Frugal Living: 25 new messages in 9 topics

Tuesday, August 21, 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: Let's Unite Against Jews and Mongrels!
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/073e1531cdad2191?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 12:30 pm
From: "AC"

"Nenad Milicevic - The Aryan Serb" <i_hate_jews@shiftmail.com> wrote
in message
news:1187652563.939367.319480@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> Rise up and shine, white sons and daughters
> Rise up and shine, you gotta fight to part those waters
> When we swim in the light, all will be okay
> The black, yellow and brown man will wash away.
> ------------------------------
> Let's break the chains of Jewish and black domination! Unite, white
> brothers and sisters, and let's defeat those who oppress our white
> heritage!
>
> Our skin is our uniform!
>
> Serbian Committee for Aryan Defence
> Nenad Milicevic, executive
> ICQ 208030128
> endymion@deadspam.com
> endimion@myrealbox.com
>

Oh, its just too much effort. Next week maybe?

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 1:03 pm
From: ampana

On 21 août, 20:35, "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)"
<evgm...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Nenad Milicevic - The Aryan Serb wrote:
>
> > Rise up and shine, white sons and daughters
> > Rise up and shine, you gotta fight to part those waters
> > When we swim in the light, all will be okay
> > The black, yellow and brown man will wash away.
> > ------------------------------
> > Let's break the chains of Jewish and black domination! Unite, white
> > brothers and sisters, and let's defeat those who oppress our white
> > heritage!
>
> > Our skin is our uniform!
>
> > Serbian Committee for Aryan Defence
> > Nenad Milicevic, executive
> > ICQ 208030128
> > endym...@deadspam.com
> > endim...@myrealbox.com

C'est totalement FAUX !

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Who loves ya, Rush?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/50fc4bce846b7dea?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 8 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 12:33 pm
From: bearclaw@cruller.invalid

In article <1187722712.984308.180690@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
BeaForoni@msn.com wrote:

> I think allowing people to immagrate to this country unimpeded is
> wrong on so many levels. Mostly because it lowers the standard of
> living for everyone except the highest class of society.

Nowhere in this thread has anyone said anything about immigration
policy. I agree that it is a subject worthy of discussion.

That is NOT what is happening in this thread, nor largely in this
country. What is happening in this country with regards to immigration--
legal or otherwise-- is something else, something far more dreadful and
dangerous. Like most appeals to the ill-equipped-but-highly-opinionated,
it starts with the dehumanization of the least: "illegal immigrants".
This approach appeals most to those who would tell brain-cancer patients
to take two aspirin. And they are the ones I have been arguing with.

It is the artificial construction of an illusory enemy at our southern
border where none existed before. Shots have already been fired,
property destroyed and victims murdered for the simple purpose of
inflaming and shepherding popular opinion in this country around a
complex issue. It is yet another conflict, like Iraq, scatologically
designed to the absolute detriment of every American below a certain
level of wealth and social standing.

Those who insist on resolving the issue through imprisonment, armed
conflict and extravagantly impotent border walls are working toward the
ruination of America, whether they realize it or not. It would be a
major step in the right direction to turn them out first.

== 2 of 8 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 12:41 pm
From: "Chloe"

<bearclaw@cruller.invalid> wrote in message
news:bearclaw-603D7C.14331421082007@news.supernews.com...
> In article <1187722712.984308.180690@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> BeaForoni@msn.com wrote:
>
>> I think allowing people to immagrate to this country unimpeded is
>> wrong on so many levels. Mostly because it lowers the standard of
>> living for everyone except the highest class of society.
>
> Nowhere in this thread has anyone said anything about immigration
> policy. I agree that it is a subject worthy of discussion.
<snip>

Would you be willing to tell us what, if any, changes you think should be
made in the U.S.'s immigration policy? I think that might be more
enlightening than the "your grandchild deserves to eat worms" commentary
we've been getting from you.

== 3 of 8 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 12:51 pm
From: "simon"

bearclaw@cruller.invalid wrote:
> In article <1187722712.984308.180690@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> BeaForoni@msn.com wrote:
>
>> I think allowing people to immagrate to this country unimpeded is
>> wrong on so many levels. Mostly because it lowers the standard of
>> living for everyone except the highest class of society.
>
> Nowhere in this thread has anyone said anything about immigration
> policy. I agree that it is a subject worthy of discussion.
>
> That is NOT what is happening in this thread, nor largely in this
> country. What is happening in this country with regards to
> immigration-- legal or otherwise-- is something else, something far
> more dreadful and dangerous. Like most appeals to the
> ill-equipped-but-highly-opinionated, it starts with the
> dehumanization of the least: "illegal immigrants". This approach
> appeals most to those who would tell brain-cancer patients to take
> two aspirin. And they are the ones I have been arguing with.

> It is the artificial construction of an illusory enemy
> at our southern border where none existed before.

Nope.

> Shots have already been fired, property destroyed and victims
> murdered for the simple purpose of inflaming and shepherding
> popular opinion in this country around a complex issue.

There has been plenty of that sort of thing done by the illegals too.

> It is yet another conflict, like Iraq, scatologically designed
> to the absolute detriment of every American below a certain
> level of wealth and social standing.

Just another utterly mindless conspiracy theory.

> Those who insist on resolving the issue through imprisonment, armed
> conflict and extravagantly impotent border walls are working toward
> the ruination of America, whether they realize it or not.

Easy to claim, hell of a lot harder to actually substantiate that claim.

> It would be a major step in the right direction to turn them out first.

Not even possible.

== 4 of 8 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 1:08 pm
From: bearclaw@cruller.invalid

In article <46cb39d0$0$16471$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
"Chloe" <justsayno@spam.com> wrote:

> In other words, you'd be afraid to talk to someone IRL the way you talk to
> people who disagree with you online.

Not in other words. In your words. Which reduces the impact of the rest
of your article, to say the least. You know, it is simple to oppose
someone when you can stick your own words in their mouth, isn't it? Not
very brave or thoughtful, though. You know what else? I might just say
that to your face. In front of your family. Risking beating and
shooting, even.

I love hurling insults that go right over the heads of the intended
recipients IRL. To wit: "What a lovely child! Is he yours?"

> Where I live, it takes a lot less than phrases like "your mewling inbred
> grandchildren" or " you are nothing more than a swastika-swinging,
> mean-spirited racist asshole who deserves every insult, every deprivation,
> every theft of dignity his grandchild suffers" or "perhaps the thought of
> having anyone from your genetic line involved in their school made them ill"
> to actually get a person beaten up or shot.

Yeah, bars here also overflow with trailer trash drunks, effete
intellectuals and armchair quarterbacks who would beat and shoot people
for saying what they think. It's a national disgrace. We should beat and
shoot people for what they DON'T say. Oh, wait, the beaters and shooters
do that too. Of course, most high-minded people like that would beat and
shoot people for nothing at all even if no offense were issued. Many
might be propelled into martial action for no reason other than the
frustration resulting from the self-imposed strictures confining their
intellects. No doubt there are parades celebrating such lack of respect
for the physical well-being of others where you live... IRL

> Nonetheless, I'd submit that the above doesn't actually do a lot in terms of
> swaying the opinion of the target over to your side of the argument, nor
> even really impresses or convinces anyone else who's reading, either. But
> it's nice *you* think it's working. That's what really matters.

Submit away. There are plenty of other non-motives for "beating and
shooting" solutions for which you seem to have such regard as it may
suit you. Pardon me for not inserting myself in the bloody squalid
middle of it. You know, IRL. Of course, most people espousing the lines
I oppose here don't go where it would get them "beat or shot" either.
Please, don't chastise them, whatever you do. I wouldn't ever suggest
that "ChairMan" ever go into a bar in South L.A. and talk about how
those Mezzicans ruined his grandkid's chance at an advance preschool
edumacation. Although I do agree that it might be fun to watch the
result.

== 5 of 8 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 1:44 pm
From: bearclaw@cruller.invalid

In article <46cb3fdb$0$18788$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
"Chloe" <justsayno@spam.com> wrote:

> Would you be willing to tell us what, if any, changes you think should be
> made in the U.S.'s immigration policy?

First and easiest step: Stop the intentional inflammatory dehumanization
and simplistic compartmentalization of undocumented people. Stop it now.
Eliminate it from the language and from all legitimate policy
considerations so that _real_ criminals from either nation can be
recognized, stopped and prosecuted. Become adept at separating the
problems arising from the presence of undocumented foreign nationals
from the people themselves. Recognize that with just a few signatures,
_any_ group in this nation could lose its rightful citizen status and
join the ranks of the undesirable, the ejectable, or the foreign.
Problems can be addressed without creating DMZs, without armed vigilante
groups, and without threats of violence.

Step 2: Talk. Negotiation. Diplomacy. Cooperation. They are our
neighbors. Any attempt to resolve the issues (note the plurality) should
include them and be mutually beneficial. Expect breakdowns and
roadblocks. "Illegal" immigration is not a single issue, and any effort
to treat it as such will serve only to further divide us as a nation.

Step 3: Instill the idea that real solutions will take time, patience
and likely sacrifice on both sides of the border. The problem is not
static and neither is its fix. The current situation didn't happen in a
day or a week or a year or even a decade, and it will take longer than
that to fix it. Without first implementing step 1, however, lasting
resolution grows increasingly distant, takes longer, and will be more
involved and infinitely more costly.

== 6 of 8 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 2:00 pm
From: "simon"

bearclaw@cruller.invalid wrote:
> In article <46cb3fdb$0$18788$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
> "Chloe" <justsayno@spam.com> wrote:
>
>> Would you be willing to tell us what, if any, changes you think
>> should be made in the U.S.'s immigration policy?

> First and easiest step: Stop the intentional inflammatory dehumanization
> and simplistic compartmentalization of undocumented people. Stop it now.

No thanks, they are criminals.

> Eliminate it from the language and from all legitimate policy considerations

No thanks, that's giving in to criminal activity.

The last thing any country needs is those who choose to flout its laws for their own purposes.

> so that _real_ criminals from either nation can be recognized, stopped and prosecuted.

Those are _real_ criminals and they should be recognized, stopped and prosecuted.

And the law should be changed to stop the use of anchor babies
etc, even if that requires a constititional referrendum to do that.

> Become adept at separating the problems arising from the presence
> of undocumented foreign nationals from the people themselves.

Not even possible.

> Recognize that with just a few signatures, _any_ group
> in this nation could lose its rightful citizen status and join
> the ranks of the undesirable, the ejectable, or the foreign.

Nothing to 'recognize', that is a bare faced lie.

> Problems can be addressed without creating DMZs, without
> armed vigilante groups, and without threats of violence.

Easy to claim, hell of a lot harder to actually substantiate that claim.

> Step 2: Talk. Negotiation. Diplomacy. Cooperation.

Doesnt work with illegals, they have chosen to flout the law.

> They are our neighbors. Any attempt to resolve the issues
> (note the plurality) should include them and be mutually beneficial.

Easy to waffle like that.

> Expect breakdowns and roadblocks. "Illegal" immigration is not a single issue,
> and any effort to treat it as such will serve only to further divide us as a nation.

That is inevitable and your silly ideas about what to do about illegals do that in spades.

> Step 3: Instill the idea that real solutions

No such animal. If that was available, it would have been found by now.

> will take time, patience and likely sacrifice on both sides of the border.
> The problem is not static and neither is its fix.

There is no 'fix'

> The current situation didn't happen in a day or a week or a year
> or even a decade, and it will take longer than that to fix it.

Its unfixable.

> Without first implementing step 1, however, lasting resolution grows increasingly
> distant, takes longer, and will be more involved and infinitely more costly.

There is no 'lasting resolution' even possible.

== 7 of 8 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 2:25 pm
From: "Chloe"

<bearclaw@cruller.invalid> wrote in message
news:bearclaw-ED93AA.15083821082007@news.supernews.com...
> In article <46cb39d0$0$16471$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
><snip>
> I love hurling insults that go right over the heads of the intended
> recipients IRL. To wit: "What a lovely child! Is he yours?"
<snip>

I guess this is what I'm having a bit of trouble grasping. What, exactly, is
it that you love about hurling insults, regardless of whether they go over
the recipients' heads or not? What's the payoff to you?

== 8 of 8 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 3:21 pm
From: "Rod Speed"

Chloe <justsayno@spam.com> wrote:
> <bearclaw@cruller.invalid> wrote in message
> news:bearclaw-ED93AA.15083821082007@news.supernews.com...
>> In article <46cb39d0$0$16471$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
>> <snip>
>> I love hurling insults that go right over the heads of the intended
>> recipients IRL. To wit: "What a lovely child! Is he yours?"
> <snip>
>
> I guess this is what I'm having a bit of trouble grasping. What, exactly, is it that you love
> about hurling insults, regardless of whether they go over the recipients' heads or not? What's the
> payoff to you?

Usual juvenile result, just what most juveniles get out of that sort of stunt.

Its why they use language that adults dont understand.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Simpler solar attics
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/cfecec12fcff406b?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 2:23 pm
From: "Jim"

We did a bit recently on storing energy at the phase change of Glauber's
Salt (Sodium sulfate decahydrate) which melts at 90*F and when it cools
releases a tremendous amount of energy as Heat of Fusion as it solidifies.
It is less than $1/lb, and a barrel of it (dry) in a 55 gallon drum with
water circulating around it will be a major component of my new system.

"Torrey Hills" <kkuang@torreyhillstech.com> wrote in message
news:1187721439.812460.68770@x40g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 21, 10:31 am, nicksans...@ece.villanova.edu wrote:
>> Laren Corie writes:
>> > The ultimate performance solutions are: 1) Isolate the solar gain
>> > space,
>> > to let it go cold at night. If you eliminate all of the times that the
>> > sun
>> > does not heat the room, you eliminate 100% of the backup heating, so
>> > you
>> > don't need high Rvalue windows...
>>
>> Maybe no windows at all, just plastic film glazing.
>>
>> > 2) Nighttime window insulation. Basically the same strategy, but you
>> > are
>> > closing the insulated door on the glass, instead of the whole room.
>> > There can be problems.. some of them human.
>>
>> Historically, most people tire of moving insulation twice a day. Twice a
>> year
>> seems OK. Or automatically filling a glazing cavity with soap bubble foam
>> at night. My favorite "movable insulation" is a big fan with 2
>> thermostats
>> in an insulated wall between a sunspace and a living space.
>>
>> > 3) Reduce the glazing area considerably, and get your Solar gain, via
>> > simple, low cost wall type air panels, or a single glazed sunspace,
>> > over the south wall.
>>
>> We might rethink how we use spaces. People seldom look out windows at
>> night.
>> They cover black holes with curtains. A living space might only have 1-2%
>> of
>> the floorspace as windows for small views. Picture a core living space
>> behind
>> enclosed porches, or "viewspaces" with lots of glazing for large views.
>> During
>> the day, move into a viewspace and steal some heat or AC from the living
>> space
>> with an occupancy sensor and a thermostat and a fan.
>>
>> A 32x32x8' tall living space with 16'-deep SE and SW viewspaces and
>> a 48'x48' footprint might have 24ft^2 of R4 windows with 6 Btu/h-F. An
>> R40
>> ceiling and R30 walls would add 32x32/40 = 26 and 33, with 30 more for
>> 30 cfm of air leaks, if it's tight, for a total conductance of 95
>> Btu/h-F.
>>
>> With 4 American Craftsman 6068-2 6'x80" U0.48 sliding glass doors ($269
>> each at Home Depot) or 320 ft^2 of R4 windows, a 16'x48' SE viewspace
>> would have a 123 Btu/h-F conductance. Two more doors would give a 16'x32'
>> SW space 61 Btu/h-F. The glazing might have overhangs to reduce summer
>> sun and dark mesh curtains to reduce light levels for people, eg 80%
>> greenhouse shadecloth, which preserves views, like a dark window screen.
>>
>> If the average living space temp is 65 F and we spend 4 hours per day in
>> each 70 F viewspace (Henry Mercer built bonfires on the roof and moved
>> from
>> desk to desk as the sun moved in his 6-story concrete castle in
>> Doylestown
>> PA) on an average 30 F January day in Phila, the house needs 24h(65-30)95
>> + 4h(70-34)123 + 4h(70-34)61 = 79.8K + 17.7K + 8.8K = 106K Btu/day of
>> heat.
>> With 34.1K from 300 kWh/mo of frugal indoor electrical use, we need 72K
>> more solar heat, which might come from a solar attic.
>>
>> The solar attics of Soldiers Grove
>> (seehttp://www.ece.villanova.edu/~nick)
>> can be improved. They blow warm air down into a building during the day,
>> with a motorized damper to let the attic stay cool at night. Some have
>> rock bed or hypocaust stores, but few store heat for more than 1 day.
>>
>> A new attic might have a $1/ft^2 corrugated R1 Dynaglas polycarbonate
>> 20-year south roof with a 60 degree slope and 90% solar transmission.
>> NREL says 620 Btu/ft^2 falls on the ground and 1000 falls on a south wall
>> on an average January day in Phila, so 1 ft^2 of roof would collect
>> 0.9(1000sin(60)+620cos(60)) = 1058 Btu/day.
>>
>> Nathan Hurst's "Low-cost active heat storage" story in the July-September
>> 2007 Issue 100 of ReNew (http:www.ata.org.au) shows how to collect solar
>> heat
>> with a Mazda car radiator and its 16 watt electric fan. (I have a $35
>> 1984
>> Dodge Omni radiator below my living room floor) With an 800 Btu/h-F
>> air-water
>> thermal conductance like MagicAire's 2'x2' SHW2347 duct heat exchanger,
>> we
>> could store 0.75x72K/6h = 9K Btu in 140 F water in 6 hours on an average
>> day
>> with a 140+9K/800 = 151 F attic air temp. A radiator in a box below an
>> attic
>> floor can both store and distribute heat, like this, viewed in a fixed
>> font:
>>
>> upper g
>> attic l
>> | | a
>> | | z
>> ~ ~ i south -->
>> | | n
>> | vertical | motorized / g
>> | duct | damper /
>> | | /
>> | | day /
>> | | /
>> | | /
>> | | / night attic floor
>> ---| -------------............----------------------------------
>> | . r .
>> | . d room a d.
>> | . a air d f a. f
>> | . m out i m.
>> | ==> . p a a ==> p. a <== room air in
>> | . e t e.
>> | . r o n r. n
>> | . r .
>> -------------------------------------
>> | |
>> | duct to |
>> | room floor |
>> | |
>> | |
>> ~ ~
>>
>> To collect heat, open the motorized damper and run the radiator fan.
>> They typically last 3-4K hours at 225 F. If the fan lifetime doubles with
>> every 10 C decrease, it might last 70K hours at 150 F. To distribute
>> heat,
>> close the motorized damper and run the room fan. The passive dampers
>> could
>> be plastic film over hardware cloth, aka "the 7-cent solution" invented
>> by
>> Doug Kelbaugh (now Dean of the UMich Architecture school) in Princeton in
>> 1973. The motorized damper could be polyiso foamboard with an auto
>> windshield
>> wiper motor and limit switches or Honeywell's $50 6161B1000 damper
>> actuator,
>> which only uses 2 watts as it moves up to 45 in-lb. The room air outlet
>> would
>> also have a passive damper that opens out of the page into another
>> vertical
>> duct or closet to move warm air down into the room. The floor might have
>> more
>> motorized dampers over polycarbonate film to bounce light and heat down
>> into
>> rooms during the day.
>>
>> If 1 ft^2 of glazing gains 1058 Btu/day and loses 6h(151-34)1ft^2/R1,
>> the net gain is 356, so we might need 50.4K/356 = 142 ft^2 of glazing.
>> A 4'x48' strip would do. At 140 F, we could make hot water for showers
>> with a $60 1"x300' piece of pressurized black PE pipe in a heat storage
>> tank and a simple graywater heat exchanger (eg 2 uninsulated 55 gallon
>> plastic drums) to add heat to the house.
>>
>> On an average day, with an 800 Btu/h-F radiator conductance, we can heat
>> the living space with 70 + (70-30)95/800 = 75 F water. If the viewspace
>> use patterns don't change on cloudy days, we can store 5x72K = 360K Btu
>> for 5 cloudy days in a row in 360K/(140-75) = 5538 pounds of water, ie
>> 665 gallons, in an STSS tank or a 4'x8'x3'-tall plywood box lined with
>> a single folded 10'x16' piece of EPDM rubber.
>>
>> Nick
>
> Wow, thank you for the posting. Really enjoyed it.
>
> Ken
>
>
> Opportunities are never lost. The other fellow takes those you miss.
>
>
> | Torrey Hills Technologies, LLC |
> | www.threerollmill.com

|
> | www.torreyhillstech.com

|
>
>

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 3:30 pm
From: "HP. Blunt"

nicksanspam@ece.villanova.edu wrote:

> Historically, most people tire of moving insulation twice a day. Twice a year
> seems OK. Or automatically filling a glazing cavity with soap bubble foam
> at night. My favorite "movable insulation" is a big fan with 2 thermostats
> in an insulated wall between a sunspace and a living space.

Historically, most people never move insulation, unless they're some
kind of nut.

The only math anyone needs to know is, if someone wrote what you wrote
just one time, they shouldn't be allowed out in public without the
proper supervision.

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 3:00 pm
From: Steve O'Hara-Smith

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 11:07:52 -0700
ransley <Mark_Ransley@Yahoo.com> wrote:

> Name anybody you know that moves insulation twice a day or twice a

That would be anybody who closes curtains at night.

--
C:>WIN | Directable Mirror Arrays
The computer obeys and wins. | A better way to focus the sun
You lose and Bill collects. | licences available see
|

http://www.sohara.org/

==============================================================================
TOPIC: The Money Masters: How international bankers gained control of Europe
and America, created wars and depressions.
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/165ff3ef89f8d2b8?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 2:51 pm
From: plenty560@yahoo.com

Watch The Money Masters via http://Muvy.org

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 9:09 pm
From: GeorgeSpamungus@gmail.com

On Aug 21, 4:51 pm, plenty...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Watch The Money Masters viahttp://Muvy.org

Yes it is.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Top 10 money drains
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/4b4f42b2c99e847d?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 3:36 pm
From: ""

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 10:58:53 -0400, "Chloe" <justsayno@spam.com> wrote:
>
>The part of the coverage that's explicitly called "uninsured motorist" pays
>YOU if you suffer damages as a result of the fault of someone with no
>insurance. I guess if you don't want it, you shouldn't have to buy it, but
>the point is that it doesn't pay them.
>
My point exactly !

I have to buy insurance coverage to protect my liablity,

then, I have to buy insurance coverage to protect myself
from those who choose not to buy insurance coverage.....

BTW;
Doesn't matter how many times you read your insurance policy...
there'll always be one more looophole. ( KATRINA proved that )

<rj>

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 4:21 pm
From: "Rod Speed"

<RJ> <RJ> wrote
> Chloe <justsayno@spam.com> wrote

>> The part of the coverage that's explicitly called "uninsured
>> motorist" pays YOU if you suffer damages as a result of the fault of
>> someone with no insurance. I guess if you don't want it, you
>> shouldn't have to buy it, but the point is that it doesn't pay them.

> My point exactly !

> I have to buy insurance coverage to protect my liablity,

> then, I have to buy insurance coverage to protect myself
> from those who choose not to buy insurance coverage.....

Nope, you are welcome to choose not to have that last and
to try to get what they owe you out of them using the courts etc.

> BTW;
> Doesn't matter how many times you read your insurance policy...
> there'll always be one more looophole. ( KATRINA proved that )

Mindless stuff with car insurance.

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 4:57 pm
From: George

Rod Speed wrote:
> <RJ> <RJ> wrote
>> Chloe <justsayno@spam.com> wrote
>
>>> The part of the coverage that's explicitly called "uninsured
>>> motorist" pays YOU if you suffer damages as a result of the fault of
>>> someone with no insurance. I guess if you don't want it, you
>>> shouldn't have to buy it, but the point is that it doesn't pay them.
>
>> My point exactly !
>
>> I have to buy insurance coverage to protect my liablity,
>
>> then, I have to buy insurance coverage to protect myself
>> from those who choose not to buy insurance coverage.....
>
> Nope, you are welcome to choose not to have that last and
> to try to get what they owe you out of them using the courts etc.

Maybe in your country but when a state mandates that you must have
automotive insurance to obtain/maintain vehicle registration they
typically also require that you buy uninsured/underinsured motorist
coverage.

>
>> BTW;
>> Doesn't matter how many times you read your insurance policy...
>> there'll always be one more looophole. ( KATRINA proved that )
>
> Mindless stuff with car insurance.
>
>

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 9:40 pm
From: Usenet2007@THE-DOMAIN-IN.SIG

In article <s6ulc3tl8ods41i2tpf1mhjfu1pn0r2nb8@4ax.com>,
baranick@localnet.com says...
> On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 01:14:49 GMT, Gordon <gonzo@alltomyself.com> wrote:
>
> >> 7 Insurance; house, health, auto, life. ( add 'em up )
> >
> >Auto insurance isn't optional in many areas. If you get cought
> >driving without insurance you could get hit with some very
> >unfrugal fines. Around here they have a form called an SR-22.
> >If you are required to file an SR-22, you have to find an insurance
> >company the will issue it (not all do). And the ones that do are
> >the sub-prime, high rate insurers. Very unfrugal.
> >>
> >>
> I was speaking of over-insuring.
> If you follow your insurance agents advice,
> you'll NEVER have enough coverage.
>
> If you're the average responsible person,
> it's amazing how much total $$ you spend on insurance.
>
> ....how much is "enough" insurance ?
>
> and, why do I have to buy auto insurance
> to cover myself,
> and to cover the "uninsured motorist" ??

"Uninsured motorist" coverage is to cover YOU when the person
responsible for the accident doesn't have liability insurance.

--
Get Credit Where Credit Is Due
http://www.cardreport.com/
Credit Tools, Reference, and Forum

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Apt Complex Laundry Facility or Portable, Compact Washer?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/cc45903df93c215d?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 5:08 pm
From: "Lou"

"Shawn Hirn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-F6EE5F.04080821082007@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> In article <Xns9992DBC5EAA9B5x55x5@207.115.33.102>,
> Five By Five <5x5@5x5.com> wrote:
> >
> > I am in the market for buying a compact/mini washer, probably a small
> > version of the front-loading Bosch, weighted more towards product
> > quality/reliability/durability than in just finding the cheapest price
and
> > in risking known warranty hassles. What experiences and/or information
do
> > you have?
>
> Good luck with your search. Before you spend much time with this, check
> your apartment lease. Some landlords do not allow their tenants to use a
> clothes washer in the apartment.
>
> As for how much of a cost savings you would experience with a new
> washer, I suppose it depends on how much you would spend to use coin
> operated washers and how much electricity costs you.

As a first approximation, you'll probably save some money. The coin-op
washer is going to have all the expenses your own does (electricity, water,
wear and tear) plus a profit for whoever provides the washer. At the very
least, it seems like you'd save the profit, provided you get a reasonably
priced, appropriately sized, machine.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Right wing's sacred cow at work again Re: Psychological Warfare
Techniques Used on Your Doctor
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/f35fb63a1849c153?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 7:47 pm
From: ultimauw@hotmail.com

On Aug 20, 12:58 pm, Citizen Jimserac <Jimse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 20, 8:14 am, ultim...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > AllEmailDeletedImmediately wrote:
> > > Pharmaceutical sales reps are trained in tactics that are on par with some
> > > of the most potent brainwashing techniques used throughout the world,
> > > according to an in-depth report co-written by former Eli Lilly drug rep
> > > Shahram Ahari, and Adriane Fugh-Berman, associate professor of physiology
> > > and biophysics at Georgetown University Medical Center in Washington, D.C..
>
> > > Pharmaceutical companies spend more than $15 billion each year promoting
> > > prescription drugs in the United States.
>
> > > These campaigns are designed to effectively alter prescribing behavior, to
> > > sell more of the high-profit drugs (as opposed to the most effective, and
> > > least dangerous).
>
> > > The fact that sales reps for drug companies serve no useful function other
> > > than driving up sales for their blockbuster drugs -- at your expense
>
> > But... This cant be! We have the bestest healthcare in the world. At
> > least that is what the Republican party line says.
>
> EVERYBODY IS ONTO THIS CHARADE BY NOW. The repercussions have only
> just started from Moore's epochal and timely documentary. I've
> already seen one ad from the "Ad Council" in which people are laughing
> and singing in a hospital waiting room while the announcer extols the
> virtues of our wonderful health care system.
>

Sounds just like the happy masses propaganda straight from the soviet
union.

> EVEN BETTER, as the winds of reform sweep away a health system run by
> and for uncaring profiteers, a serious public view is now falling on
> the dominant medical system in this country, its dangerous nostrums
> and "remedies" dignified with the name "pharmaceuticals", its primary
> method of "curing" people by REMOVING things via surgery and its
> curious over reliance on MACHINES for diagnoses.
>

Eventually this shit is going to peak, and people will be demanding
their heads. This corruption can't go on forever, it has to end
sometime.

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 8:04 pm
From: "Rod Speed"

ultimauw@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Aug 20, 12:58 pm, Citizen Jimserac <Jimse...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 20, 8:14 am, ultim...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> AllEmailDeletedImmediately wrote:
>>>> Pharmaceutical sales reps are trained in tactics that are on par
>>>> with some of the most potent brainwashing techniques used
>>>> throughout the world, according to an in-depth report co-written
>>>> by former Eli Lilly drug rep Shahram Ahari, and Adriane
>>>> Fugh-Berman, associate professor of physiology and biophysics at
>>>> Georgetown University Medical Center in Washington, D.C..
>>
>>>> Pharmaceutical companies spend more than $15 billion each year
>>>> promoting prescription drugs in the United States.
>>
>>>> These campaigns are designed to effectively alter prescribing
>>>> behavior, to sell more of the high-profit drugs (as opposed to the
>>>> most effective, and least dangerous).
>>
>>>> The fact that sales reps for drug companies serve no useful
>>>> function other than driving up sales for their blockbuster drugs
>>>> -- at your expense
>>
>>> But... This cant be! We have the bestest healthcare in the world.
>>> At least that is what the Republican party line says.

>> EVERYBODY IS ONTO THIS CHARADE BY NOW. The repercussions
>> have only just started from Moore's epochal and timely documentary.
>> I've already seen one ad from the "Ad Council" in which people are
>> laughing and singing in a hospital waiting room while the announcer
>> extols the virtues of our wonderful health care system.

> Sounds just like the happy masses propaganda straight from the soviet union.

You need to get your ears tested, bad.

>> EVEN BETTER, as the winds of reform sweep away a health system
>> run by and for uncaring profiteers, a serious public view is now falling
>> on the dominant medical system in this country, its dangerous nostrums
>> and "remedies" dignified with the name "pharmaceuticals", its primary
>> method of "curing" people by REMOVING things via surgery and its
>> curious over reliance on MACHINES for diagnoses.

> Eventually this shit is going to peak, and people will be demanding their heads.

Have fun explaining how come it didnt happen that way in any first world country.

> This corruption can't go on forever, it has to end sometime.

It aint corruption, and that particular aspect aint ended in even one first world country.

It hasnt for a reason.

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 8:56 pm
From: websurf1@cox.net

On Aug 20, 5:14 am, ultim...@hotmail.com wrote:

> But... This cant be! We have the bestest healthcare in the world. At
> least that is what the Republican party line says.

Oh stop with the knee-jerk party stuff. The dems haven't done
anything serious either, and they won't. For the same reasons.
Hillary's so-called reform attempt was pathetic and way too
complicated.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: video clip
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/73dac3554810113d?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 8:14 pm
From: "laelahaellallah@gmail.com"

http://tv.fanateq.com/free/sami/Al-Muallim_normal.wmv

==============================================================================
TOPIC: saving money by..... Running Air Conditioning with windows open at
night
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/25cf69951aae955f?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 21 2007 9:02 pm
From: theory4debate@gmail.com

Whenever I tell people they should run their air conditioning (A/C)
with their windows open to save money, it surprises them.

It's really logical, if you fall into a certain criteria.

1. If the outside temperature is warmer then the inside temperature,
then you need to run the A/C with the windows closed.
2. If the outside temperature is cooler then your inside temperature,
you need to run the A/C with your windows open. (It would actually be
better by leaving the windows open and running a window fan.)

Let me explain with an example....

I live in an area where the daytime temperature reaches 100 degrees.
However, at around 8pm the outside temperature drops down to the upper
70's. The temperature in my house will stay around 90 degrees if I
don't turn on the A/C.

So every day when I get home around 6pm, I run the A/C with the
windows closed. (During this time the outside temperature is still in
the 90's.) However, at 8pm, I open all the windows and turn on the
windows fans to blow in the cool air from the outside (since the
outside temperature has lowered to the upper 70's) and I still keep
the A/C running. At 10pm, I can actually shut off the A/C, however I
keep the window fans running. At 3am in the morning, it has cooled
down the house enough where I actually shut off the window fans also.
However, if I kept all the windows closed, then I would actually have
to run the A/C the whole night.

The concept is similar to when you first go inside a car and the
temperature in the car is way hotter then the temperature outside.
For me if I go inside my car when the outside temperature is 100
degree, the temperature in my car is around 115 degree. Then for the
first minute I open all the windows to allow the 100 degree outside
temperature to cool off the 115 degree inside temperature. After 1
minute, I will close the windows.

Of coarse the best way is having a "total house fan". If I had that,
then I can shut off my A/C at 8pm and just run that.

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

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

Tuesday, August 21, 2007

25 new messages in 9 topics - digest

No comments: