Frugal Living: 25 new messages in 9 topics

Saturday, August 11, 2007

25 new messages in 9 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: Kodak Easyshare C315 digital camera died
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/df590642031e5770?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 6 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 10:44 am
From: Rick

OhioGuy wrote:
>
> Our Kodak Easyshare C315 digital camera died during our recent vacation.
> It cost about $100, and was just over a year old. When I turn it on now,
> there is a red LED on the front that will blink for a while, then it just
> stays on. No signs of life from the color LCD screen. I've removed the SD
> card, put in fresh batteries, and even opened up the unit and tried blowing
> dust out of the main control on the top. Nothing makes any difference.
>
> My big question is this: is it worth taking this sort of thing to a repair
> shop, or would I be better off finding another $100 digital camera?

$100.00 camera and out of warranty? Not worth it. Even if you could get
it repaired for half that cost - highly unlikely - the repair would only
have a 30 to 90 day warranty at best. Especially if your intention is to
replace it with another camera costing only $100.00. The cost for
repair/cost to replace ratio doesn't make ecomonic sense.

Rick

== 2 of 6 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 11:17 am
From: Anthony Matonak

OhioGuy wrote:
> My big question is this: is it worth taking this sort of thing to a repair
> shop, or would I be better off finding another $100 digital camera?

You can buy these (C315 / C530 / CD50) refurbished for around $65.
For instance...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16830170083
Recertified: Kodak EASYSHARE C530 Silver 5.0 MP Digital Camera $65

I can't imagine anyone repairing one of these for less than $65.
You are better off getting another camera.

Anthony

== 3 of 6 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 11:17 am
From: gheston@hiwaay.net (Gary Heston)

In article <f9kmuj$8q9$1@aioe.org>, OhioGuy <none@none.net> wrote:
> Our Kodak Easyshare C315 digital camera died during our recent vacation.
>It cost about $100, and was just over a year old. When I turn it on now,
>there is a red LED on the front that will blink for a while, then it just
>stays on. No signs of life from the color LCD screen. I've removed the SD
>card, put in fresh batteries, and even opened up the unit and tried blowing
>dust out of the main control on the top. Nothing makes any difference.

> My big question is this: is it worth taking this sort of thing to a repair
>shop, or would I be better off finding another $100 digital camera?

Depends upon how old it is, mainly. A couple of places turned up in a web
search for "digital camera repair quote Kodak Easyshare C315":

www.digitechcamerarepair.com/

(wants you to fill in a request form)

www.precisioncamera.com/kodak-digital-camera-repair.html (has a link to
a cost estimator, but it doesn't seem to work with FireFox).

You might try taking the batteries out and leaving them out overnight.
Sometimes the control circutry gets confused, and leaving it unpowered
long enough for the residual charges to bleed off will clear up the problem.

Gary

--
Gary Heston gheston@hiwaay.net

http://www.thebreastcancersite.com/

Yoko Onos' former driver tried to extort $2M from her, threating to
"release embarassing recordings...". What, he has a copy of her album?

== 4 of 6 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 11:53 am
From: Anthony Matonak

OhioGuy wrote:
...
> My big question is this: is it worth taking this sort of thing to a repair
> shop, or would I be better off finding another $100 digital camera?

After a bit of websearching, it looks like the General Electric A730
has the most bang for the buck at less than $100. 7MP, 3X optical zoom,
image stabilization, Mpeg-4 movie recording and ISO 1600.

Anthony

== 5 of 6 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 1:21 pm
From: "David"

"OhioGuy" <none@none.net> wrote in message news:f9kmuj$8q9$1@aioe.org...
> Our Kodak Easyshare C315 digital camera died during our recent vacation.
> It cost about $100, and was just over a year old. When I turn it on now,
> there is a red LED on the front that will blink for a while, then it just
> stays on. No signs of life from the color LCD screen. I've removed the
> SD card, put in fresh batteries, and even opened up the unit and tried
> blowing dust out of the main control on the top. Nothing makes any
> difference.
>
> My big question is this: is it worth taking this sort of thing to a repair
> shop, or would I be better off finding another $100 digital camera?
Last time I checked on repairs to a Kodak camera from Kodak, they charged a
flat $150. Looks like you'd be better off with a new camera.

== 6 of 6 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 5:12 pm
From: Warren Block

Anthony Matonak <anthonym40@nothing.like.socal.rr.com> wrote:
> OhioGuy wrote:
> ...
>> My big question is this: is it worth taking this sort of thing to a repair
>> shop, or would I be better off finding another $100 digital camera?
>
> After a bit of websearching, it looks like the General Electric A730
> has the most bang for the buck at less than $100. 7MP, 3X optical zoom,
> image stabilization, Mpeg-4 movie recording and ISO 1600.

GE doesn't even register on dpreview.com, a bad sign. Kodak recently
announced they were phasing out low-end cameras, and their low-end ones
were really, really low-end.

newegg's $75-$100 list for ideas for replacements:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2070070012+4027&name=%2475+-+%24100

--
Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota * USA

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Cheap way to fix chipped windshield?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/4a367f6464847919?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 10:48 am
From: clams casino

Wayne Sallee wrote:

> Logan Shaw wrote on 8/10/2007 10:16 PM:
>
>> And, trust me, replacing the windshield is not cheap. I had to do it on
>> my current car, and if it costs $50 to prevent it, it's worth $50.
>>
>> Not only that, on a 1969 Ford van, it might be "interesting" trying to
>> find the part. And the last thing you want on any vehicle is some
>> third-party replacement glass that doesn't quite fit right. Or
>> perfectly-good glass that isn't installed right and leaks.
>>
>> IMHO, there are two roads (so to speak) you can go down with that van
>> now. You can either pay a little right now and be sure this problem
>> doesn't get worse and be happy, or you can take your chances. And if
>> you take your chances, you might have to track down a part, pay a lot
>> of money, and still not get good results.
>>
>> - Logan
>
>
> Or if you drive an old vehicle that is not worth anything and the
> window leaks anyway, then you look at it a little different :-) But if
> you have a nice car, then you'd best get it fixed professionally right
> away :-)
>
>
Since Ohio reportedly doesn't have inspections, having a cracked
windshield will likely fit right in with all the other misfit vehicles.

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 4:10 pm
From: Logan Shaw

clams casino wrote:
> Since Ohio reportedly doesn't have inspections, having a cracked
> windshield will likely fit right in with all the other misfit vehicles.

When I lived in California (which was 10 years ago, this month), that
state had inspections, but the only thing they checked was vehicle
emissions. You could have failing brakes, a broken windshield, and
doors that wouldn't close all the way and California would let you
on the road. But put out too much pollution, and you're outta there.

- Logan

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 4:53 pm
From: Beeblebrox

Wayne Sallee wrote:

>
> Just don't use one of those do it your self kits a Wall-Mart. Those
> things don't work. They are a rippoff.
>
> Where do y'all live that you have to get yearly inspections. I'm glad
> that I don't have to get yearly inspections on my vehicle. That sounds
> like a pain. I have two small chips in my windshield. I won't be fixing
> them, though I did try one of those stupid kits. The chips are small,
> and I live in Florida, so I won't have a problem with ice making them
> bigger.
>
> Wayne Sallee
> Webmaster@LeesburgNazarene.org
>

heat can make them run too.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: State Farm Bank
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/ba1fef856d30047b?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 10:49 am
From: "SpammersDie"

>
> State Farm is skum. I paid them for many years for auto insurance. In
> full, one time. Not once did I miss a payment or even be late for one.

Clap, clap, clap. You met your obligations of a business deal that you
agreed to.

> I got into an accident (no injuries and no damage to the other vehicle,
> but my fault). State Farm paid to have my car fixed, then when my policy
> came up for renewal, they dropped me like a hot potato. In NJ where I
> live, if your auto insurance company drops you, none of the other
> carriers will talk to you. I ended up going into assigned risk and
> getting reamed out the you know what for a couple of years as a result
> of State Farm.

No, you got into that situation as a result of your at-fault accident.

