Thursday, March 7, 2019

Digest for misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com - 7 updates in 4 topics

ItsJoan NotJoann <itsjoannotjoann@webtv.net>: Mar 06 06:37PM -0800


> You might assume calling back is safe because a number happens to be from your area code. Is it your doctor? Your kid's principal? A neighbor? Unfortunately, the answer is probably none of those, says Adam Levin, founder of CyberScout and author of Swiped: How to Protect Yourself in a World of Scammers, Phishers, and Identity Thieves. Scammers 'are adept at spoofing phone numbers for caller ID purposes,' he says. So just because a number shares your area code doesn't mean the caller is from your town. Crooks purposely use familiar area codes to gain your trust. Don't miss these other sneaky ways con artists win your trust...
 
> (snip)
 
> Lenona.
 
Without fail, any local number I have called back I immediately get the tone
and announcement "the number you've called is no longer in service." In
other words some lowlife scammer has spoofed a disconnected number. Now, when
I receive a call from an unknown number I simply ignore it. The name on my
caller id always show "unavailable." Any that are stupid enough to persist
in calling again are blocked using my Pro Call Blocker device.
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com>: Mar 07 09:19AM -0800

On 03/06/2019 06:37 PM, ItsJoan NotJoann wrote:
 
> number I simply ignore it. The name on my caller id always show
> "unavailable." Any that are stupid enough to persist in calling
> again are blocked using my Pro Call Blocker device.
 
I get a lot of spam calls with the first 6 numbers of my phone number.
These are generally a recorded message from a Chinese woman -- in
Mandarin. I would guess this happens because those digits belonged to a
majority-Asian area back when we could tell where a caller was from by
the first 6 digits.
 
I just reject them.
 
--
Cheers, Bev
Some people are like Slinkies... Not really good for
anything, but they still bring a smile to your face
when you push them down a flight of stairs.
Bob F <bobnospam@gmail.com>: Mar 07 05:15PM -0800

On 3/7/2019 9:19 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
> majority-Asian area back when we could tell where a caller was from by
> the first 6 digits.
 
> I just reject them.
 
No. It happens because there is a major scam going on to steal the money
of Chinese people.
ggggg9271@gmail.com: Mar 07 09:42AM -0800

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/03/07/its-time-pay-taxes-boy-are-people-steamed-about-trump-tax-cut-bill/?utm_term=.b4a6dee8eaf2
ggggg9271@gmail.com: Mar 06 08:58PM -0800

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/making-sense/why-later-enrollment-in-supplemental-medicare-can-cause-problems
"catalpa" <catalpa@entertab.org>: Mar 06 08:57PM -0500

<ggggg9271@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1792227f-1a2e-4d7f-bd42-437a9c6c8f56@googlegroups.com...
On Wednesday, March 6, 2019 at 11:39:59 AM UTC-10, John Weiss wrote:
 
>Concerning dividends, the higher the dividend, then the more it's worth
>accumulating shares since the more shares accumulated the amount collected
>in dividends will increase over time?
 
For decent dividend paying stocks the higher the dividend yield the higher
the risk.
 
CTL (8.65%) is riskier than T (6.84%) which is riskier than VZ (4.33%).
 
If you are investing in individual stocks you need a portfolio of at least
10 stocks (from multiple industries) to spread the risk.
ggggg9271@gmail.com: Mar 06 08:58PM -0800

On Wednesday, March 6, 2019 at 3:57:16 PM UTC-10, catalpa wrote:
 
> CTL (8.65%) is riskier than T (6.84%) which is riskier than VZ (4.33%).
 
> If you are investing in individual stocks you need a portfolio of at least
> 10 stocks (from multiple industries) to spread the risk.
 
Thank you.
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to misc.consumers.frugal-living+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)