Frugal Living: misc.consumers.frugal-living - 25 new messages in 12 topics

Wednesday, January 14, 2009

misc.consumers.frugal-living - 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: OT - Survivalism Retail Style
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/da641b3711ca2726?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 12:04 am
From: Curly Surmudgeon

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 02:57:13 +0000, EskWIRED wrote:

> In misc.survivalism Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySurmudgeon@live.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 21:13:16 +0000, EskWIRED wrote:
>
>> > In misc.survivalism Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySurmudgeon@live.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> >> > You are correct that the raw median average house prices are
>> >> >> > not reflected in CPI. I misundersood the reference to house
>> >> >> > prices, and took it to mean housing prices.
>> >> >
>> >> >> Neither are "housing prices" part of the CPI:
>> >> >
>> >> > You need to look more closely.
>> >
>> >> Despite all your insults and denials you've not provided a single
>> >> cite as promised. You _have_ contradicted, and snipped, the
>> >> evidence proving you wrong.
>> >
>> > Is this why you need to have settled issues remain in the posts? Are
>> > you making some kind of semantic arguement?
>
>> I disproved your insult and assertion yet you still engage in denial.
>> As long as you continue to open your lawyer-mouth evading that you were
>> wrong on all counts I'm going to continue shoving this down your
>> throat.
>
> WTF? Did you look below? Do you need this spoon fed to you? You
> yourself posted that CPI includes "Housing (rent of primary residence,
> owner's equivalent rent, fuel oil, bedroom furniture)"

Your constant snipping and evasion is morphing the issue.

Curly Surmudgeon:
"House prices" wasn't in the statement to which I responded nor are they
a component of official inflation figures.

EskWIRED:
Curly - your ignorance of facts colors your conclusions. Look at the BLS
website. Indeed, housing is one of the eight major groups of products and
services that is considered when computing the number.

"House prices" are _not_ in the CPI:

"The CPI does not include investment items, such as stocks, bonds, real
estate, and life insurance."
http://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpifaq.htm#Question_1

Yet you keep snipping the proof of your invalid, malicious, attack.

So, again, Fuck You and the judge you rode in on.

> You knew that there was such a category. Why are you denying that
> housing costs are part of CPI? Is tis some kind of quibble about their
> statistical methods?

I said what I meant and it is accurate. You attacked that correct
statement with personal invective. Fuck you.

> Again - are you making a semantic arguement? Is there some slight
> wording difference between what you have in mind and the Housing
> component of CPI? If not, WTF are you going on about?

Again, Fuck You. Cease the evasion and snipping to hide your fuckup.

>> > You yourself posted the eight categoreis, and I snipped all but the
>> > housing costs category. The Housing Index is Series No. CUUR0000SAH.
>
>
>
>> Shut your festering globule, you tit!
>
> Gobutit. It's British. You're getting to be very entertaining.

You're an asshole lawyer. But I repeat myself, not a very good lawyer at
that.

--
Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bush. Like a Rock. Only Dumber.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 12:36 am
From: Curly Surmudgeon

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 01:16:40 -0500, Strabo wrote:

> Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 04:48:08 -0500, Strabo wrote:
>>
>>> EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com wrote:
>>>> In misc.survivalism Strabo <strabo@flashlight.net> wrote:
>>>>> EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com wrote:
>>>>>> My sister went through a similar search a few years ago outside DC.
>>>>>> She ended up buying a McMansion far far into the exurbs because
>>>>>> that was pretty much all that was affordable, consistent with good
>>>>>> schools. They use the formal living room to house their foosball
>>>>>> table. Given that the house has a huge Family Room, they don't
>>>>>> need a living room. They put their TV in the family room, so the
>>>>>> Media Room too is underutilized.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They don't like living in the middle of nowhere, nor do they like
>>>>>> heating a huge house. But as you say, very little was available
>>>>>> that met their needs at the time. And now, their neighbors are
>>>>>> desperate to sell, with some homes being sold by banks for MUCH
>>>>>> lower prices than they typical outstanding debt.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> And this lowers the resell value of their home. Even if they live in
>>>>> the house for years it may never bring the price they paid in
>>>>> adjusted dollars.
>>>> Yep. A home in the same subdivision as theirs, which the owners paid
>>>> over $800k for, has been on the market for many months, priced at
>>>> $500k.
>>>>
>>>> They paid much less, given that they have a smaller house and a
>>>> smaller lot. I was too kind to ask what they paid and how much the
>>>> home is now worth. But my guess is that their home is worth around
>>>> 50-60% of what they paid, unless they would like to sell it more
>>>> quickly than the most desperate family in their subdivision, in which
>>>> case they would have to price it even lower.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Real property market prices are being forced down to the point of
>>>>> true value. The difference between this cost value and the initial
>>>>> cost of the house is a permanent loss.
>>>> I doubt that they have gone that low. I predict that they will go
>>>> lower. I think that a lot of people are hanging on by their
>>>> fingernails, and that increasing numbers will bite the bullet once
>>>> they see that their neighbor's "underpriced" home has sold, while
>>>> theirs is still on the market.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Over the next five years or so, every asset, everything of value on
>>> the planet, will be assessed and revalued. In monetary terms some of
>>> these will go up while most will go down.
>>
>> True but the mechanism is more complex, we must figure in inflation/
>> deflation.
>>
>> At the moment I cannot tell whether we're in for one, the other, or a
>> weird mix of the two.
> >
> >
> Of course you can't tell because we're in the process of a total
> revaluation, of everything.
>
>
> > You said "value" which is a better indicator and
>> independent of the dollar.
>>
>>
> I define value as the determination of worth. At its basis, the value of
> something is the *amount of energy one is willing to expend* toward
> attaining it.
>
> "I will exert two hours labor (worth) in mowing your lawn for $N OR a
> glass of milk and a sandwich of ham and lettuce on rye (value)."
>
> The $N then represents a value equal to the meal in the eyes of the
> laborer.
>
> When two laborers assign a similar valuation then we have a trend.
>
> When two thousand laborers assign a similar valuation then we have
> stability.
>
> If I accept the $N then I am a capitalist and may later convert this and
> apply it to another thing of value.
>
>
>
>> I expect the value of homes to continue a slide for years to come.
>> Another 6-24 months at the current pace then a slowing which could
>> continue for a decade or more. That doesn't mean the dollar price will
>> decline, in fact (with inflation), home prices could rise dramatically.
>>
>>
> But temporarily since an inflated dollar represents false value.
>
> The last period of stable and *relatively* uninflated costs was the
> 1960s. This means that a modest house built in 1960 sold then for about
> $7000. A similar house at the peak of the housing bubble in 2003 would
> have brought about $150,000. Today the cost is perhaps down to
> $120,000. I expect it to be maybe $80,000 in 2013. Of course salaries
> and the general cost of living will fall as well.

Not if inflation kicks in with the printing of new dollars.

We agree on *value* and that it has only some correlation to dollars/unit
but do not extrapolate too far into the future. What direction the
dollar value will take is yet to be determined, it could go either way,
down slightly/slowly or rise fast.

The equation is too complex, too many variables, for me to try and
predict. All I can say is that *value* will probably decline even if the
dollar/unit price increases.

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 5:19 am
From: EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com

In misc.survivalism Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySurmudgeon@live.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 02:57:13 +0000, EskWIRED wrote:

> > In misc.survivalism Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySurmudgeon@live.com> wrote:
> >> On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 21:13:16 +0000, EskWIRED wrote:
> >
> >> > In misc.survivalism Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySurmudgeon@live.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> >> > You are correct that the raw median average house prices are
> >> >> >> > not reflected in CPI. I misundersood the reference to house
> >> >> >> > prices, and took it to mean housing prices.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Neither are "housing prices" part of the CPI:
> >
> > WTF? Did you look below? Do you need this spoon fed to you? You
> > yourself posted that CPI includes "Housing (rent of primary residence,
> > owner's equivalent rent, fuel oil, bedroom furniture)"

> Your constant snipping and evasion is morphing the issue.

> Curly Surmudgeon:
> "House prices" wasn't in the statement to which I responded nor are they
> a component of official inflation figures.

It has been established that current market prices of hones are not part
of CPI. Now you say that "housing prices" are not part of CPI.

So again I ask: is this some kind of semantic arguement? Are you sayig
that "housing prices" are not part of CPI, but that instead it is housing
"costs"? Or what?

--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 10:56 am
From: Curly Surmudgeon

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:19:05 +0000, EskWIRED wrote:

> In misc.survivalism Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySurmudgeon@live.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 02:57:13 +0000, EskWIRED wrote:
>
>> > In misc.survivalism Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySurmudgeon@live.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 21:13:16 +0000, EskWIRED wrote:
>> >
>> >> > In misc.survivalism Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySurmudgeon@live.com>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> >> > You are correct that the raw median average house prices are
>> >> >> >> > not reflected in CPI. I misundersood the reference to house
>> >> >> >> > prices, and took it to mean housing prices.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> Neither are "housing prices" part of the CPI:
>> >
>> > WTF? Did you look below? Do you need this spoon fed to you? You
>> > yourself posted that CPI includes "Housing (rent of primary
>> > residence, owner's equivalent rent, fuel oil, bedroom furniture)"
>
>> Your constant snipping and evasion is morphing the issue.
>
>> Curly Surmudgeon:
>> "House prices" wasn't in the statement to which I responded nor are
>> they a component of official inflation figures.
>
> It has been established that current market prices of hones are not part
> of CPI. Now you say that "housing prices" are not part of CPI.
>
> So again I ask: is this some kind of semantic arguement? Are you sayig
> that "housing prices" are not part of CPI, but that instead it is
> housing "costs"? Or what?

And, again, you're trying to morph the discussion to something other than
your original insult and assertion by snipping and stealth.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is an announcing amnesty for illegal
aliens, including the removal of the border fence!
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/e186213ced1f3b7f?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 3:08 am
From: hpope@lycos.com

On Jan 14, 1:07 am, "R.S." <r...@hickorytech.net> wrote:
> False Bill title does just the Opposite and Crook Senate Leader is
> Responsible for the deception!
>
> S. 9, "Stronger Economy, Stronger Borders Act of 2009" it is neither
> but a stealth trick to Pass an Amnesty Bill by the Old School Insider
> Crook Harry Reid, this guy needs to be booted he's an anti-legal
> Citizen worker shill pupet for Big Business and Cheap Labor.
>
> Will our country remain a sovereign United States of America or become
> another Latin American state?
>
> We are reaching the tipping point in this fight for our country,
> especially in terms of demographic shift, and while we do not have the
> resources of the opposition, we still have the numbers.
>
> Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has fired a shot across the bow by
> introducing S. 9, "Stronger Economy, Stronger Borders Act of 2009".
> The title is misleading—it sounds like it is pro-American worker and
> pro-border enforcement. It is neither. The text is not available yet,
> but Senator Reid's introduction given on the floor of the Senate is an
> announcement of amnesty for illegal aliens, including the removal of
> the border fence!
>
> Suggested actions against S. 9 will come in the days and months ahead.
> The timing is dependent on the determination and arrogance of the open
> borders' politicians in our Executive Branch and Congress to move this
> reprehensible agenda forward.
>
> One of our immediate concerns is the United States government's total
> disregard for the unemployed American worker! Our elected officials
> have shown by their inaction that they do not care about job loss or
> the suppression of the wages of American workers, from the unskilled
> to the highly technical.
>
> The government of the United States is continuing to allow 138,000
> foreign workers into this country every month on work Visas!
>
> The continued importation of foreign labor, the failure to secure our
> borders and to enforce immigration law in this economic crisis is
> egregious. The fault lies with the globalists, the business lobby, the
> open borders lobby, radical ethnocentric groups and academia along
> with their bought and paid for elected representatives in the United
> States government.
>
> We are partially to blame because many of us have become complacent
> bystanders to the destruction of our nation.
>
> The importation of foreign labor is the subject of our action alert
> below.
>
> I hope you find the reading informative and if you are so moved,
> please post your comments and any additional information you want to
> impart to readers of the Forum. And, please use the Digest and Forum
> to reach family, friends and acquaintances in spreading the word about
> our corrupt, non-representative United States government.
>
> God Bless and Keep up the fight!
>
> Jason Mrochek
> Co-founder & Executive Director
> FIRE Coalitionhttp://www.FIRECoalition.com
>
> Why should you be concerned about the illegal alien invasion?
>
> Take 30 Minutes and find out:http://www.FIRECoalition.com/30minuteeducation
>
> Network with other patriots athttp://forum.FIRECoalition.com
>
> Read my blog athttp://www.FIRECoalition.com/blog
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Support American Workers:
>
> Tips for informing our Senators and Representatives of our positions:
>
> An email and a fax are fine, but nothing beats personally calling our
> federal and state offices for a little one-on-one with an aide. This
> guarantees your concerns will be heard, not deleted or shredded.
>
> Be very polite and engaging. Pretend you are talking to your children,
> your grandchildren, a niece or nephew or a younger friend. These aides
> most usually in their early 20's!!!
>
> Be well-informed and ask "did you know" or "do you think Congressman
> ____ or Senator ________ is aware" questions.
>
> Do not express anger! This only gives them an excuse not to listen.
>
> Possible talking points when calling the offices of your United States
> Congressman and your two Senators:
>
> Pleasantly inform them that you are an American citizen living in the
> state or district where their bosses were elected to office by those
> American citizens they swore an oath to represent.
> Ask them why American jobs are not being protected from the monthly
> importation of 140,000 foreign workers and unknown quantities of
> illegal aliens. (Source: The Department of Homeland statistical data)
> Ask them if Senator _____ or Congressman________ would like to comment
> on why American jobs are going to foreign nationals over United States
> citizens.
> Ask them if they or other staff members know that based on the number
> of jobless claims, it appears that in excess of 2 million American
> jobs were lost in 2008.
> Ask them if the Senator or Congressman they work for understands that
> the American people deserve to have the jobs that American businesses,
> farmers and other American institutions are giving to foreign visa
> holders and even illegal aliens.
> Thank them for their time in listening to you and tell them you,
> friends and family will be watching for Senator _______ or Congressman
> _________ to introduce and/or vocally support legislation that ends
> the importation of the foreign laborers…the labor that keeps Americans
> jobless and suppresses Americans wages.
> Inform them that now, more than ever, is the time for enforcement of
> immigration laws. No amnesties are acceptable and would be great and
> permanent harm to the sovereignty of America.
>
> CAPITOL SWITCH BOARD NUMBER: 202.224.3121
>
> OTHER MEANS OF COMMUNICATING AND DIRECT LINES:http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/congdir.tt
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Background information on the failure of our government to protect
> American jobs in favor of cheap foreign labor, even as jobless claims
> rise:
>
> Our Urgent Request of Obama -- Stop Importing Foreign Workers, by Roy
> Beck
> (http://www.firecoalition.com/forum/yaf_postst3986_Our-Urgent-Request-
> of-Obama--Stop-Importing-Foreign-Workers.aspx)
>
> Excerpt:
> The Department of Homeland Security's most-recent-year data show that
> the U.S. granted:
> 744,531 permanent green cards to working-age adults ages 20-64, and
> 912,735 new employment authorization documents to temporary foreign
> workers…
> That adds up to an annual rate of 1,657,266 new foreign workers (not
> counting illegal workers) added to our economy. There are no
> indications that the pace has slackened.
> Source: (http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/LPR07.shtm
>
> Foreign-Worker Arrivals Continue as Jobless Claims Rise to 26-Year
> High
> (http://www.firecoalition.com/forum/yaf_postst3827_ForeignWorker-
> Arrivals-Continue-as-Jobless-Claims-Rise-to-26Year-High.aspx)
>
> Excerpt:
> The United States will import another 140,000 foreign workers this
> month despite worsening jobless numbers.
> With the new numbers, job losses for the year [2008] are expected to
> exceed two million
>
> Last-minute changes to farm worker program raise groups' ire
> (http://www.firecoalition.com/forum/yaf_postst4052_Lastminute-changes-
> to-farm-worker-program-raise-groups-ire.aspx
>
> Excerpt:
> Farm worker advocates and opponents of illegal immigration are
> blasting one of President George W. Bush's "midnight regulations" that
> will make it easier for agricultural employers to hire foreign
> workers.
>
> ...
>
> Mehlman said that by continuously adding foreign workers to their
> employment rolls and paying them according to the prevailing wage,
> employers undercut the need for domestic workers by relying on a
> steady stream of immigrants who can be easily replaced if they
> complain. Employers' actions also cap wages at such low rates that
> Americans can't compete for agricultural jobs…
>
> H-1B's Negative Impact Goes Beyond IT and into Science and Academia
> (http://www.firecoalition.com/forum/yaf_postst4072_H1Bs-Negative-
> Impact-Goes-Beyond-IT-and-into-Science-and-Academia.aspx
>
> Excerpt:
> …Bottom line: The H-1B program is being used in academia for cheap
> labor, just like in IT. It's ruining the careers and lives of people
> like "Otto B. Doing-Better," even to the point of forcing a Nobel-
> level researcher into blue collar work to earn a living. And all this
> is occurring unseen behind the hype that "Johnnie can't do science"
> and the U.S. is on the verge of losing its technical edge…
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Noteworthy news stories on immigration for the week of January 3, 2009—
> January 9, 2009
>
> Amnesty Bill Introduced: "Stronger Economy, Stronger Borders Act of
> 2009" SESBA
>
> Senator Harry Reid introduced S. 9 (the text of the bill is not
> available yet)
>
> Excerpt of comments by Senator Reid on the Senate floor:
>
> Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, as we begin the 111th Congress, we will try,
> once again, to enact comprehensive immigration reforms that have
> eluded us in the past several years. With an administration that
> understands the critical necessity of meaningful reform and that
> understands the policy failures of the last 8 years, I am hopeful that
> the new Congress can finally enact legislation consistent with our
> history as a nation of immigrants…more…
>
> http://www.firecoalition.com/forum/yaf_postst4010_Amnesty-Bill-Introd...
>
> Ruling Says Deportation Cases May Not Be Appealed Over Lawyer Errors
>
> The Bush administration has issued a ruling that illegal immigrants do
> not have a constitutional right to effective legal representation in
> deportation hearings, closing off one of the most common avenues for
> appealing deportation decisions…
>
> http://www.firecoalition.com/forum/yaf_postst4044_Ruling-Says-Deporta...
>
> New Report: U.S. Infrastructure Overwhelmed by Influx of Immigrants
>
> $1.6 Trillion Needed to Repair and Maintain Nation's Hospitals,
> Schools, Parks, Water Supply, Bridges, and Basic Infrastructures
>
> WASHINGTON, D.C.- Immigration policies need to go hand-in-hand with
> decisions to repair the deteriorating U.S. infrastructure, according
> to a unique new report ...
>
> read more »

Note the sources to contact your folks in Congress. Senator Reid is a
fanatical Morman who feels everyone should
come to America and be "converted".

mitch

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Batteries: Pays to shop around
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/5e9668558de59929?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 3:22 am
From: clams_casino

me@privacy.net wrote:

>clams_casino <PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Big lot batteries may not be all that fresh.
>>
>>
>
>Well the ones my local Big Lot had were Kodak brand and
>had use by dates of 2013 or so
>
>

Considering the crap cameras & printers that Kodak has been trying to
sell over the past 20 years (the company is down to about 15k employees
from over 100k perhaps 10 years ago), I'd be very leery of buying any
product with their name on it.

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 9:29 am
From: me@privacy.net

clams_casino <PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:

>Considering the crap cameras & printers that Kodak has been trying to
>sell over the past 20 years (the company is down to about 15k employees
>from over 100k perhaps 10 years ago), I'd be very leery of buying any
>product with their name on it.

Hmmm.... OK

Are their printers really crap as well? I'm in market
for printer and looked at Kodak printers based on their
claims of cheap ink... but if printer crap that's no
good either

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 9:30 am
From: me@privacy.net

clams_casino <PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:

>>Well the ones my local Big Lot had were Kodak brand and
>>had use by dates of 2013 or so
>>
>>
>
>Considering the crap cameras & printers that Kodak has been trying to
>sell over the past 20 years (the company is down to about 15k employees
>from over 100k perhaps 10 years ago), I'd be very leery of buying any
>product with their name on it.

I just assumed the Kodak batteries were made by
Duracell or Energizer as I didn't think Kodak had a
facility to make their own batteries. yes?

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Most effective grease removal from clothes?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/50e041b05a439b9e?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 3:53 am
From: William Cutler

On Sun, 11 Jan 2009 04:08:19 -0800 (PST), brassplyer
<brassplyer@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Grease stains seem to be really tenacious. Thinking primarily
>petroleum-based grease - automotive etc. Anyone found a product or
>combination of products a/or methods that's really effective getting
>it out without damaging the cloth?

Go to your Supermarket laudry detergent section and look for
"Degreaser"! Rub it on the grease and through the item in the washing
machine...

Bill

==============================================================================
TOPIC: How Not to Get a Construction Loan
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/d367573846de7521?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 5:12 am
From: Napoleon

On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 23:38:32 GMT, "Reggie" <Reggie@wantsnospam.com>
wrote:

>you plan on taking out a loan and having initial funds flow from you TO the
>bank? I wouldn't loan you money either!
>

I have no idea what you're talking about. Yes, that's right banks only
lend 100-120% of the total money. Yes, that's right. They need no
downpayment. Yes, that's right. Banks only prefer to lend to people
with no equity and the need for ALL the cash from the bank. Yes,
that's right.

You must live in California or Nevada or one of the other states that
live in the la-la land of real estate.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 7:33 am
From: Larry Caldwell

In article <o19pm4d9cuh0r2ahpue2718q5lj5i76mtm@4ax.com>, anarch@
666yes.net (Napoleon) says...
> How not to get a new construction loan (for the frugal):
>
> 10. Live in America.
> 9. Have more than 50% equity to put down.
> 8. Have an above 800 credit score.
> 7. Have no debts.
> 6. Own your own land free and clear.
> 5. Plan to build a modest house - not a McMansion.
> 4. Plan to build on your own lot - not a McMansion subdivision.
> 3. Build a modular home through an established company.
> 2. Live in an area of the country where housing prices never
> overinflated and there are very few foreclosures.
>
> AND THE NUMBER ONE REASON:
>
> 1. Go to your local bank which is waiting for the next TARP handout
> and doesn't need your MEASLY MONEY.

There's your problem. You went to a bank. Banks don't have any money.
Go to a mortgage broker and you will get your loan in short order.

--
For email, replace firstnamelastinitial
with my first name and last initial.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Sales Taxes on Web Purchases
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/9ed7426ab3321f7d?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 8:41 am
From: "h"

"Shawn Hirn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-701E8C.00005614012009@adsl-99-136-209-74.dsl.tpkaks.sbcglobal.net...
> In article <h2qhm4p8m27egbepgmmrui0vfo0ah74ioe@4ax.com>,
> Vic Smith <thismailautodeleted@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Just did a yearly T-Mobile refill.
>> Noticed my $10.00 refill cost $11.01, which reflects the local sales
>> tax rate. Cook County, IL.
>> The refills weren't taxed a couple years ago.
>> Seems some web purchases add the tax, others don't.
>> Anybody know what's going on with this?
>> Wonder how it will affect web sales.
>
> Its very simple. If a merchant has a physical presence in your
> community, it is required by local law to charge sales tax, even for web
> purchases.

Actually, it's the state, not just the community. Because I am physically
located in NY I have to charge sales tax on any web purchase shipped to any
NY address, not just the ones shipped or picked up locally. However, I
charge no sales tax on any purchases shipped to other states or other
countries.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 1:45 pm
From: Seerialmom

On Jan 10, 10:42 am, Vic Smith <thismailautodele...@comcast.net>
wrote:
> Just did a yearly T-Mobile refill.
> Noticed my $10.00 refill cost $11.01, which reflects the local sales
> tax rate. Cook County, IL.
> The refills weren't taxed a couple years ago.
> Seems some web purchases add the tax, others don't.
> Anybody know what's going on with this?
> Wonder how it will affect web sales.
>
> --Vic

At this point it usually depends on where you live and whether the
company has a "presence" in your state (if they have brick/mortar
stores). States are pushing for sales tax collection for web sales
because they're hurting for tax revenue. In California "technically"
you're supposed to claim "use tax" on your taxes if you buy something
outside of the state, too (but who keeps track when you pay cash just
over the border in Oregon?).

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Frugal changes that save more than $100 per month
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/07f36911318eebe4?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 9:00 am
From: Too_Many_Tools

We all see suggestions that others offer that save a dime here, a
nickel there.

Well what frugal changes have you made that save at least a $100 a
month?

TMT

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 11:34 am
From: Evelyn Leeper

Too_Many_Tools wrote:
> We all see suggestions that others offer that save a dime here, a
> nickel there.
>
> Well what frugal changes have you made that save at least a $100 a
> month?

It's hard to make changes to save that much when you've been frugal all
along. :-)

--
Evelyn C. Leeper
I know you can't live on hope alone but without hope
life is not worth living. -Harvey Milk

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 1:24 pm
From: skarkada@gmail.com

TMT, out lifestyle is frugal. We haven't made many recent frugal
changes that have saved us $100 per month.

Most recent changes:
Switched the cell phone to pay-as-you-go service.
Eat out less often. (Less than once a week.)

Never started:
Buying breakfast
Buying lunch
Eating out more than twice a week
Smoking
Starbucks
Buying a car when the old car is still running fine
Borrowing / Paying interest on credit
Ball games, concerts, movies, etc.
Living beyond our means

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 2:25 pm
From: "h"

"Evelyn Leeper" <eleeper@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:496e3e2d$0$14297$607ed4bc@cv.net...
> Too_Many_Tools wrote:
>> We all see suggestions that others offer that save a dime here, a
>> nickel there.
>>
>> Well what frugal changes have you made that save at least a $100 a
>> month?
>
> It's hard to make changes to save that much when you've been frugal all
> along. :-)
>

Agreed. I was reading an article in the local fishwrap about how to "be more
frugal". They offered 20 things you could either cut out or cut back on to
save money. We don't have/do/spend money on any of them. They also suggested
dropping the thermostat to 65 in winter and 80 in summer. I laughed out
loud. I've never set it above 55 in my life and we've never had AC in the
house.

We're at a loss as to what else we can cut.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Cheap doesn't mean frugal.
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/236d9191f133039a?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 10:00 am
From: blake murphy

On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 14:01:01 -0500, cybercat wrote:

> "Kate Connally" <connally@pitt.edu> wrote
>> Well, it's still less scrap for the stockpot than with a whole
>> chicken. And then you don't have to figure out what to do with
>> the damned breasts. ;-)
>>
>
> We have that Jack Sprat thing going on around here, only with light and dark
> meat.

a match made in heaven, or at least close by.

your pal,
blake

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 12:56 pm
From: "cybercat"

"blake murphy" <blakepmNOTTHIS@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:o9ejjpr1kckf.1lwuv9h7x3r6z$.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 14:01:01 -0500, cybercat wrote:
>
>> "Kate Connally" <connally@pitt.edu> wrote
>>> Well, it's still less scrap for the stockpot than with a whole
>>> chicken. And then you don't have to figure out what to do with
>>> the damned breasts. ;-)
>>>
>>
>> We have that Jack Sprat thing going on around here, only with light and
>> dark
>> meat.
>
> a match made in heaven, or at least close by.
>

Not quite, sugar britches. My heart belongs to you alone. Only my white meat
goes to my husband.

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 12:56 pm
From: James

On Jan 12, 10:53 pm, Evelyn Leeper <elee...@optonline.net> wrote:
> James wrote:
> > On Jan 12, 6:11 pm, Evelyn Leeper <elee...@optonline.net> wrote:
> >> James wrote:
> >>> I bought 4 chickens because they were on sale for 69 cents a pound.
> >>> Now I like dark meat better and can get leg quarters for the same
> >>> price. So I got the better deal but will probably enjoy it less.
> >> Make soup. Or serve them when you have company who like white meat.
>
> >> One question regarding "the same price": do you get the same percentage
> >> of meat from leg quarters as from whole chickens?
>
> > Leg quarters for 69 cents a pound.
>
> No, my question i, if you remove all the bones and waste from four
> pounds of whole chicken, do you get the same amount of meat as from four
> pounds of leg quarters?
>
> --
> Evelyn C. Leeper
> Be braver. You cannot cross a chasm in two small jumps.

Don't have the equipment to measure. Only 2 bones on a leg quarter
but with the whole chick you got the back and neck bones as well as
the ribs.

Since roasters are more expensive per pound does that mean % of meat
is higher than a fryer?

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 3:46 pm
From: lenona321@yahoo.com

Here's a chart I posted a few years ago:

I was trying to weed out some out-of-date books I never use and as I
flipped through the 1982 "Information Age Sourcebook" (no mention of
computers in THAT book) I found this chart, which might be quite
useful!

"Based on yields of cooked chicken.....the uncooked chicken weighed
2.75 lbs."

If a whole fryer costs 49 cents/lb:

Breast half without rib should cost 67

" " WITH rib should cost 65

Thighs should cost 55

Thighs & drumsticks should cost 53

Drumsticks should cost 50

Wings should cost 39.

If the fryer costs 51 cents/lb, prices are 70, 67, 57, 55, 53, 41.

Fryer at 53 cents: 72, 70, 59, 57, 55, 43.

Fryer at 55 cents: 75, 73, 61, 59, 57, 44.

" " 57 " : 78, 75, 63, 61, 59, 46.

" " 59 " : 80, 78, 66, 63, 61, 48.

" " 61 " : 83, 81, 68, 66, 63, 49.

" " 63 " : 86, 83, 70, 68, 65, 51.

That's not the entire chart, but I hope it will do. Note that the
ratios change a bit as you move down the chart.

(end)

Here are some responses to that:

http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/fe06ce5e86022833/b4b2083b4d77f0cf?lnk=gst&q=lenona+chicken+chart#b4b2083b4d77f0cf

Lenona.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Extra Income Ideas - Parts 1-3
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/aa3dded340bc8934?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 10:09 am
From: Cheapo Groovo

Short videos that look at some alternative income streams

http://revver.com/video/1359372/extra-income-ideas/

http://revver.com/video/1366518/extra-income-ideas-part-2/

http://revver.com/video/1423637/extra-income-ideas-part-3/

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Cheap things to do with your kids
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/5687c834d5e2ac40?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 12:47 pm
From: lenona321@yahoo.com

On Jan 12, 8:59 am, OldRoads <oldro...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
> Other ideas??

Old post of mine:

I thought I'd post this because I've forgotten how to play most kids'
games that don't involve toys, and one hears about some of these only
in books such as the "Little House" series and "Pippi
Longstocking." (Namely, Run Sheep Run and Drop the Handkerchief,
which, I found, is similar to Duck Duck Goose.) While I remember Red
Rover, Ali Baba, Marco Polo, Duck Duck Goose and maybe a few others,
most of these I don't know - and I didn't know anything about musical
chairs until my teens!

http://www.gameskidsplay.net/games/xtra_games.htm

Enjoy it!

Lenona.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: real estate
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/c83896877cf66008?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 3:00 pm
From: im.1.maxaluminum@xoxy.net

Steve Daniels wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:02:38 -0800 (PST), against all advice,
> something compelled thackere@gmail.com, to say:
>
> > why would a judge tell 1 lady, you can't take a mans inheritence, and
> > tell the sistern in law you can take everything he owns?
>
>
> The sister in law gives better blowjobs.
>
>
>
Like the bad girl said to the good girl, "Is it hard to be good?"
She answered, "It has to be hard to be good."

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Divorcing husband demands kidney back from cheating wife (or payment)
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/a04de9d37a2e6d87?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 14 2009 3:37 pm
From: lenona321@yahoo.com

On Jan 8, 9:00 pm, lenona...@yahoo.com wrote:

>
> I expect this to show up in GlennSacks.com soon, mainly because while
> it MAY be safe to say that Batista doesn't really expect any judge to
> take him seriously, at least he's willing to go public and risk having
> most strangers laugh at him in exchange for a lot of sympathy from
> divorced dads - and Sacks tends to admire men like that.

And so it did.

http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=3185#comments

You have to scroll upwards to see Sacks' article. Sacks discussed the
case on TV, on Fox & Friends.

To read the 73 comments in order, click on "Show all."

Lenona.

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

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

Wednesday, January 14, 2009

misc.consumers.frugal-living - 25 new messages in 12 topics - digest

No comments: