Frugal Living: 26 new messages in 9 topics

Friday, July 11, 2008

26 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: jordan shoes and much popular cloths ,sports shoes only 27 usd
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/7b929e590d26f7eb?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 7:11 am
From: "www.yhnetstore.com"

Dear friend
When your all order form volume of trade accumulation achieves
above $500, our company will bestow an independent website to give you
for free. Manages by you, you may put the price on the homepage at
backstage management page, revises the news,payment method and so on.
Then propagandize, for instance promotes your website on Google or
B2B. When has the customer make order with your website, you may send
the order form to me, we will delivers goods directly to your
customer. So long as you send yours customer address to me. We will
deliver goods in 1-2 days, all goods will arrive in 5-7 days.
You may choose pay in advance every month $500 give us, when after
completing each time the order form, we will deduct from $500 are
corresponding in our website the quoted price money, certainly, in
your website's quoted price must be higher than our company's quoted
price. You may also choose before we delivers goods to your customer,
put the corresponding money send to us. Certainly, like this will
lengthen the business the time, we hoped that your customer can
receive the goods in such a short time.
If in first three months each month's all order money (including
yours order form and your customer order form) not above $500 , Or
from the fourth month each month's business money cannot achieve $800,
we are authorized to cancel your website.
Wishes us cooperates happily!

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Surviving high heating oil prices
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/a184bef53e828bc7?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 7:17 am
From: zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com (GregS)

In article <MPG.22e123dbff71726b989e7e@news.individual.net>, krw <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzz> wrote:
>In article <g57jos$d36$2@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>,
>zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com says...
>> In article <MPG.22e067da4eb0bb1e989e77@news.individual.net>, krw
> <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzz> wrote:
>> >In article <g54uji$nkv$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>,
>> >zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com says...
>> >> In article <MPG.22df1c1ee7abf69f989e70@news.individual.net>, krw
>> > <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzz> wrote:
>> >> >In article <g52fmu$u9q$1@aioe.org>, tmclone@searchmachine.com
>> >> >says...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> <hchickpea@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:33i974tg8ojk98l0l343fnj8iravfqutmg@4ax.com...
>> >> >> > On Tue, 8 Jul 2008 22:50:07 -0400, "JonquilJan" <ward39@imcnet.net>
>> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>There was one home about half a mile from me - where it was tried to
>> >> >> >>insulate. Once they took off the outer shell, there was a frame of
> very
>> >> >> >>large hand hewn (could see the ax marks) beans - filled in with
> bricks
>> >> >> >>and
>> >> >> >>mortar between.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> Everything in my house was hand hewn. The home inspector who did the
>> > report
>> >> >> before I bought the place thought the joists weren't real wood because
>> > they
>> >> >> were "misshapen and just way too big" (his words). When I pointed out
> that
>> >
>> >> >> the house was nearly 200 years old, he then assumed that the wood would
> be
>> >
>> >> >> rotten. He was extremely surprised that everything in the house was
> just
>> >> >> fine. He commented that the house was "better built than anything
> they're
>> >> >> making now". Well, yeah, since my house was built to last, not to
> current
>> >> >> "code". 24" on center. Are they crazy? Everything in my house is 12-15"
> on
>> >
>> >> >> center, and 4x4, not 2x4. Hardwood floors over diagonally laid tongue
> and
>> >> >> groove subfloor over wide plank pine. An elephant could jump up and
> down
>> > on
>> >> >> my floors and you'd never feel it. I would never live in a "new" house.
>
>> >> >
>> >> >I would bet that a "properly built" house today will use a lot less
>> >> >heat than yours. 2x6s 24" on center construction is certainly
>> >> >better than 2x4s on 16" centers, and even somewhat better than 2x6s
>> >> >16" on center. Wood is a pretty poor insulator.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> 1 inch of dry wood = R1.
>> >
>> >Yes, pretty damned poor.
>> >
>> >> 2 inches = R2
>> >
>> >Rather obvious.
>>
>> Put a reflective surface on that and you can add 1.5. Sometimes a reflective
>> surface can be much more than R 1.5 depending if there are really hot
>> areas involved, or high differentials.
>
>Not that it has anything to do with the issue at hand, but this is
>simply wrong. The reflective barrier will not keep heat in; zero R
>value. It will *reflect* IR radiation and is useful in areas with
>lots of sun, but it adds zero to the R value.
>

Tell that to the people who label their foam products at the home stores.
The reflective factor is added to the R value.
The reflective surface also inhibits radiation as well as reflecting radiation.

greg

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 7:23 am
From: zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com (GregS)

In article <g57q21$ekg$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com (GregS) wrote:
>In article <MPG.22e123dbff71726b989e7e@news.individual.net>, krw
> <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzz> wrote:
>>In article <g57jos$d36$2@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>,
>>zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com says...
>>> In article <MPG.22e067da4eb0bb1e989e77@news.individual.net>, krw
>> <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzz> wrote:
>>> >In article <g54uji$nkv$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>,
>>> >zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com says...
>>> >> In article <MPG.22df1c1ee7abf69f989e70@news.individual.net>, krw
>>> > <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzz> wrote:
>>> >> >In article <g52fmu$u9q$1@aioe.org>, tmclone@searchmachine.com
>>> >> >says...
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> <hchickpea@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> >> >> news:33i974tg8ojk98l0l343fnj8iravfqutmg@4ax.com...
>>> >> >> > On Tue, 8 Jul 2008 22:50:07 -0400, "JonquilJan" <ward39@imcnet.net>
>>> >> >> > wrote:
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >>There was one home about half a mile from me - where it was tried to
>>> >> >> >>insulate. Once they took off the outer shell, there was a frame of
>> very
>>> >> >> >>large hand hewn (could see the ax marks) beans - filled in with
>> bricks
>>> >> >> >>and
>>> >> >> >>mortar between.
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> Everything in my house was hand hewn. The home inspector who did the
>>> > report
>>> >> >> before I bought the place thought the joists weren't real wood because
>>> > they
>>> >> >> were "misshapen and just way too big" (his words). When I pointed out
>> that
>>> >
>>> >> >> the house was nearly 200 years old, he then assumed that the wood
> would
>> be
>>> >
>>> >> >> rotten. He was extremely surprised that everything in the house was
>> just
>>> >> >> fine. He commented that the house was "better built than anything
>> they're
>>> >> >> making now". Well, yeah, since my house was built to last, not to
>> current
>>> >> >> "code". 24" on center. Are they crazy? Everything in my house is
> 12-15"
>> on
>>> >
>>> >> >> center, and 4x4, not 2x4. Hardwood floors over diagonally laid tongue
>> and
>>> >> >> groove subfloor over wide plank pine. An elephant could jump up and
>> down
>>> > on
>>> >> >> my floors and you'd never feel it. I would never live in a "new"
> house.
>>
>>> >> >
>>> >> >I would bet that a "properly built" house today will use a lot less
>>> >> >heat than yours. 2x6s 24" on center construction is certainly
>>> >> >better than 2x4s on 16" centers, and even somewhat better than 2x6s
>>> >> >16" on center. Wood is a pretty poor insulator.
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >> 1 inch of dry wood = R1.
>>> >
>>> >Yes, pretty damned poor.
>>> >
>>> >> 2 inches = R2
>>> >
>>> >Rather obvious.
>>>
>>> Put a reflective surface on that and you can add 1.5. Sometimes a reflective
>>> surface can be much more than R 1.5 depending if there are really hot
>>> areas involved, or high differentials.
>>
>>Not that it has anything to do with the issue at hand, but this is
>>simply wrong. The reflective barrier will not keep heat in; zero R
>>value. It will *reflect* IR radiation and is useful in areas with
>>lots of sun, but it adds zero to the R value.
>>
>
>Tell that to the people who label their foam products at the home stores.
>The reflective factor is added to the R value.
>The reflective surface also inhibits radiation as well as reflecting radiation.

A reflective surface needs open space for it to reflect. If there is no space
its worthless. On a building here, they specified foil backed drywall
for RF interference. This is also mold proof, and I don't know why its not
usually seen at the home buiding stores, and of course can add some
R value if used in that way.

greg

== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 10:07 am
From: nicksanspam@ece.villanova.edu

krw <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

>... The reflective barrier will not keep heat in; zero R value.
>It will *reflect* IR radiation and is useful in areas with
>lots of sun, but it adds zero to the R value.

Wrong.

Here's one way to estimate the R-value of a radiant barrier based on the air
gap and the emissivities and surface temps and the direction of heatflow from

http://www.reflectixinc.com/pdf/RIMA_Handbook.pdf

10 DIM HC(18,6)
20 DATA 0.359,0.184,0.126,0.097,0.080,0.068
30 DATA 0.361,0.187,0.129,0.100,0.082,0.072
40 DATA 0.363,0.189,0.131,0.101,0.085,0.075
50 DATA 0.364,0.190,0.132,0.103,0.087,0.078
60 DATA 0.365,0.191,0.133,0.105,0.090,0.081
70 DATA 0.366,0.192,0.134,0.106,0.092,0.082
80 DATA 0.360,0.204,0.169,0.179,0.185,0.189
90 DATA 0.366,0.267,0.223,0.233,0.238,0.241
100 DATA 0.373,0.247,0.261,0.271,0.275,0.276
110 DATA 0.380,0.270,0.292,0.301,0.303,0.303
120 DATA 0.387,0.296,0.317,0.325,0.327,0.326
130 DATA 0.394,0.319,0.339,0.347,0.347,0.345
140 DATA 0.381,0.312,0.295,0.284,0.275,0.268
150 DATA 0.429,0.381,0.360,0.346,0.336,0.328
160 DATA 0.472,0.428,0.405,0.389,0.377,0.368
170 DATA 0.511,0.465,0.440,0.423,0.410,0.400
180 DATA 0.545,0.496,0.469,0.451,0.437,0.426
190 DATA 0.574,0.523,0.494,0.475,0.460,0.449
200 FOR I=1 TO 18'read data table
210 FOR J=1 TO 6
220 READ HC(I,J)
230 NEXT:NEXT
240 T1=105'temperature of surface 1 (F)
250 E1=.03'emissivity of surface 1
260 T2=75'temperature of surface 2 (F)
270 E2=.8'emissivity of surface 2
280 L=2'air gap (valid range: 0.5-3")
290 LI=INT(2*L+.5)'length table index
300 HF=0'heatflow 0-down,1-sideways,2-up
310 E=1/(1/E1+1/E2-1)'effective emittance
320 TM=(T1+T2)/2'mean temp (F)
330 DT=ABS(T1-T2)'temp diff (valid range: 5-30 F)
340 DTI=INT(DT/5+.5+6*HF)'temp diff table index
350 HR=.00686*((TM+459.7)/100)^3'radiant conductance
360 R=1/(E*HR+HC(DTI,LI))'US R-value (ft^2-F-h/Btu)
370 PRINT T1,E1,T2,E2
380 PRINT L,HF,R

T1 (F) E1 T2 (F) E2

105 .03 75 .8

gap heatflow US R-value

2" 0 (down) 7.146456

With more than one space in series (eg double-foil foamboard spaced away
from a basement wall), we can't just add R-values. We only know the overall
temp diff, so we have to iterate to find a solution. Estimating the system
R-value of a radiant barrier as installed is fairly complicated, so it's no
surprise that the FTC prohibits makers from advertising R-values for radiant
barriers to avoid confusing the public.

Nick

== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 10:13 am
From: nicksanspam@ece.villanova.edu

GregS <zekfrivo@zekfrivolous.com> wrote:

>Tell that to the people who label their foam products at the home stores.
>The reflective factor is added to the R value.

No, it is not. Double-foil foamboard labeled "R7.2" is closer to R11 if
it has air gaps on both sides.

Nick

== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 12:59 pm
From: krw

In article <g5840u$j8t@acadia.ece.villanova.edu>,
nicksanspam@ece.villanova.edu says...
> krw <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzz> wrote:
>
> >... The reflective barrier will not keep heat in; zero R value.
> >It will *reflect* IR radiation and is useful in areas with
> >lots of sun, but it adds zero to the R value.
>
> Wrong.

Not wrong. Foil does nothing to "resist" the conduction of heat
therefor has no "R" value. It will REFLECT radiated heat, but do
ZERO for conducted heat.

> Here's one way to estimate the R-value of a radiant barrier based on the air
> gap and the emissivities and surface temps and the direction of heatflow from
> http://www.reflectixinc.com/pdf/RIMA_Handbook.pdf

Estimate. Whoopie.

> 10 DIM HC(18,6)
> 20 DATA 0.359,0.184,0.126,0.097,0.080,0.068
> 30 DATA 0.361,0.187,0.129,0.100,0.082,0.072
> 40 DATA 0.363,0.189,0.131,0.101,0.085,0.075
> 50 DATA 0.364,0.190,0.132,0.103,0.087,0.078
> 60 DATA 0.365,0.191,0.133,0.105,0.090,0.081
> 70 DATA 0.366,0.192,0.134,0.106,0.092,0.082
> 80 DATA 0.360,0.204,0.169,0.179,0.185,0.189
> 90 DATA 0.366,0.267,0.223,0.233,0.238,0.241
> 100 DATA 0.373,0.247,0.261,0.271,0.275,0.276
> 110 DATA 0.380,0.270,0.292,0.301,0.303,0.303
> 120 DATA 0.387,0.296,0.317,0.325,0.327,0.326
> 130 DATA 0.394,0.319,0.339,0.347,0.347,0.345
> 140 DATA 0.381,0.312,0.295,0.284,0.275,0.268
> 150 DATA 0.429,0.381,0.360,0.346,0.336,0.328
> 160 DATA 0.472,0.428,0.405,0.389,0.377,0.368
> 170 DATA 0.511,0.465,0.440,0.423,0.410,0.400
> 180 DATA 0.545,0.496,0.469,0.451,0.437,0.426
> 190 DATA 0.574,0.523,0.494,0.475,0.460,0.449
> 200 FOR I=1 TO 18'read data table
> 210 FOR J=1 TO 6
> 220 READ HC(I,J)
> 230 NEXT:NEXT
> 240 T1=105'temperature of surface 1 (F)
> 250 E1=.03'emissivity of surface 1
> 260 T2=75'temperature of surface 2 (F)
> 270 E2=.8'emissivity of surface 2
> 280 L=2'air gap (valid range: 0.5-3")
> 290 LI=INT(2*L+.5)'length table index
> 300 HF=0'heatflow 0-down,1-sideways,2-up
> 310 E=1/(1/E1+1/E2-1)'effective emittance
> 320 TM=(T1+T2)/2'mean temp (F)
> 330 DT=ABS(T1-T2)'temp diff (valid range: 5-30 F)
> 340 DTI=INT(DT/5+.5+6*HF)'temp diff table index
> 350 HR=.00686*((TM+459.7)/100)^3'radiant conductance
> 360 R=1/(E*HR+HC(DTI,LI))'US R-value (ft^2-F-h/Btu)
> 370 PRINT T1,E1,T2,E2
> 380 PRINT L,HF,R
>
> T1 (F) E1 T2 (F) E2
>
> 105 .03 75 .8
>
> gap heatflow US R-value
>
> 2" 0 (down) 7.146456
>
> With more than one space in series (eg double-foil foamboard spaced away
> from a basement wall), we can't just add R-values. We only know the overall
> temp diff, so we have to iterate to find a solution. Estimating the system
> R-value of a radiant barrier as installed is fairly complicated, so it's no
> surprise that the FTC prohibits makers from advertising R-values for radiant
> barriers to avoid confusing the public.

Weasel words that say foil has no 'R' value.

--
Keith

==============================================================================
TOPIC: How much does AC cost you?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/cdcf4b45a8aaec43?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 7:29 am
From: Jeff

clams_casino wrote:
> James wrote:
>
>> On Jul 11, 7:01 am, clams_casino <PeterGrif...@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> James wrote:
>>>
>>>> I get 30 mpg not using AC but only 25 mpg with it on.
>>>>
>>> That's contrary to any study I've read, unless perhaps you are driving
>>> with your windows closed. Any references?
>>>
>>> At best, I see a 15% variation in tank-to-tank mileage, quite
>>> consistently throughout the year. I've also found no significant
>>> differences comparing spring, fall, winter & summer gas mileage.
>>>
>>> Consequently, I'm reluctant to believe there is any significant
>>> difference.
>>>
>>
>> Well, 30 less 15% is about 25.
>>
>>
>>
>
> 15% is the maximum variation I've seen over 110k on one car and 85k on
> the other - more likely variations due to how much the tank was filled /
> type of driving during any particular tank (city vs. hwy).
>
> As previously mentioned, I have also compared fall, winter, summer &
> spring mileage with essentially no significant differences (less than
> 1/2 mile).
>
> I highly doubt there is much difference w/wo air.

I see no difference myself. I have an instantaneous mileage gauge.

But all this will vary depending on the car and the way it is driven.

A small engine will need proportionately more of it's power to run the
AC. Car ACs are different also.

As far as power, many, if not most cars, cut off the AC when max power
is required. Your car appears to be different.

I'd say that a lot of fuel economy is lost while waiting in a parked
car. On a hot day, the temptation to leave the car running with it's AC
on is great!
>
>
>
> "In Edmunds.com's test, conducted at a steady 65 miles per hour,
> "windows down" or "A/C on" made virtually no difference in mileage."
>
> "Basically, the extra fuel used by the air conditioner is made up for in
> improved aerodynamics at high speeds (vs.windows down). Your not really
> saving any fuel but, at least on the highway, the A/C isn't costing you
> appreciably either."

Everything I've read is along those lines.

Jeff

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Subscribed to the paper --- Was this frugal??
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/492a471c6c732495?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 9:04 am
From: Seerialmom

On Jul 10, 10:02 pm, "DemoDisk" <pack...@nospam.com> wrote:
> Our metropolitan area has just one major local newspaper which I buy on
> Friday, Sunday, and maybe one or two other days. It's reputation isn't
> good, but there are sales ads, the free TV guide, coupons, etc.
>
> Today, they offered it for 3, 6, or 12 months at $10/month, so I
> subscribed for their deal's maximum 2 years for $240. I figure that
> it's money I would have spent anyway for fewer papers and more hassle
> going out for it (and paying 50¢ or $1.50 for the Sunday).
>
> Still, the up-front outlay is a lot for me at this time, so I was
> wondering... Do you think it was the right choice?
>
> JPM

Now if you were walking to the corner store to buy those papers
before, you've just lost some exercise time. If you only wanted the
sale ads, a more frugal approach would be to drop into a BK or Denny's
after the breakfast rush, people usually leave the newspaper behind.
That said, I do subscribe to our local paper and have for many years
and for the same reasons you mentioned. However I don't prepay that
far in advance (but I do take Time up on their offer of the magazine
when I get the "Professional" rate). Whether it was the right choice
for you, only you know. To me it sounds like you're suffering buyers
remorse.

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 9:51 am
From: art.shapiro@unisys.com (Arthur Shapiro)

In article <7Lidndt_r43zdOvVnZ2dnUVZ_tDinZ2d@yournetplus.com>, "DemoDisk" <packrat@nospam.com> wrote:
Do you think it was the right choice?

I'd say ten bucks a month for a newspaper of adequate quality is a fine deal.

I'm paying $38.60 every six weeks for the Los Angeles Times, which is getting
ever smaller and more parochial. It used to be a world-class paper. Your
expenditure strikes me as quite intelligent.

Art

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 1:42 pm
From: "Bay Area Holdout"

Makes perfect sense but as mentioned depends on content of paper. If you
read it reguallly and enjoy it then makes sense. Downside is if you move or
something happens to the paper like the content going to an end of a
political spectrum you don't like or going out of business(not allthat
unheard of in the next few years I think) are allowed a pro-rated refund of
the unused portion?

Our local is shrinking all the time after it's recent sale and showing a
political "tilt" we don't always agree with. So we've moved away from daily
reading and get a Sunday paper($1.00) every other week or so.

On a pure dollars and cents rule, I've found that most weekly ad's of major
stores can now be accessed via the Web and with your Zip Code you get the
exact same ad paperless and coupons can be printed out if they strike your
interest. Local grocery stores and other stores typically send us ads with
our mail once a week as well.
Additional advantage is that if you enroll online to get the ads sent to
you, you get additional coupons and discounts as well. Many don't like the
email spam factor but I browse and delete and easier than having a bunch of
newsper around to recycle.

As for smaller local stores, the freebie papers have plenty of discount
coupons for local resturants and such. Their rates are cheaper and doubtful
they would be in the local paper.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Donating blood
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/51be6adc7412e820?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 9:09 am
From: The Real Bev

hchickpea@hotmail.com wrote:

> People die. I once had the wife of a janitor accuse me of killing her
> husband by asking him to do his job. He happened to die of a coronary
> within a month of my supervising him.

Is "supervising" like "counseling heavily about the head and shoulders"?

--
Cheers, Bev
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"There is nothing wrong with it and I didn't do it and, my gosh,
well I guess I just remembered I did...sort of...but it wasn't my
fault...because my staff didn't tell me...and I was very busy
meditating on the issues and besides I thought I was in Cleveland."
-- Meg Greenfield

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 9:28 am
From: Seerialmom

On Jul 5, 9:27 pm, hchick...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 10:31:07 -0700 (PDT), val189
>
> <gwehr...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > Ever thought about your psa score?
>
> >Let me remind you of a friend who also boasted that he hadn't been to
> >a doctor in 25 years - and died in bed one night - coronary - widow
> >still angry that he might have prevented his untimely death.
>
> Last time I checked, those weren't related...
>
> People die. I once had the wife of a janitor accuse me of killing her
> husband by asking him to do his job. He happened to die of a coronary
> within a month of my supervising him.

Not that I agree with the wife of a janitor, but there are "some"
people who assign their stress issues to those around them (rather
than taking responsibility for their own reactions...of which stress
is one). Sometimes you can't prevent the reaction, it just
happens..like when a blood vessel in my eye burst because I was trying
to listen to a conference call and coworkers were making snide remarks
about the speaker (with their mute button on, of course). I could
feel my frustration rising but didn't know that happened until I
walked into the restroom later.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: You are not frugal if......
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/3c5261ec65743940?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 7 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 9:12 am
From: Seerialmom

On Jul 10, 8:00 pm, William Souden <sou...@nospam.com> wrote:
> You ,as an individual. pay more than $100 for landline,cell and
> internet access. Find a company offering two or all three at a combo rate.

Details on who currently provides all 3 for the price you're
referencing, please.

> You pay for travelers checks. Better to get them free at AAA or, even
> better, use a debit card on trips.

Wrong: AAA has partnered with Travelex** to offer Traveler Cheques.
Never has traveling to Europe been easier. American Express Euro and
Pounds Traveler Cheques are accepted in 12 European nations. US
Traveler cheques are also available. Please note a $9.95 handling fee
for US Travelers Cheques purchases

> You pay 25 cents a gallon more at a brand name station than at no name
> place across the street.

My coworker swears that his car runs better on "name
brand"...personally I think he's smokin' crack. However if my car
develops the sludges because I didn't use Chevron with Techron...I
might change my tune.

> You pay an extra fee for concert and sporting events which have you go
> to Will Call when you can print the tickets at home.

What if you're being frugal by not having the expense of a computer
and the ink for a printer?

== 2 of 7 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 10:10 am
From: clams_casino

Seerialmom wrote:

>
>
>My coworker swears that his car runs better on "name
>brand"...personally I think he's smokin' crack. However if my car
>develops the sludges because I didn't use Chevron with Techron...I
>might change my tune.
>
>
>
>
A few years back, I analyzed about 150k miles of driving and found that
the gas from brand names (Shell, Exxon, Amoco, Chevron, BP, etc)
averaged about 0.3 miles/gallon higher than the so-called off brands
(Pilot, Hess, Murphy, Racetrack, etc), but once I considered the fact
that more "off Brand" gasoline was purchased locally vs. more use of
"brand name" gas on out-of-state interstate trips where the relatively
small increase in mileage was likely due simply because of the higher
amount of interstate driving using the branded gas.

== 3 of 7 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 10:14 am
From: George Grapman

Seerialmom wrote:
> On Jul 10, 8:00 pm, William Souden <sou...@nospam.com> wrote:
>> You ,as an individual. pay more than $100 for landline,cell and
>> internet access. Find a company offering two or all three at a combo rate.
>
> Details on who currently provides all 3 for the price you're
> referencing, please.

I can not speak for the OP but I get my DSL and cell from AT&T for a
combined $45 a month. With a home office most of my cell usage is
incoming calls as I use a separate land line for outgoing calls. That
line is unlimited service from IDT for $35 a month. I assume that the
poster is not including the various fees that even those of us who work
in telecom do not always understand.
>
>> You pay for travelers checks. Better to get them free at AAA or, even
>> better, use a debit card on trips.
>
> Wrong: AAA has partnered with Travelex** to offer Traveler Cheques.
> Never has traveling to Europe been easier. American Express Euro and
> Pounds Traveler Cheques are accepted in 12 European nations. US
> Traveler cheques are also available. Please note a $9.95 handling fee
> for US Travelers Cheques purchases

I do not think I have purchased travelers checks since I first got a
debit card. When traveling I rarely carry more than $40 on me. If I need
cash I numerous options:

Go to any chain store,buy one item and get cash back.
My credit union is linked to network of other credit unions as well as
the 7/11 network with no fees for using their ATMs.
>
>> You pay 25 cents a gallon more at a brand name station than at no name
>> place across the street.
>
> My coworker swears that his car runs better on "name
> brand"...personally I think he's smokin' crack. However if my car
> develops the sludges because I didn't use Chevron with Techron...I
> might change my tune.
>
>> You pay an extra fee for concert and sporting events which have you go
>> to Will Call when you can print the tickets at home.
>
> What if you're being frugal by not having the expense of a computer
> and the ink for a printer?

I guess it is on a case by case basis. By the way, one should be wary
of buying computer generated tickets from an unknown person as they
could easily print multiple tickets but only the first one scanned at
the gate will be valid.
Reminds me of a dumb thief years ago when I has weekend season
tickets for the A's. Season tickets were laminated and had a totally
different look than individual game tickets. Someone in our section had
never gotten their season tickets (this was in the days before there
were scanned). The team issued replacements. One day someone showed up
with the originals. The usher called security. The person claimed the
got them at the box office a few weeks ago. They were arrested and later
convicted of mail theft.

== 4 of 7 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 10:35 am
From: Seerialmom

On Jul 11, 10:10 am, clams_casino <PeterGrif...@DrunkinClam.com>
wrote:
> Seerialmom wrote:
>
> >My coworker swears that his car runs better on "name
> >brand"...personally I think he's smokin' crack. However if my car
> >develops the sludges because I didn't use Chevron with Techron...I
> >might change my tune.
>
> A few years back, I analyzed about 150k miles of driving and found that
> the gas from brand names (Shell, Exxon, Amoco, Chevron, BP, etc)
> averaged about 0.3 miles/gallon higher than the so-called off brands
> (Pilot, Hess, Murphy, Racetrack, etc), but once I considered the fact
> that more "off Brand" gasoline was purchased locally vs. more use of
> "brand name" gas on out-of-state interstate trips where the relatively
> small increase in mileage was likely due simply because of the higher
> amount of interstate driving using the branded gas.

That would make sense. His argument was probably more about octane
level, but if I believed either Shell or Chevron...my poor engine is
clogging up like the arteries of someone who eats too much fat :)

== 5 of 7 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 10:40 am
From: Seerialmom

On Jul 11, 10:14 am, George Grapman <sfgeo...@paccbell.net> wrote:
> Seerialmom wrote:
> > On Jul 10, 8:00 pm, William Souden <sou...@nospam.com> wrote:
> >> You ,as an individual. pay more than $100 for landline,cell and
> >> internet access. Find a company offering two or all three at a combo rate.
>
> > Details on who currently provides all 3 for the price you're
> > referencing, please.
>
> I can not speak for the OP but I get my DSL and cell from AT&T for a
> combined $45 a month. With a home office most of my cell usage is
> incoming calls as I use a separate land line for outgoing calls. That
> line is unlimited service from IDT for $35 a month. I assume that the
> poster is not including the various fees that even those of us who work
> in telecom do not always understand.
>
>
>
> >> You pay for travelers checks. Better to get them free at AAA or, even
> >> better, use a debit card on trips.
>
> > Wrong: AAA has partnered with Travelex** to offer Traveler Cheques.
> > Never has traveling to Europe been easier. American Express Euro and
> > Pounds Traveler Cheques are accepted in 12 European nations. US
> > Traveler cheques are also available. Please note a $9.95 handling fee
> > for US Travelers Cheques purchases
>
> I do not think I have purchased travelers checks since I first got a
> debit card. When traveling I rarely carry more than $40 on me. If I need
> cash I numerous options:
>
> Go to any chain store,buy one item and get cash back.
> My credit union is linked to network of other credit unions as well as
> the 7/11 network with no fees for using their ATMs.
>
I bought traveler's cheques when I was going on a trip to Hong Kong
about 8 years ago, but I also used my debit card. I think the
original point of Traveler's Cheques was that back before debit cards
were around people wrote personal checks. Outside of your local area
many businesses wouldn't take a personal check from out of towners,
Traveler's Cheques were the alternative (plus you didn't have to carry
a big roll of dough).

== 6 of 7 ==
Date: Thurs, Jul 10 2008 11:21 pm
From: Dave

> > You pay 25 cents a gallon more at a brand name station than at no
> > name place across the street.
>
> My coworker swears that his car runs better on "name
> brand"...personally I think he's smokin' crack. However if my car
> develops the sludges because I didn't use Chevron with Techron...I
> might change my tune.

Depends on what name brand your coworker is using. The only difference
I noticed is that I owned one car (a Suzuki) that ran noticeably better
and got better fuel economy if I filled it at any Shell station. It
wasn't a fluke, but a repeated occurrence until I noticed a pattern.
The pattern was, if I filled up at Shell, my MPG calculated at my NEXT
fill-up would be higher. And while the tank was full of mostly Shell,
the car ran noticeably smoother.

OTOH, it is a well-known fact that most fuel comes from the same
refineries. So in many cases, the brand name stuff could be the EXACT
SAME product sold at the no-name place across the street. -Dave

== 7 of 7 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 12:11 pm
From: Seerialmom

On Jul 10, 11:21 pm, Dave <no...@nohow.not> wrote:
> > > You pay 25 cents a gallon more at a brand name station than at no
> > > name place across the street.
>
> > My coworker swears that his car runs better on "name
> > brand"...personally I think he's smokin' crack. However if my car
> > develops the sludges because I didn't use Chevron with Techron...I
> > might change my tune.
>
> Depends on what name brand your coworker is using. The only difference
> I noticed is that I owned one car (a Suzuki) that ran noticeably better
> and got better fuel economy if I filled it at any Shell station. It
> wasn't a fluke, but a repeated occurrence until I noticed a pattern.
> The pattern was, if I filled up at Shell, my MPG calculated at my NEXT
> fill-up would be higher. And while the tank was full of mostly Shell,
> the car ran noticeably smoother.
>
> OTOH, it is a well-known fact that most fuel comes from the same
> refineries. So in many cases, the brand name stuff could be the EXACT
> SAME product sold at the no-name place across the street. -Dave

Is it also possible that the pump was either more precise (not sure if
you've seen the reports, but some are way of) or it could just be
better. Personally I think this sounds like something for the
Mythbusters or Top Gear:)

==============================================================================
TOPIC: McDonald's free wifi
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/f18d134b2385fd64?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 9:55 am
From: art.shapiro@unisys.com (Arthur Shapiro)

In article
<1df11318-a381-4607-b022-6a3ae3ec0936@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
James <j0069bond@hotmail.com> wrote:
--> I would just as
--> soon go to Starbucks or a public library rather than sit amongst a bunch
--> of noisy kids

But Starbucks, to put it mildly, isn't free. That's both the existing
T-Mobile and the newly-instituted AT&T Wi-Fi. I understand the latter is free
for AT&T wireless customers. (I happen to be a pay-per-minute T-Mobile user.)

Art

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Would you track finances online?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/d633520836dcf5d6?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 12:10 pm
From: George

me@privacy.net wrote:
> ediefaber@yahoo.com (elise d faber) wrote:
>
>> are your finances so complex that you really need this?
>
> No..... but I'm attracted to the automation aspect of
> Mint
>
> Basically it sounds like I wouldn't have to save any
> receipts thruout the day and set down at PC at night to
> enter them in Quicken
>
> I do know Clark Howard swears buy them..for what that's
> worth
>
> http://clarkhoward.com/shownotes/category/7/18/209/387/

Its interesting that anyone with a cold and aloof name like
"me@privacy.net" would even consider this.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Any Good Methods for Filtering and Reusing Cooking Oil ?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/d1dc6a245c3380b7?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 12:26 pm
From: Jeffy3

I'm new to occasional deep-frying and everyone recommends cheese cloth
or coffee filters, and I've tried to coffee filter method with a
funnel but the process is so slow and the funnel only holds so much so
I have to keep coming back every ten minutes to pour some more oil
in. Does anybody have any good ideas ?

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 1:05 pm
From: "Rod Speed"

Jeffy3 <jeffy3@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I'm new to occasional deep-frying and everyone recommends
> cheese cloth or coffee filters, and I've tried to coffee filter method
> with a funnel but the process is so slow and the funnel only holds
> so much so I have to keep coming back every ten minutes to pour
> some more oil in. Does anybody have any good ideas ?

Dont bother to filter it, just reuse it unfiltered.

== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 1:33 pm
From: "W. Stief"

Jeffy3 wrote:
> I'm new to occasional deep-frying and everyone recommends cheese cloth
> or coffee filters, and I've tried to coffee filter method with a
> funnel but the process is so slow and the funnel only holds so much so
> I have to keep coming back every ten minutes to pour some more oil
> in. Does anybody have any good ideas ?

How about a piece of metal window screen folded like a funnel or basket?

== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 1:36 pm
From: Jeffy3

On Jul 11, 4:33 pm, "W. Stief" <n...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Jeffy3 wrote:
> > I'm new to occasional deep-frying and everyone recommends cheese cloth
> > or coffee filters, and I've tried to coffee filter method with a
> > funnel but the process is so slow and the funnel only holds so much so
> > I have to keep coming back every ten minutes to pour some more oil
> > in. Does anybody have any good ideas ?
>
> How about a piece of metal window screen folded like a funnel or basket?

I guess what I'm asking is for methods that can handle a lot of oil at
once without having to stand there and and keep pouring little bits at
a time.

== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Jul 11 2008 1:45 pm
From: "Rod Speed"

Jeffy3 <jeffy3@hotmail.com> wrote
> W. Stief <n...@sbcglobal.net> wrote
>> Jeffy3 wrote

>>> I'm new to occasional deep-frying and everyone recommends
>>> cheese cloth or coffee filters, and I've tried to coffee filter method
>>> with a funnel but the process is so slow and the funnel only holds
>>> so much so I have to keep coming back every ten minutes to pour
>>> some more oil in. Does anybody have any good ideas ?

>> How about a piece of metal window screen folded like a funnel or basket?

> I guess what I'm asking is for methods that can handle a lot of oil at once
> without having to stand there and and keep pouring little bits at a time.

A big enough filter that will hold all the oil.

Not a shred of rocket science whatever required.

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

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

Friday, July 11, 2008

26 new messages in 9 topics - digest

No comments: