs temp up 2F at 4pm (from 66 to
>> 68) to offset the typical sun set chill, setting it back down to 63
>> overnight at around 9 pm.
>> For some reason, 66F can be quite comfortable during the day, but it
>> becomes chilly as the sun sets.
>>
>> It may sound involved, but it's a cycle that we've developed over the
>> years that's left to the programmable thermostats, except for the
>> manual adjustments downstairs when we leave for extended periods
>> during the day. Having the downstairs thermostat near the exit to
>> the garage makes it an easy task.

> We have the wood stove and it's Radiant Heat. we love it and wood
> warms you many times ; getting it, cutting it, stacking and burning it.
> I hope everyone has discovered flannel sheets for the bed. Wonderful.

> And we make our own Polar fleece hats. A lot of your body heat goes out through you head.

Trouble is those home made balaclavas can get you summarily executed as a terrorist.

> And every year we do an additional thing to lower our carbon
> foot-print. Insulate, more double glazing if needed. etc.

You'd save a lot more carbon by hanging yourself with second hand rope.

> Good luck, group. and wear brighter more colorful clothing. Keeps the spirits up.
> and Smile at someone you pass on the street. They'll wonder what you're up to.

Or gun you down when they decide you must be another of those loonys we used to keep in locked wards.


== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 1:20 pm
From: "'nam vet."


In article
<georgewkspam-F2BF80.12420924112008@sn-ip.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>,
"'nam vet." <georgewkspam@humboldt1.com> wrote:

> In article <VScWk.15360$qh4.3006@newsfe04.iad>,
> clams_casino <PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:
>
> > chilisincarne@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > >I usually have about 73F indoors, but now with the expensive heating
> > >costs ive been thinking of maybe going a bit lower.
> > >So last week i tried sinking it all the way down to 60F and see how it
> > >felt, and it was unbelievably damn COLD! I had to wear socks and t-
> > >shirt while sleeping LOL!
> > >Maybe something around 66F would be better?
> > >
> > >Have you experimented with lower indoor temp? What is a alrite lowest
> > >temp?
> > >
> > >
> >
> > You should probably drop in stages. During the summer, we are quite
> > comfortable at 75F, but find around 67F to be quite comfortable in the
> > winter. A lot will depend on how much / type of clothing you typically
> > wear. Do consider programmable thermostats, especially if you have
> > multi-zone heating / cooling.
> >
> > We set the temp downstairs back to 63 over night & ramp it up to 67
> > after 5am. Upstairs, we set it back to 63 during the day & keep the
> > doors closed so the downstairs isn't simply heating the upstairs during
> > the day where we ramp it to 67 after 7 pm. It ramps down to 66 after 9
> > am. When not around during the day, we typically set the temp back
> > down to 63 & reset when we return. The gradual increase tends to
> > be just as comfortable vs. walking into a 67F home. We also ramp up
> > the downstairs temp up 2F at 4pm (from 66 to 68) to offset the typical
> > sun set chill, setting it back down to 63 overnight at around 9 pm.
> > For some reason, 66F can be quite comfortable during the day, but it
> > becomes chilly as the sun sets.
> >
> > It may sound involved, but it's a cycle that we've developed over the
> > years that's left to the programmable thermostats, except for the manual
> > adjustments downstairs when we leave for extended periods during the
> > day. Having the downstairs thermostat near the exit to the garage makes
> > it an easy task.
>
> We have the wood stove and it's Radiant Heat. we love it and wood warms
> you many times ; getting it, cutting it, stacking and burning it.
> I hope everyone has discovered flannel sheets for the bed. Wonderful.
> And we make our own Polar fleece hats. A lot of your body heat goes out
> through you head.
> And every year we do an additional thing to lower our carbon foot-print.
> Insulate, more double glazing if needed. etc.
> Good luck, group. and wear brighter more colorful clothing. Keeps the
> spirits up. and Smile at someone you pass on the street. They'll wonder
> what you're up to.

Oh, I forgot, If your feet get cold, it's so hard to sleep. we used to
heat up a large smooth rock on the wood stove and put it at the foot of
the bed, Soooo nice !
Remember the "bed Warmer">?
Stay cosy! and there's always Three Dog Nite.
--
When the Power of Love,replaces the Love of Power.
that's Evolution.


== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 1:52 pm
From: Vic Smith


On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 13:20:48 -0800, "'nam vet."
<georgewkspam@humboldt1.com> wrote:


>
>Oh, I forgot, If your feet get cold, it's so hard to sleep. we used to
>heat up a large smooth rock on the wood stove and put it at the foot of
>the bed, Soooo nice !
>Remember the "bed Warmer">?
>Stay cosy! and there's always Three Dog Nite.

Even one dog helps. Got a small pooch that jumps on the bed after I
turn off the lights. She nestles between my legs, the blankets making
sort of a hammock there.
Wife gets jealous though.

--Vic

==============================================================================
TOPIC: The Constitution of the Kingdom of God, Earth (www.grishenkoff.com)
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/108ccf116ffbeab9?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 1:00 pm
From: Al Bundy


On Nov 24, 3:46 am, Prime Minister of the Kingdom of God
<jewbec...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> The Constitution of the Kingdom of God, Earth (www.grishenkoff.com)

Funny how the religious freaks always make the rest of us suffer
through the penance they feel necessary to perform in repeat postings.


== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 2:46 pm
From: Prime Minister Serge Grishenkoff


The Constitution of the Kingdom of God, Earth (www.grishenkoff.com)

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Bailout costs every taxpayer $24,000.00. Are Americans just fat sheeple?

http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/a7c77e2271603a4f?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 1:20 pm
From: twentydollarock@yahoo.com


> > Is it not interesting that the masses wander about scratching their
> > ample butts while  accepting the
> > theft of their money?


I find it very interesting. Unbelievable, actually.

>   They accepted the Bush regime's 9-11 fairy tale without thought
> or question, so why not the theft and redistribution of their
> money to billionaire corporate thieves and criminals?

And Obama and McCain were both right there to cheer on the symphony
while Paulson and Brananke were conducting.

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 3:01 pm
From: "S'mee"


On Nov 24, 9:56 am, Henry <9...@insidejob.gov> wrote:
> wis...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > Is it not interesting that the masses wander about scratching their
> > ample butts while  accepting the
> > theft of their money?
>
>   They accepted the Bush regime's 9-11 fairy tale without thought
> or question, so why not the theft and redistribution of their
> money to billionaire corporate thieves and criminals?
>

ROTFLMAO!!! ITYMTS "They eat at McDonalds and drive mini-vans...you
can't get stupider than that"

Because everyone knows it's logisiticly improbable much less possible
to blow up any skyscraper. Not and keep the preparations secret...

--
Keith


== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 3:48 pm
From: "catalpa"

<wismel@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:shlli458slmvic2dmq698cpsrrkbf4fsma@4ax.com...
> Is it not interesting that the masses wander about scratching their
> ample butts while accepting the
> theft of their money?
>
> ted

I don't have $24,000.00, so they better take an IOU.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Microsoft Owes Vista Owners a Free Replacement that Works - Petition to
Microsoft
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/39cd08f7148038d7?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 3:44 pm
From: "Pete C."

Dave wrote:
>
> >> There is nothing wrong with Vista. Nothing.

Second the Vista is fine. I had heard all the propaganda that Vista was
terrible, but never heard a single example of how it was so bad. Not
having any particular reason to put Vista on anything I just ignored it
for a while.

Eventually I decided I needed a new laptop and ended up getting a very
nice HP one for a whopping $650, that happened to come with Vista HP
64bit. So far I haven't run into any issues.

I've loaded alternate browsers and newsreaders, and some relatively
obscure stuff like Dive computer interface software and diving gas
blending calculators and all either worked just fine or took 30 seconds
to download a 64 bit version of.

The one semi-issue I had was antivirus software, where the CA stuff I
use on my other machines didn't have a 64 bit version available, so I
had to stick with the Norton that came with the laptop. Whoop-dee-doo.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: If Detroit automakers sink....
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/5f444322ed08bcda?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 3:54 pm
From: kozmo


On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 05:10:11 +1100, "Rod Speed"
<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

>val189 <gwehrenb@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>> what happens to extended warranties, dealers who handle service, recalls, and probably other issues.
>
>Those who were stupid enough to buy those cars have one hell of a problem.
>
>In spades with the value of those steaming turds with wheels.
>
>> Neighbor with two Dodge vehicles was wondering.
>
>They could always do the decent thing and hang themselves.
>
>> Another reason to bail?
>
>Nope.
>

rofl

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Bed Bath & Beyond - ridiculous gifts, laughable prices
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3145bb7ec51f39ae?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 4:16 pm
From: Patricia Martin Steward


Got their flyer in the mail today, and I was laughing out loud at some
of the "gifts" they're selling (I'm rounding prices up on those ending
in .99):

wine chiller - $100 (I put mine in the fridge for free)
single-serve coffee brewer - $200 (my four-cup Mr. Coffee cost $14.99)
espresso maker - $230
knife set - $200
Aerogarden to grow herbs - $150
Proper Positioning bed pillow - $80
Braun shaver - $250 AFTER rebate

And finally, my favorite: a "do-it-yourself electric BACK HAIR SHAVER
for $40!!!!

I can only think they had this printed before the economy went down
the drain.

--
"This is our moment. This is our time - to put our people back to work and open doors of opportunity for our kids;
to restore prosperity and promote the cause of peace; to reclaim the American Dream and reaffirm that fundamental
truth - that out of many, we are one; that while we breathe, we hope, and where we are met with cynicism, and doubt,
and those who tell us that we can't, we will respond with that timeless creed that sums up the spirit of a people:
Yes We Can." President-elect Barack Obama, November, 4, 2008
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **


== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 24 2008 4:21 pm
From: Bert Hyman


In news:i8gmi4hlq2n4sq3c0qt8034qb7r2qjpug3@4ax.com Patricia Martin
Steward <patstew@noteranews.com> wrote:

> And finally, my favorite: a "do-it-yourself electric BACK HAIR SHAVER
> for $40!!!!

Maybe they're trying to pick up the slack left by Sharper Image.

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com


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

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