http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* What if climate change is a big hoax and we make a better world for nothing?
- 11 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/01e8327e9564d243?hl=en
* Could we be more wasteful? - 7 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/66ac567f385d4667?hl=en
* Social security - 7 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/d88079bb19fcaa9a?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: What if climate change is a big hoax and we make a better world for
nothing?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/01e8327e9564d243?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 11 ==
Date: Sat, Apr 3 2010 11:11 pm
From: "TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu"
(I took the title from a cartoon at the link below)
Yep, that's the irony of it. We don't even have to sacrifice that much
just to play it safe. Just ride a bike or be vegetarian perhaps. Why
so much resistance to change?
I guess that's too threatening to the fat lazy couch potatoes... ;)
'Featured as part of the cover story of Scientific American magazine's
April issue, which hit newsstands on March 24, U of M professor Jon
Foley makes the case for why we need to pay more attention to all
environmental processes that contribute to the Earth's health. In his
article, "Boundaries for a Healthy Planet," he argues that while
climate change gets ample attention, species loss and nitrogen
pollution exceed safe limits by greater degrees. In addition, other
environmental processes such as ocean acidification and stratospheric
ozone depletion are also moving toward dangerous thresholds.'
http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2010/04/is_earth_past_the_tipping_poin.php
------------------------------------------------
THE WISE TIBETAN MONKEY SAYS
"Being frugal and smart is GOOD FOR YOU and others"
http://webspawner.com/users/BANANAREVOLUTION
== 2 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 12:42 am
From: "Rod Speed"
Just a complete yawn if we do what makes sense.
TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
> (I took the title from a cartoon at the link below)
> Yep, that's the irony of it. We don't even have to sacrifice that much
> just to play it safe. Just ride a bike or be vegetarian perhaps.
Makes a hell of a lot mores sense to use nukes to replace coal fired power stations.
> Why so much resistance to change?
Because the terminally stupid things proposed will fuck the economy, stupid.
> I guess that's too threatening to the fat lazy couch potatoes... ;)
It wouldnt fix the problem.
> 'Featured as part of the cover story of Scientific American magazine's
> April issue, which hit newsstands on March 24, U of M professor Jon
> Foley makes the case for why we need to pay more attention to all
> environmental processes that contribute to the Earth's health.
Then he's a fool. The environment is doing fine.
> In his article, "Boundaries for a Healthy Planet," he argues that
> while climate change gets ample attention, species loss and
> nitrogen pollution exceed safe limits by greater degrees.
Complete and utter drivel.
> In addition, other environmental processes such as ocean acidification and
> stratospheric ozone depletion are also moving toward dangerous thresholds.'
More drivel.
> http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2010/04/is_earth_past_the_tipping_poin.php
== 3 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 8:10 am
From: "TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu"
On Apr 4, 6:02 am, Marvin the Martian <mar...@ontomars.org> wrote:
>
> You're an idiot, because you fell for this stupid scam of global warming.
> So is the author of the blog you read. It is also evidence of idiot
> thinking to say "so what if I lied to get you to do all this stuff, it's
> good for the planet". If your argument was good, why the big damned lies?
> If you lied then, why should you be trusted not to lie about how good it
> is now?! May as well cut your tongue out, as the gift of speech is wasted
> on liars.
>
> And you're an asshole. Only an asshole would expect to impose an
> draconian world government on people and dictate that they can travel no
> father than they can walk and they must be a vegetarian. A person who
> thinks that EVERYONE must live as they do is, by definition, a
> contemptible asshole. You can bike or eat just veggies and I'm fine with
> that, but your attitude to use the government gun to force others to live
> the way YOU dictate is pure asshole.
>
> But at least you're not Al Gore, who tells us to live cold, dark and
> hungry lives while he lives it up in his energy consuming mansion. Now
> that's a fat bastard.
Exactly, I'm not Al Gore, and I'm asking you too much to leave the SUV
home and ride a bike or walk to the market. We basically gave up the
bike as a healthy option (how can it be healthy if you can get
killed), but we walk with a hand cart, some 1/2 mile to the market and
meet people and see the sun and the moon.
In other words, WE ENJOY THE CHANGES however small they can be.
I just wished people were that skeptical of government when they
launch foreign wars and the conquest of space. It costs a lot of
money, and the motivations are doubtful, you know.
But we our common sense tells me that too many people putting out too
much shit, will eventually overrun the balance. It has it many ways
already, as the article says, such in the extinction of species...
The Current Mass Extinction:
Human beings are currently causing the greatest
mass extinction of species since the extinction of
the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. If present trends
continue one half of all species of life on earth will
be extinct in less than 100 years, as a result of
habitat destruction, pollution, invasive species,
and climate change. (For details see links below.)
http://www.well.com/~davidu/extinction.html
Probably you may even have heard of the fisheries crashing and
everything. Your mentality of CONQUEST AND EXPLOITATION is beyond
COMMON SENSE. I think the cage changes our sense of reality. Yes, your
house can be a cage, so is your vehicle.
== 4 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 8:27 am
From: "TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu"
On Apr 4, 12:42 am, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just another SneakySnake.
>
> TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
>
> > (I took the title from a cartoon at the link below)
> > Yep, that's the irony of it. We don't even have to sacrifice that much
> > just to play it safe. Just ride a bike or be vegetarian perhaps.
>
> Makes a hell of a lot mores sense to use nukes to replace coal fired power stations.
No, it makes more sense FOR YOU to make personal responsibility.
Anything the government does is wasteful, don't you say?
>
> > Why so much resistance to change?
>
> Because the terminally stupid things proposed will fuck the economy, stupid.
So the beast we have created is sacred and we can't back down from it
and enjoy the simple happy life again. And what economy? You must mean
China's economy in any case since it was passed to them.
>
> > I guess that's too threatening to the fat lazy couch potatoes... ;)
>
> It wouldnt fix the problem.
>
> > 'Featured as part of the cover story of Scientific American magazine's
> > April issue, which hit newsstands on March 24, U of M professor Jon
> > Foley makes the case for why we need to pay more attention to all
> > environmental processes that contribute to the Earth's health.
>
> Then he's a fool. The environment is doing fine.
Oh, the environment is doing fine. I see WHERE your opposition is
coming from now... You deny the problem, so it's OK to keep being
wasteful.
If we have trashed this country in under 200 years, you shouldn't
underestimate the capacity of 7 billion people to trash the planet.
>
> > In his article, "Boundaries for a Healthy Planet," he argues that
> > while climate change gets ample attention, species loss and
> > nitrogen pollution exceed safe limits by greater degrees.
>
> Complete and utter drivel.
>
> > In addition, other environmental processes such as ocean acidification and
> > stratospheric ozone depletion are also moving toward dangerous thresholds.'
>
> More drivel.
>
> >http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2010/04/is_earth_past_the_tippi...
I see that you consider the extinction of the tiger and the polar bear
drivel. But many people see the fat lazy Americans lifestyle totally
beyond proportion and reason.
Don't you consider it would be nice for me to get on a bike and go to
the natural supermarket, some 15 miles ride? No, I must be content to
be in the *fucking cage* and take and occasional little walk, or drive
another *fucking cage* somewhere...
== 5 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 12:09 pm
From: VFW
In article
<3479ecfb-c0be-43c0-8fa3-5a816d8aacd5@z6g2000yqz.googlegroups.com>,
"TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu"
<comandante.banana@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Apr 4, 12:42 am, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Just another SneakySnake.
> >
> > TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
> >
> > > (I took the title from a cartoon at the link below)
> > > Yep, that's the irony of it. We don't even have to sacrifice that much
> > > just to play it safe. Just ride a bike or be vegetarian perhaps.
> >
> > Makes a hell of a lot mores sense to use nukes to replace coal fired power
> > stations.
>
> No, it makes more sense FOR YOU to make personal responsibility.
> Anything the government does is wasteful, don't you say?
>
> >
> > > Why so much resistance to change?
> >
> > Because the terminally stupid things proposed will fuck the economy,
> > stupid.
>
> So the beast we have created is sacred and we can't back down from it
> and enjoy the simple happy life again. And what economy? You must mean
> China's economy in any case since it was passed to them.
> >
> > > I guess that's too threatening to the fat lazy couch potatoes... ;)
> >
> > It wouldnt fix the problem.
> >
> > > 'Featured as part of the cover story of Scientific American magazine's
> > > April issue, which hit newsstands on March 24, U of M professor Jon
> > > Foley makes the case for why we need to pay more attention to all
> > > environmental processes that contribute to the Earth's health.
> >
> > Then he's a fool. The environment is doing fine.
>
> Oh, the environment is doing fine. I see WHERE your opposition is
> coming from now... You deny the problem, so it's OK to keep being
> wasteful.
>
> If we have trashed this country in under 200 years, you shouldn't
> underestimate the capacity of 7 billion people to trash the planet.
>
> >
> > > In his article, "Boundaries for a Healthy Planet," he argues that
> > > while climate change gets ample attention, species loss and
> > > nitrogen pollution exceed safe limits by greater degrees.
> >
> > Complete and utter drivel.
> >
> > > In addition, other environmental processes such as ocean acidification
> > > and
> > > stratospheric ozone depletion are also moving toward dangerous
> > > thresholds.'
> >
> > More drivel.
> >
> > >http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2010/04/is_earth_past_the_tippi...
>
> I see that you consider the extinction of the tiger and the polar bear
> drivel. But many people see the fat lazy Americans lifestyle totally
> beyond proportion and reason.
>
> Don't you consider it would be nice for me to get on a bike and go to
> the natural supermarket, some 15 miles ride? No, I must be content to
> be in the *fucking cage* and take and occasional little walk, or drive
> another *fucking cage* somewhere...
but in the END, when all was said and done... More was said than done.
and the brighter side of this (for the planet) is that the Extinction of
the humans is inevitable. The Earth will survive this parasite and heal.
Not the way it was but.....
Hey, enjoy the moment!
--
Money; What a Concept !
== 6 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 1:32 pm
From: "TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu"
On Apr 4, 12:09 pm, VFW <george...@toast.net> wrote:
> > Don't you consider it would be nice for me to get on a bike and go to
> > the natural supermarket, some 15 miles ride? No, I must be content to
> > be in the *fucking cage* and take and occasional little walk, or drive
> > another *fucking cage* somewhere...
>
> but in the END, when all was said and done... More was said than done.
>
> and the brighter side of this (for the planet) is that the Extinction of
> the humans is inevitable. The Earth will survive this parasite and heal.
> Not the way it was but.....
> Hey, enjoy the moment!
> --
You know, I thought the same thing when I went out today and watched
over the polluted yet beautiful Biscayne Bay. Lots of motorboats and
jet skis where there should be sailboats and canoes. But such is the
predatory nature of us monkeys.
Bicycles riding on sidewalks, but we took the safer path... good old-
fashioned walking, the way it was in our hunter-gatherer past.
But when all is inevitable and temporal why even bother about
terrorism. Why not let the world end with a big bang rather than a
long and painful degradation of the environment? You know, this clip
says a lot about our species...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a15KgyXBX24
== 7 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 2:43 pm
From: "TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu"
On Apr 4, 1:35 pm, TheTibetanMonkey <comandante.ban...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> On Apr 4, 12:09 pm, VFW <george...@toast.net> wrote:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a15KgyXBX24
I was scanning through the comments above and this one caught my
attention...
"All great truths begin as blasphemies" ~George Bernard Shaw~
..But then again.. He was just another monkey... =))))
== 8 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 2:51 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
> On Apr 4, 12:42 am, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Just another SneakySnake.
>>
>> TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
>>
>>> (I took the title from a cartoon at the link below)
>>> Yep, that's the irony of it. We don't even have to sacrifice that
>>> much just to play it safe. Just ride a bike or be vegetarian
>>> perhaps.
>>
>> Makes a hell of a lot mores sense to use nukes to replace coal fired
>> power stations.
> No, it makes more sense FOR YOU to make personal responsibility.
Wrong, as always.
> Anything the government does is wasteful, don't you say?
Nope.
>>> Why so much resistance to change?
>> Because the terminally stupid things proposed will fuck the economy, stupid.
> So the beast we have created is sacred
Nope, just works a lot better than all the alternatives, child.
> and we can't back down from it and enjoy the simple happy life again.
I do every day thanks child.
> And what economy?
The one that provided you with what you communicate with, child.
> You must mean China's economy in any case
Nope.
> since it was passed to them.
Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.
>>> I guess that's too threatening to the fat lazy couch potatoes... ;)
>> It wouldnt fix the problem.
>>> 'Featured as part of the cover story of Scientific American
>>> magazine's April issue, which hit newsstands on March 24, U of M
>>> professor Jon
>>> Foley makes the case for why we need to pay more attention to all
>>> environmental processes that contribute to the Earth's health.
>> Then he's a fool. The environment is doing fine.
> Oh, the environment is doing fine.
Yep.
> I see WHERE your opposition is coming from now...
Nope, because you wanked yourself completely blind, child.
You were warned.
You wouldnt listen...
> You deny the problem,
There is no problem, just some fools mindlessly hyperventilating.
Fools have been doing that for countless millennia now, child.
> so it's OK to keep being wasteful.
Yep, you are free to waste countless electrons on your mindless silly shit.
> If we have trashed this country in under 200 years,
Just another of your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasys, child.
> you shouldn't underestimate the capacity of 7 billion people to trash the planet.
Not my problem, child.
>>> In his article, "Boundaries for a Healthy Planet," he argues
>>> that while climate change gets ample attention, species loss
>>> and nitrogen pollution exceed safe limits by greater degrees.
>> Complete and utter drivel.
>>> In addition, other environmental processes such as ocean
>>> acidification and stratospheric ozone depletion are also moving
>>> toward dangerous thresholds.'
>> More drivel.
>>> http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2010/04/is_earth_past_the_tippi...
> I see that you consider the extinction of the tiger and the polar bear drivel.
Just a lie.
> But many people see the fat lazy Americans lifestyle totally beyond proportion and reason.
Then do the decent thing and set fire to yourself in 'protest' or sumfin, child.
> Don't you consider it would be nice for me to get on a bike
> and go to the natural supermarket, some 15 miles ride?
Nope, I'd have to run you over and squash you flat, child.
> No, I must be content to be in the *fucking cage* and take and
> occasional little walk, or drive another *fucking cage* somewhere...
Do the decent thing and set fire to yourself or sumfin, child.
== 9 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 3:24 pm
From: "TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu"
On Apr 4, 2:51 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
>
> > On Apr 4, 12:42 am, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Just another SneakySnake.
>
> >> TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
>
> >>> (I took the title from a cartoon at the link below)
> >>> Yep, that's the irony of it. We don't even have to sacrifice that
> >>> much just to play it safe. Just ride a bike or be vegetarian
> >>> perhaps.
>
> >> Makes a hell of a lot mores sense to use nukes to replace coal fired
> >> power stations.
> > No, it makes more sense FOR YOU to make personal responsibility.
>
> Wrong, as always.
>
> > Anything the government does is wasteful, don't you say?
>
> Nope.
>
> >>> Why so much resistance to change?
> >> Because the terminally stupid things proposed will fuck the economy, stupid.
> > So the beast we have created is sacred
>
> Nope, just works a lot better than all the alternatives, child.
>
> > and we can't back down from it and enjoy the simple happy life again.
>
> I do every day thanks child.
>
> > And what economy?
>
> The one that provided you with what you communicate with, child.
>
> > You must mean China's economy in any case
>
> Nope.
>
> > since it was passed to them.
>
> Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.
>
> >>> I guess that's too threatening to the fat lazy couch potatoes... ;)
> >> It wouldnt fix the problem.
> >>> 'Featured as part of the cover story of Scientific American
> >>> magazine's April issue, which hit newsstands on March 24, U of M
> >>> professor Jon
> >>> Foley makes the case for why we need to pay more attention to all
> >>> environmental processes that contribute to the Earth's health.
> >> Then he's a fool. The environment is doing fine.
> > Oh, the environment is doing fine.
>
> Yep.
>
> > I see WHERE your opposition is coming from now...
>
> Nope, because you wanked yourself completely blind, child.
>
> You were warned.
>
> You wouldnt listen...
>
> > You deny the problem,
>
> There is no problem, just some fools mindlessly hyperventilating.
>
> Fools have been doing that for countless millennia now, child.
>
> > so it's OK to keep being wasteful.
>
> Yep, you are free to waste countless electrons on your mindless silly shit.
>
> > If we have trashed this country in under 200 years,
>
> Just another of your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasys, child.
>
> > you shouldn't underestimate the capacity of 7 billion people to trash the planet.
>
> Not my problem, child.
>
> >>> In his article, "Boundaries for a Healthy Planet," he argues
> >>> that while climate change gets ample attention, species loss
> >>> and nitrogen pollution exceed safe limits by greater degrees.
> >> Complete and utter drivel.
> >>> In addition, other environmental processes such as ocean
> >>> acidification and stratospheric ozone depletion are also moving
> >>> toward dangerous thresholds.'
> >> More drivel.
> >>>http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2010/04/is_earth_past_the_tippi...
> > I see that you consider the extinction of the tiger and the polar bear drivel.
>
> Just a lie.
>
> > But many people see the fat lazy Americans lifestyle totally beyond proportion and reason.
>
> Then do the decent thing and set fire to yourself in 'protest' or sumfin, child.
>
> > Don't you consider it would be nice for me to get on a bike
> > and go to the natural supermarket, some 15 miles ride?
>
> Nope, I'd have to run you over and squash you flat, child.
>
> > No, I must be content to be in the *fucking cage* and take and
> > occasional little walk, or drive another *fucking cage* somewhere...
>
> Do the decent thing and set fire to yourself or sumfin, child.
I see you DON'T GIVE A SHIT.
Well, it sounds like a prevalent look in the United Selfish of
America. Maybe you supersize everything out of proportion.
Did you see the movie? But when you eat that much shit, you must burn
the calories or you die...
"While examining the influence of the fast food industry, Morgan
Spurlock personally explores the consequences on his health of a diet
of solely McDonald's food for one month."
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0390521/
== 10 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 3:31 pm
From: "TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu"
On Apr 4, 12:51 am, Rupert <rupertmccal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I believe that anthropogenic climate change is taking place, based on
> reports I have heard in the media that that is the consensus among
> climatologists at the moment. I would have to confess that I myself
> have not read a peer-reviewed journal in climate science. Given that I
> have not done so, I would have a hard time refusing to forgive those
> who hold a different view from me, even if I suspect that it might not
> be rationally grounded.
>
> Since I believe that anthropogenic climate change is taking place and
> that it is the developing nations who will suffer the worst effects
> first I do believe that it is a very important moral issue, and that
> in fact the president of Uganda was correct to characterise the
> conduct of the developed nations as "a form of aggression", but I
> would have to confess that I have not yet gotten around to calculating
> my carbon footprint and taking steps to reduce it, although I can at
> least take comfort in the fact that I have made a good start with my
> vegan diet. If this means I am beyond the point of forgiveness then
> that is certainly very sad but there it is.
>
> I'm certainly with you on being concerned about climate change but
> talking about who can and cannot be forgiven is not very productive
> really. The main point is to do what we can to see if the problem can
> be adequately solved. Unfortunately it is quite hard to feel confident
> about that.
It is hard for us who have more of the UNSELFISH GENE to forgive those
who suffer from the SELFISH GENE.
I find them a really despicable character, one step below serial
criminals... After all, serial criminals only kill a handful of
people, unless they are the president of a country.
I just throw shit at them. ;)
== 11 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 6:17 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
> On Apr 4, 2:51 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
>>
>>> On Apr 4, 12:42 am, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Just another SneakySnake.
>>
>>>> TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
>>
>>>>> (I took the title from a cartoon at the link below)
>>>>> Yep, that's the irony of it. We don't even have to sacrifice that
>>>>> much just to play it safe. Just ride a bike or be vegetarian
>>>>> perhaps.
>>
>>>> Makes a hell of a lot mores sense to use nukes to replace coal
>>>> fired
>>>> power stations.
>>> No, it makes more sense FOR YOU to make personal responsibility.
>>
>> Wrong, as always.
>>
>>> Anything the government does is wasteful, don't you say?
>>
>> Nope.
>>
>>>>> Why so much resistance to change?
>>>> Because the terminally stupid things proposed will fuck the
>>>> economy, stupid.
>>> So the beast we have created is sacred
>>
>> Nope, just works a lot better than all the alternatives, child.
>>
>>> and we can't back down from it and enjoy the simple happy life
>>> again.
>>
>> I do every day thanks child.
>>
>>> And what economy?
>>
>> The one that provided you with what you communicate with, child.
>>
>>> You must mean China's economy in any case
>>
>> Nope.
>>
>>> since it was passed to them.
>>
>> Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.
>>
>>>>> I guess that's too threatening to the fat lazy couch potatoes...
>>>>> ;)
>>>> It wouldnt fix the problem.
>>>>> 'Featured as part of the cover story of Scientific American
>>>>> magazine's April issue, which hit newsstands on March 24, U of M
>>>>> professor Jon
>>>>> Foley makes the case for why we need to pay more attention to all
>>>>> environmental processes that contribute to the Earth's health.
>>>> Then he's a fool. The environment is doing fine.
>>> Oh, the environment is doing fine.
>>
>> Yep.
>>
>>> I see WHERE your opposition is coming from now...
>>
>> Nope, because you wanked yourself completely blind, child.
>>
>> You were warned.
>>
>> You wouldnt listen...
>>
>>> You deny the problem,
>>
>> There is no problem, just some fools mindlessly hyperventilating.
>>
>> Fools have been doing that for countless millennia now, child.
>>
>>> so it's OK to keep being wasteful.
>>
>> Yep, you are free to waste countless electrons on your mindless
>> silly shit.
>>
>>> If we have trashed this country in under 200 years,
>>
>> Just another of your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasys, child.
>>
>>> you shouldn't underestimate the capacity of 7 billion people to
>>> trash the planet.
>>
>> Not my problem, child.
>>
>>>>> In his article, "Boundaries for a Healthy Planet," he argues
>>>>> that while climate change gets ample attention, species loss
>>>>> and nitrogen pollution exceed safe limits by greater degrees.
>>>> Complete and utter drivel.
>>>>> In addition, other environmental processes such as ocean
>>>>> acidification and stratospheric ozone depletion are also moving
>>>>> toward dangerous thresholds.'
>>>> More drivel.
>>>>> http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2010/04/is_earth_past_the_tippi...
>>> I see that you consider the extinction of the tiger and the polar
>>> bear drivel.
>>
>> Just a lie.
>>
>>> But many people see the fat lazy Americans lifestyle totally beyond
>>> proportion and reason.
>>
>> Then do the decent thing and set fire to yourself in 'protest' or
>> sumfin, child.
>>
>>> Don't you consider it would be nice for me to get on a bike
>>> and go to the natural supermarket, some 15 miles ride?
>>
>> Nope, I'd have to run you over and squash you flat, child.
>>
>>> No, I must be content to be in the *fucking cage* and take and
>>> occasional little walk, or drive another *fucking cage* somewhere...
>>
>> Do the decent thing and set fire to yourself or sumfin, child.
>
> I see you DON'T GIVE A SHIT.
>
> Well, it sounds like a prevalent look in the United Selfish of
> America. Maybe you supersize everything out of proportion.
Nothing to do with me, boy.
> Did you see the movie?
Nope, dont bother with that sort of mindless silly shit.
> But when you eat that much shit, you must burn the calories or you die...
Wrong, as always.
> "While examining the influence of the fast food industry,
> Morgan Spurlock personally explores the consequences
> on his health of a diet of solely McDonald's food for one month."
> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0390521/
Just another completely mindless steaming turd.
Right up your alley no doubt.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Could we be more wasteful?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/66ac567f385d4667?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 12:37 am
From: "Rod Speed"
TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
> On Apr 3, 11:06 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 3, 5:40 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Apr 3, 11:23 am, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> ccar...@new.rr.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Apr 2, 5:03 pm, "TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana
>>>>>>> Kung-Fu" <nolionnoprob...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I'm not going to ask the reverse question because I know that
>>>>>>>> we can easily be more frugal (hey, ride a bicycle or walk to
>>>>>>>> the market), but I can't see how we could more wasteful.
>>>>>>>> Everywhere I turn I see a competition for the bigger car, the
>>>>>>>> bigger boat, and the heat is on the small fish that dare to
>>>>>>>> swim around.
>>
>>>>>>>> In other words, EVERYBODY WANTS TO BE THEBIG FISH! The stats
>>>>>>>> show America leading the field vs. Japan and Germany by
>>>>>>>> something like 2 or 3 to 1 in energy efficiency. Hey, we are
>>>>>>>> #1!
>>
>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>>>>>>> THE WISE TIBETAN MONKEY SAYS
>>
>>>>>>>> "Don't be a stupid monkey trying to be a lion"
>>
>>>>>>>> http://webspawner.com/users/BANANAREVOLUTION
>>>>>>> I've been thinking of ways to reduce my waste.
>>
>>>>>> The best way to do that is to hang yourself with some
>>>>>> used rope and let your body be used in that corpse farm.
>>
>>>>>>> I want to make my weekly garbage disposal as small as I can.
>>>>>>> This means, try to use non-recyclable, throw-away things as
>>>>>>> little as possible. I've been thinking of growing a beard so I
>>>>>>> could end my shaving
>>>>>>> cream and razor consumption. I'd abstain from deodorant too,
>>>>>>> if I could find a natural way - and a way that wouldn't make
>>>>>>> me look like a hippy - to keep my armpits from stinking.
>>
>>>>>> Just accept the fact that thats natural, stupid.
>>
>>>>>>> TibetanMonkey, thanks for posting this to "frugal living".
>>>>>>> I'm going to check that newsgroup out...
>>
>>>>>> Its pretty dead now.
>>>>> You are such a pessimist.
>>
>>>> You werent here before it died.
>>
>>>>> Civilization is possible.
>>
>>>> No such thing as civilisation in usenet, fool.
>>
>>>> Its the closest thing to anarchy any of use will ever be part of.
>>
>>>>> You are even trying in Iraq and Afghanistan, right?
>>
>>>> Wrong.
>>
>>> Wrong, why?
>>
>> Its wrong because its wrong. I am not trying anything that in Iraq
>> and Afghanistan.
>>
>>> You may call me an optimist, but I believe in the power of Internet
>>> to bring civilization to America.
>>
>> I call you a fool.
>
> Just stay the course until everything falls apart, right?
Nothing is gunna fall apart, you watch.
> Easter Island on a global scale, I guess.
Guess again. Diamond didnt even manage to get Easter Island right.
The problem was imported rats that ate the seeds of their trees.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=www.abc.net.au/rn/counterpoint/stories/2009/2589097.htm%26usg%3DAFQjCNEDVY33b3LFGyNmgGN8ryr4dUnCyw&usg=AFQjCNEpwEfqAqy7L7UJtE_M0tqYLPY-VA
> Or perhaps some nuclear event to prevent us from slow agonizing death.
Just another silly little neurotic fantasy, child.
== 2 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 9:00 am
From: "TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu"
On Apr 4, 5:01 am, Ha Ha Boomer <jboom...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Apr 3, 11:36 pm, TheTibetanMonkey <thetibetanmon...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > I think we are owned by China now. ;)
>
> So you post errouneous nonsence, and answer yourself, taking up our
> bandwith
> with your stupid ideas....
>
> No Body Knows you and your an IDIOT
>
> AH H HA HA HA HA
>
> So, Welcome Home, throw another log on the fire
>
> And Sit on some Banana's
> w
You are wrong, sir. First of all, I sit on my ass. Just like Jesus.
And secondly, if China were to launch a trade war with America... you
will have to eat shit...
"China's commerce minister: U.S. has the most to lose in a trade war"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03
== 3 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 9:03 am
From: "TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu"
On Apr 4, 12:37 am, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Apr 3, 11:06 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
>
> >>> On Apr 3, 5:40 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Apr 3, 11:23 am, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> ccar...@new.rr.com wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Apr 2, 5:03 pm, "TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana
> >>>>>>> Kung-Fu" <nolionnoprob...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> I'm not going to ask the reverse question because I know that
> >>>>>>>> we can easily be more frugal (hey, ride a bicycle or walk to
> >>>>>>>> the market), but I can't see how we could more wasteful.
> >>>>>>>> Everywhere I turn I see a competition for the bigger car, the
> >>>>>>>> bigger boat, and the heat is on the small fish that dare to
> >>>>>>>> swim around.
>
> >>>>>>>> In other words, EVERYBODY WANTS TO BE THEBIG FISH! The stats
> >>>>>>>> show America leading the field vs. Japan and Germany by
> >>>>>>>> something like 2 or 3 to 1 in energy efficiency. Hey, we are
> >>>>>>>> #1!
>
> >>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> >>>>>>>> THE WISE TIBETAN MONKEY SAYS
>
> >>>>>>>> "Don't be a stupid monkey trying to be a lion"
>
> >>>>>>>>http://webspawner.com/users/BANANAREVOLUTION
> >>>>>>> I've been thinking of ways to reduce my waste.
>
> >>>>>> The best way to do that is to hang yourself with some
> >>>>>> used rope and let your body be used in that corpse farm.
>
> >>>>>>> I want to make my weekly garbage disposal as small as I can.
> >>>>>>> This means, try to use non-recyclable, throw-away things as
> >>>>>>> little as possible. I've been thinking of growing a beard so I
> >>>>>>> could end my shaving
> >>>>>>> cream and razor consumption. I'd abstain from deodorant too,
> >>>>>>> if I could find a natural way - and a way that wouldn't make
> >>>>>>> me look like a hippy - to keep my armpits from stinking.
>
> >>>>>> Just accept the fact that thats natural, stupid.
>
> >>>>>>> TibetanMonkey, thanks for posting this to "frugal living".
> >>>>>>> I'm going to check that newsgroup out...
>
> >>>>>> Its pretty dead now.
> >>>>> You are such a pessimist.
>
> >>>> You werent here before it died.
>
> >>>>> Civilization is possible.
>
> >>>> No such thing as civilisation in usenet, fool.
>
> >>>> Its the closest thing to anarchy any of use will ever be part of.
>
> >>>>> You are even trying in Iraq and Afghanistan, right?
>
> >>>> Wrong.
>
> >>> Wrong, why?
>
> >> Its wrong because its wrong. I am not trying anything that in Iraq
> >> and Afghanistan.
>
> >>> You may call me an optimist, but I believe in the power of Internet
> >>> to bring civilization to America.
>
> >> I call you a fool.
>
> > Just stay the course until everything falls apart, right?
>
> Nothing is gunna fall apart, you watch.
I've been watching the depletion of the jungles and the oceans.
>
> > Easter Island on a global scale, I guess.
>
> Guess again. Diamond didnt even manage to get Easter Island right.
> The problem was imported rats that ate the seeds of their trees.http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=www.abc.net.au/rn/counterpoint/stori...
>
> > Or perhaps some nuclear event to prevent us from slow agonizing death.
>
> Just another silly little neurotic fantasy, child.
Oh, it's only a nightmare. Never be prepared for something, whether
it's climate change or hurricanes or earthquakes or terrorism.
Chill out, and tune out.
== 4 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 2:42 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
> On Apr 4, 12:37 am, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 3, 11:06 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Apr 3, 5:40 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> On Apr 3, 11:23 am, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> ccar...@new.rr.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Apr 2, 5:03 pm, "TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana
>>>>>>>>> Kung-Fu" <nolionnoprob...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I'm not going to ask the reverse question because I know that
>>>>>>>>>> we can easily be more frugal (hey, ride a bicycle or walk to
>>>>>>>>>> the market), but I can't see how we could more wasteful.
>>>>>>>>>> Everywhere I turn I see a competition for the bigger car, the
>>>>>>>>>> bigger boat, and the heat is on the small fish that dare to
>>>>>>>>>> swim around.
>>
>>>>>>>>>> In other words, EVERYBODY WANTS TO BE THEBIG FISH! The stats
>>>>>>>>>> show America leading the field vs. Japan and Germany by
>>>>>>>>>> something like 2 or 3 to 1 in energy efficiency. Hey, we are
>>>>>>>>>> #1!
>>
>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>>>>>>>>> THE WISE TIBETAN MONKEY SAYS
>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Don't be a stupid monkey trying to be a lion"
>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://webspawner.com/users/BANANAREVOLUTION
>>>>>>>>> I've been thinking of ways to reduce my waste.
>>
>>>>>>>> The best way to do that is to hang yourself with some
>>>>>>>> used rope and let your body be used in that corpse farm.
>>
>>>>>>>>> I want to make my weekly garbage disposal as small as I can.
>>>>>>>>> This means, try to use non-recyclable, throw-away things as
>>>>>>>>> little as possible. I've been thinking of growing a beard so I
>>>>>>>>> could end my shaving
>>>>>>>>> cream and razor consumption. I'd abstain from deodorant too,
>>>>>>>>> if I could find a natural way - and a way that wouldn't make
>>>>>>>>> me look like a hippy - to keep my armpits from stinking.
>>
>>>>>>>> Just accept the fact that thats natural, stupid.
>>
>>>>>>>>> TibetanMonkey, thanks for posting this to "frugal living".
>>>>>>>>> I'm going to check that newsgroup out...
>>
>>>>>>>> Its pretty dead now.
>>>>>>> You are such a pessimist.
>>
>>>>>> You werent here before it died.
>>
>>>>>>> Civilization is possible.
>>
>>>>>> No such thing as civilisation in usenet, fool.
>>
>>>>>> Its the closest thing to anarchy any of use will ever be part of.
>>
>>>>>>> You are even trying in Iraq and Afghanistan, right?
>>
>>>>>> Wrong.
>>
>>>>> Wrong, why?
>>
>>>> Its wrong because its wrong. I am not trying anything that in Iraq
>>>> and Afghanistan.
>>
>>>>> You may call me an optimist, but I believe in the power of
>>>>> Internet to bring civilization to America.
>>
>>>> I call you a fool.
>>
>>> Just stay the course until everything falls apart, right?
>>
>> Nothing is gunna fall apart, you watch.
> I've been watching the depletion of the jungles and the oceans.
We got much more dramatic changes in the past due to non man made climate change.
>>> Easter Island on a global scale, I guess.
>> Guess again. Diamond didnt even manage to get Easter Island right.
>> The problem was imported rats that ate the seeds of their trees.
>> http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=www.abc.net.au/rn/counterpoint/stori...
>>> Or perhaps some nuclear event to prevent us from slow agonizing death.
>> Just another silly little neurotic fantasy, child.
> Oh, it's only a nightmare. Never be prepared for something,
No point in preparing for the martians to land either, because they aint gunna.
> whether it's climate change or hurricanes or earthquakes or terrorism.
Those have all happened, stupid.
> Chill out, and tune out.
Hari Krishna.
== 5 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 2:44 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
> On Apr 4, 5:01 am, Ha Ha Boomer <jboom...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Apr 3, 11:36 pm, TheTibetanMonkey <thetibetanmon...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>
>>> I think we are owned by China now. ;)
>>
>> So you post errouneous nonsence, and answer yourself, taking up our
>> bandwith
>> with your stupid ideas....
>>
>> No Body Knows you and your an IDIOT
>>
>> AH H HA HA HA HA
>>
>> So, Welcome Home, throw another log on the fire
>>
>> And Sit on some Banana's
>> w
>
> You are wrong, sir. First of all, I sit on my ass. Just like Jesus.
>
> And secondly, if China were to launch a trade war with America...
> you will have to eat shit...
Nope, they'd lose. They aint that stupid.
> "China's commerce minister: U.S. has the most to lose in a trade war"
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03
Corse he wouldnt be just a tad biased, eh ?
== 6 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 3:46 pm
From: "TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu"
On Apr 4, 2:44 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Apr 4, 5:01 am, Ha Ha Boomer <jboom...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On Apr 3, 11:36 pm, TheTibetanMonkey <thetibetanmon...@yahoo.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >>> I think we are owned by China now. ;)
>
> >> So you post errouneous nonsence, and answer yourself, taking up our
> >> bandwith
> >> with your stupid ideas....
>
> >> No Body Knows you and your an IDIOT
>
> >> AH H HA HA HA HA
>
> >> So, Welcome Home, throw another log on the fire
>
> >> And Sit on some Banana's
> >> w
>
> > You are wrong, sir. First of all, I sit on my ass. Just like Jesus.
>
> > And secondly, if China were to launch a trade war with America...
> > you will have to eat shit...
>
> Nope, they'd lose. They aint that stupid.
Maybe America is stupid in putting too much pressure on them. But most
everybody that feels powerful gets arrogant.
>
> > "China's commerce minister: U.S. has the most to lose in a trade war"
> >http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03
>
> Corse he wouldnt be just a tad biased, eh ?
They control the manufacturing process, so how can America ever go on
a diet without indulging in overconsumption? They would win.
== 7 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 6:20 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
> On Apr 4, 2:44 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 4, 5:01 am, Ha Ha Boomer <jboom...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> On Apr 3, 11:36 pm, TheTibetanMonkey <thetibetanmon...@yahoo.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>
>>>>> I think we are owned by China now. ;)
>>
>>>> So you post errouneous nonsence, and answer yourself, taking up our
>>>> bandwith
>>>> with your stupid ideas....
>>
>>>> No Body Knows you and your an IDIOT
>>
>>>> AH H HA HA HA HA
>>
>>>> So, Welcome Home, throw another log on the fire
>>
>>>> And Sit on some Banana's
>>>> w
>>
>>> You are wrong, sir. First of all, I sit on my ass. Just like Jesus.
>>
>>> And secondly, if China were to launch a trade war with America...
>>> you will have to eat shit...
>>
>> Nope, they'd lose. They aint that stupid.
>
> Maybe America is stupid in putting too much pressure on them.
It aint putting any pressure on them at all, child.
They know who is funding their immense national debt, even if you dont.
> But most everybody that feels powerful gets arrogant.
Corse you never ever do anything like that, eh child ?
>>> "China's commerce minister: U.S. has the most to lose in a trade
>>> war" http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03
>> Corse he wouldnt be just a tad biased, eh ?
> They control the manufacturing process,
Like hell they do.
> so how can America ever go on a diet without indulging in overconsumption? They would win.
Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Social security
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/d88079bb19fcaa9a?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 4:55 am
From: MAS
I know that, if you're divorced and want to claim SS on your ex-spouse's
record, you need to have been married at least 10 years. Offhand, does
anyone know if the 10-year rule applies if you are still married and you
want to claim on your spouse's record? I can't seem to find that info
on the SS web site. Thanks.
== 2 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 4:18 pm
From: missussex
On Apr 4, 4:55 am, MAS <m...@bbbb.net> wrote:
> I know that, if you're divorced and want to claim SS on your ex-spouse's
> record, you need to have been married at least 10 years. Offhand, does
> anyone know if the 10-year rule applies if you are still married and you
> want to claim on your spouse's record? I can't seem to find that info
> on the SS web site. Thanks.
At full retirement age if your spouse is living you would be entitled
to take a benefit that is 50% of his, or 100% of your own benefit,
whichever is larger. After your husband dies, you can claim a widow's
benefit that is equal to your spouse's benefit.
== 3 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 4:24 pm
From: MAS
On 4/4/2010 7:18 PM, missussex wrote:
> On Apr 4, 4:55 am, MAS<m...@bbbb.net> wrote:
>> I know that, if you're divorced and want to claim SS on your ex-spouse's
>> record, you need to have been married at least 10 years. Offhand, does
>> anyone know if the 10-year rule applies if you are still married and you
>> want to claim on your spouse's record? I can't seem to find that info
>> on the SS web site. Thanks.
>
> At full retirement age if your spouse is living you would be entitled
> to take a benefit that is 50% of his, or 100% of your own benefit,
> whichever is larger. After your husband dies, you can claim a widow's
> benefit that is equal to your spouse's benefit.
Thank you. What I'm asking specifically is does it make any difference
if we have been married less than 10 years (and are still married) when
we reach full retirement age? If so, why would the rules be different
depending on whether you are married or divorced?
== 4 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 5:33 pm
From: Samantha Hill
MAS wrote:
>
> Thank you. What I'm asking specifically is does it make any difference
> if we have been married less than 10 years (and are still married) when
> we reach full retirement age? If so, why would the rules be different
> depending on whether you are married or divorced?
If you are no longer married but were married for more than 10 years,
it's something like a community property thing -- you are eligible by
virtue of having had a long-term marriage. I am a little fuzzy on the
details, but I know my mom got benefits from my dad's SS starting about
10 years after they had been divorced even though he had remarried.
I am not sure what would happen if you were married less than 10 years
but your husband had been married to someone before you for longer than
10 years. I suspect that you could Google that information, though.
== 5 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 7:07 pm
From: MAS
On 4/4/2010 8:33 PM, Samantha Hill wrote:
> MAS wrote:
>>
>> Thank you. What I'm asking specifically is does it make any difference
>> if we have been married less than 10 years (and are still married)
>> when we reach full retirement age? If so, why would the rules be
>> different depending on whether you are married or divorced?
>
> If you are no longer married but were married for more than 10 years,
> it's something like a community property thing -- you are eligible by
> virtue of having had a long-term marriage. I am a little fuzzy on the
> details, but I know my mom got benefits from my dad's SS starting about
> 10 years after they had been divorced even though he had remarried.
>
> I am not sure what would happen if you were married less than 10 years
> but your husband had been married to someone before you for longer than
> 10 years. I suspect that you could Google that information, though.
I don't think I'm being clear. I know how it works if you are divorced
- you must have been married at least 10 years. I'm asking about a
couple who will be married less than 10 years at the time of their full
retirement age, and one wants to claim off of the current spouse's SS,
disregarding whether either or both were married before because neither
is wanting to claim off of an ex-spouse. So far, Google hasn't come up
with anything to answer that specific question, and I really didn't want
to wait on hold all day by calling SS. I was just hoping that someone
on here would know or would have been in that situation. Heck, I have
several years before this comes into play. Everything will probably
change by then.
== 6 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 7:20 pm
From: missussex
On Apr 4, 7:07 pm, MAS <m...@bbbb.net> wrote:
> On 4/4/2010 8:33 PM, Samantha Hill wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> I don't think I'm being clear. I know how it works if you are divorced
> - you must have been married at least 10 years. I'm asking about a
> couple who will be married less than 10 years at the time of their full
> retirement age, and one wants to claim off of the current spouse's SS,
> disregarding whether either or both were married before because neither
> is wanting to claim off of an ex-spouse. So far, Google hasn't come up
> with anything to answer that specific question, and I really didn't want
> to wait on hold all day by calling SS. I was just hoping that someone
> on here would know or would have been in that situation. Heck, I have
> several years before this comes into play. Everything will probably
> change by then.
As far as I know, the length of the marriage doesn't matter unless you
are divorced.
== 7 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Apr 4 2010 7:21 pm
From: MAS
On 4/4/2010 10:20 PM, missussex wrote:
> On Apr 4, 7:07 pm, MAS<m...@bbbb.net> wrote:
>> On 4/4/2010 8:33 PM, Samantha Hill wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> I don't think I'm being clear. I know how it works if you are divorced
>> - you must have been married at least 10 years. I'm asking about a
>> couple who will be married less than 10 years at the time of their full
>> retirement age, and one wants to claim off of the current spouse's SS,
>> disregarding whether either or both were married before because neither
>> is wanting to claim off of an ex-spouse. So far, Google hasn't come up
>> with anything to answer that specific question, and I really didn't want
>> to wait on hold all day by calling SS. I was just hoping that someone
>> on here would know or would have been in that situation. Heck, I have
>> several years before this comes into play. Everything will probably
>> change by then.
>
> As far as I know, the length of the marriage doesn't matter unless you
> are divorced.
Thank you. If true, that's interesting.
==============================================================================
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