Since SF did pay your claim as agreed so they held their end of the deal.
This isn't even close to the Katrina allegations.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: iPhone Tips and Tricks
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/98b56e5c28169d9c?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 11:15 am
From: asd sadf <1careeradvice@gmail.com>

iPhone Tips and Tricks Video
http://mobilephone-guide.blogspot.com/2007/07/iphone-tips-and-tricks-video.html

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Efficient A/C use?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/1bea26b2f7601d52?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 11:18 am
From: Rick

Rick wrote:
>
> vmacekesq@yahoo.com wrote:
> >
> > This is certainly a standard, old question but I figure I'd ask
> > anyway:
> >
> > I've got a little (app. 900 sf) 2-bedroom 1-story house, insulated
> > reasonably well - when I'm in I keep the thermostat at 82 degrees and
> > with a fan in the room it's comfortable. When I leave for my 9-to-5
> > job I bump the therm. up to 85, but at these temperatures the a/c is
> > still going quite a bit in my absence (the place is certainly
> > comfortable when I step back in, but it would be after a 20-mile
> > commute).
> > Is it more efficient to just shut the a/c off when I'm gone - does it
> > take a lot of energy to bring the temp back down from a standing
> > start, as it were?
> >
> > VMacek
>
> Shut it off. If you are gone for work at least 9 hours a day I would
> have to say that it's costing you far more money to keep it running for
> those extra 9 hours than any extra load on the system to get the home
> back to a reasonable temperature when you return and start it. (It sure
> won't take 9 hours to get the temperature and humidity levels back to a
> comfortable range.) The compressor might have to run more initially when
> you return, but while you are away the fan is running constantly and
> eating up dollars in energy expenditure, even if the compressor is only
> cycling slightly less when you aren't there.
>
> The sure way to tell is try it both ways for a month and compare your
> electric bills. But I'd bet the farm it's costing you far more to run it
> an extra 9 hours a day when you aren't there.
>
> Rick

P.S. Another issue that occurs to me: If you work normal 9 to 5 hours,
even with bumping the thermostat up to 85 you would still be running the
AC during the hottest part of the day - the period where it has to work
harder to keep the temperature down. Which would be the least frugal
time of the day to keep the thing running, especially if there is no one
there to get any benefit out of it.

Rick

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 12:05 pm
From: "Rod Speed"

Logan Shaw <lshaw-usenet@austin.rr.com> wrote:
> vmacekesq@yahoo.com wrote:
>> Is it more efficient to just shut the a/c off when I'm gone - does it
>> take a lot of energy to bring the temp back down from a standing
>> start, as it were?

> It takes a lot of energy, but you save more energy. Every bit of extra energy it takes to bring
> down the temperature is equally offset by energy saved when the temperature is rising and the A/C
> unit is sitting idle.

> The only real disadvantage is the inconvenience of having to wait for it to finish bringing the
> temperature down when you get home.

And you can fix that with a programmable thermostat that starts that cooldown
so that the house will be at the lower setpoint when you arrive home.

> That can take hours in some cases,

Not likely with his house unless its rather under sized. And he
doesnt say what the temps typically get to with it turned off.

> and the cost savings of turning it completely off (as opposed to just changing the set point to
> 85F) might not be enough to justify it.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Wealth on the public dole
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/4751bd64130f7462?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 9 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 11:49 am
From: "qwrt"

bearclaw@cruller.invalid wrote:
> In article <bearclaw-902DC4.04295611082007@news.supernews.com>,
> bearclaw@cruller.invalid wrote:
>
>> WASHINGTON (AP) < The Federal Reserve, trying to calm turmoil on Wall
>> Street, announced Friday that it will pump as much money as needed
>> into the U.S. financial system to help overcome the ill effects of a
>> spreading credit crunch.
>>
>> The Fed, in a short statement, said it will provide "reserves as
>> necessary" to help the markets safely make their way. The central
>> bank did not provide details but said it would do all it can to
>> "facilitate the orderly functioning of financial markets."
>>
>> The Fed pushed $38 billion in temporary reserves into the system
>> Friday, on top of a similar move the day before.
>
> more at:
>
> http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/08/10/ap4008288.html
>
> While reading the story, ask yourself:

> Where is all this money-- essentially welfare for the rich--

No it isnt. Its just increasing liquidity, just like happened post 9/11.

> coming from?

The word 'reserve' is there for a reason.

> Who is getting it? (don't be fooled by bank names and institutions;
> look at the individuals who will be receiving these funds)

There are no individuals receiving those funds.

> Why are *they* getting it, instead of those in danger of losing their homes?

It isnt goint to those who are losing their homes.

> (considering that "they" are the ones who created the mess to begin with)

Thats arguable too. You can make a case that its the financial institutions
that were stupid enough to produce that securitization of sub prime loans
and the regulatory system that allowed that terminal stupidity.

> If "greed is good", the creed of contemporary America, then greed
> sanctioned by government fiat, enforced by government policies and
> protected at its most extreme by government force, is even better.

Mindless stuff, just like the mindless rant above.

> Are you getting yours? Now you know why bankruptcy protections
> were all but stolen from middle class people while remaining in place
> for those with the most to protect. Yes, it certainly was a plot. No, it
> wasn't hard to predict. Yes, consumers are spineless rubes.

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you
have never ever had a clue about anything at all, ever.

== 2 of 9 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 11:53 am
From: "qwrt"

clams casino <PeterGriffin@drunkin-clam.com> wrote:
> bearclaw@cruller.invalid wrote:
>
>> WASHINGTON (AP) &lsqauo; The Federal Reserve, trying to calm turmoil on Wall
>> Street, announced Friday that it will pump as much money as needed
>> into the U.S. financial system to help overcome the ill effects of a
>> spreading credit crunch.
>>
>> The Fed, in a short statement, said it will provide "reserves as
>> necessary" to help the markets safely make their way. The central
>> bank did not provide details but said it would do all it can to
>> "facilitate the orderly functioning of financial markets."
>>
>> The Fed pushed $38 billion in temporary reserves into the system
>> Friday, on top of a similar move the day before.

> I not sure how pumping money into the economy

It isnt even doing that.

> helps the current loan problems.

Or that.

> Those with good credit continue to have no problems getting loans.
> Those who have poor credit are not getting loans where an increased
> money supply likely has little effect on whether a bank, etc will be
> willing to take on a high risk borrower in today's market.

That $38B has absolutely NOTHING to do with that.

> Furthermore, the real problem today is mortgage defaults where more
> money supply is not going to help those who are over their heads with
> high ARMs. As for the hedge funds who speculated in high risk loans,
> why should the government bail them out?

It wasnt just hedge funds that did that, and that $38B isnt bailing those out.

== 3 of 9 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 12:23 pm
From: clams casino

qwrt wrote:

>It isnt even doing that.
>
>
>It wasnt just hedge funds that did that, and that $38B isnt bailing those out.
>
>
>
>
Hmm. Do I smell the presence of ROD (not-so-up-to) SPEED? or just a
wannabe?

When do we hear about pig turds in a wet paper bag?

== 4 of 9 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 12:30 pm
From: clams casino

hchickpea@hotmail.com wrote:

>
>Anyway, the subject is borderline OT. We all know that MCFL is for
>the posting of Google blogpot spam, Rod Speed Screeds, and offers from
>Pakistan.
>
>

You forgot to include the shoewear spam from China.

== 5 of 9 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 1:44 pm
From: Derald

Hello. Does "pissing into the wind" mean anything to you? ;-)

== 6 of 9 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 12:59 pm
From: Steve

bearclaw@cruller.invalid wrote:
>WASHINGTON (AP) &lsqauo; The Federal Reserve, trying to calm turmoil on Wall
>Street, announced Friday that it will pump as much money as needed into
>the U.S. financial system to help overcome the ill effects of a
>spreading credit crunch.

Like they say - when you owe $100,000, the bank owns you. When you
owe $100,000,000, you own the bank...

He is winding the watch of his wit.
By and by it will strike.

... William Shakespeare

== 7 of 9 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 1:04 pm
From: Willliam Souden

clams casino wrote:
> qwrt wrote:
>
>> It isnt even doing that.
>>
>>
>> It wasnt just hedge funds that did that, and that $38B isnt bailing
>> those out.
>>
>>
>>
> Hmm. Do I smell the presence of ROD (not-so-up-to) SPEED? or just a
> wannabe?
>
> When do we hear about pig turds in a wet paper bag?

Yep, qwrt means "quit working,reposting tripe"

== 8 of 9 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 1:18 pm
From: "qwrt"

Derald <derald@invalid.net> wrote:
> Hello. Does "pissing into the wind" mean anything to you? ;-)

Its actually pissing on those fools from a great height.

== 9 of 9 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 4:49 pm
From: "aemeijers"

"clams casino" <PeterGriffin@drunkin-clam.com> wrote in message
news:d0ovi.34837$rH6.29528@newsfe22.lga...
> qwrt wrote:
>
>>It isnt even doing that.
>>
>>
>>It wasnt just hedge funds that did that, and that $38B isnt bailing those
>>out.
>>
>>
> Hmm. Do I smell the presence of ROD (not-so-up-to) SPEED? or just a
> wannabe?
>
> When do we hear about pig turds in a wet paper bag?
Well, the headers say it is coming from a news server down under, so I think
your sniffer is probably working well. There are only 2 posts under this
latest alias- we should be absolutely sure in 2 or 3 more. Does this mean
GG, not known for their high standards, finally TOS'd him?

No, I'm not curious enough to start doing string searches.

aem sends...

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Rod Speed, bloomin' land down unda
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/cb4c140f074cdbf8?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 12:01 pm
From: "Rod Speed"

TwoAllBeefPatties <kwokx2@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Rod, do you like that 80's music band 'Australian Crawl'?

Nope, I'm such a dinosaur that I stick to stuff like the Beatles, Abba and Jarre and classical.

> I remember their Siroco album as being a good listen. What do you think?

Never even tried it.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Six Figure Income
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/83c30ff30ea72163?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 3:54 pm
From: SFI

Start Your Own Profitable Internet Business From Home.

Since 1998, SFI has been leading the Internet income revolution with
its cutting edge affiliate program that empowers even average people
to earn $20, $50, even $100 per hour working from their home computer.
SFI has shown millions of men and women from over 200 countries
worldwide how to cash in on the Internet. In fact, our system is so
successful that OVER 8000 people join SFI every week!

Click the link below to review the SFI Home-Business.

http://www.ezinfocenter.com/9719379/FGC

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Woman is content living in 84-sq. ft. tiny dream home.
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/911886124117ed11?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Aug 11 2007 5:47 pm
From: mail3277198@gorillaswithdirtyarmpits.com

On Jul 16, 4:55 am, not the moderator <lavenderlo...@AZGOV.com/us>
wrote:
> edi...@netpath.net wrote:
> > On Jul 15, 5:29 pm, Useful Info <useful_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> Electricity from solar.
> >> Propane from a small container.
> >> $10k for the entire house.
> >> No mortgage...
>
> > It's very possible. After all, lots of Americans - especially men
> > - for generations have CHOSEN to live for days at a time in small
> > hunting cabins, fishing cabins, po-up vacation trailers, etc.
>
> > No $4 to park! No $6 admission!

http://www.INTERNET-GUN-SHOW.com
>
> Lots of criminals live in 8x10 ft. cells and survive quite well. They
> have a sink and commode, a nice bed to entertain their "buddy", and have
> meals prepared for them. The cells are climate controlled and they go
> out to eat. The taxpayer picks up the bill. Unfortunately, the cells
> aren't mobile, and they aren't allowed to have campfires or pets.

I think that there are shed kitsat the home depot that are just a bit
bigger than this house. They don't cost 10k either. One could easily
live in one of those if the climate allowed it.

----------------------------------
www.tawny-kitaen.com

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

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "misc.consumers.frugal-living"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to misc.consumers.frugal-living-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com?hl=en

Frugal Living

Blog Archive

Saturday, August 11, 2007

25 new messages in 9 topics - digest

No comments: