Frugal Living: 25 new messages in 11 topics

Tuesday, September 16, 2008

25 new messages in 11 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: Welfare babies, greasy diners and other tidbits
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/05c9411f66b99582?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 11:08 am
From: chief_thracian@yahoo.com (Chief Thracian)

On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 08:47:38 -0700 (PDT), James Nasium
<jimnasium37@gmail.com> wrote:

> you read it and I remain....

a bigoted, illiterate asshole who didn't get beyond the first grade,
both literally and emotionally.

--
Steal This Blog!
http://www.gay-bible.org/steal

==============================================================================
TOPIC: I am losing my butt
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/2b88d0c3914417a6?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 9 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 11:08 am
From: chief_thracian@yahoo.com (Chief Thracian)

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 14:23:16 +1000, "Rod Speed"
<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

>Its only the dregs that end up entirely dependant on social security.

Such as the severely disabled? You sound like Der Fuhrer.

>Yes there are. The great democracys survived two world wars, the great depression and
>countless other smaller wars fine

Fine? What about the incalculable suffering and deaths? Not to mention
all the INNOCENT victims wiped out by our so-called righteous battles?
Our nation has terrorized many other nations for many years now...and
gotten away with it, so far. This time around, it won't work.

> and we have worked out how to avoid depressions now

Nope. Capitalism has diligently wiped out all those safeguards put in
place by FDR.

>and even if we do have another, it will be much easier to take than the great depression was.

Nope. It will be far more disastrous, and most likely unrecoverable. 3
billion MORE people are in the capitalist game now ("Chindia"),
grabbing as much and as fast as they can, limited resources of oil and
gas.

>Wrong again. All those close to retirement have to do is avoid the most volatile markets.

EVERY market is highly volatile, dufus. There is NO safe haven when it
comes to gambling...er, I mean investing.

--
Steal This Blog!
http://www.gay-bible.org/steal

== 2 of 9 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 12:37 pm
From: timeOday

Rod Speed wrote:

>> Even if every retiree stacks up a pile of cash, they can't spend it unless somebody
>> is ready and willing to take a job cooking meals, changing bedpans, etc.
>
> Wrong again. They can spend it on what they provide for themselves instead.

What does that mean?

Imagine everybody in a hypothetical society decides to spend their money
on their 401K's instead of raising children.

After that society ages and there is nobody to provide goods and
services, what use are the investments? Their value would be destroyed
by inflation as all the "wealthy" retirees outbid each other for the
services of the last guy healthy enough to grow their food and push them
around in a wheelchair.

You can't design an economic system to negate shifting demographics.
All you can do is rely on immigration to keep the worker-to-nonworker
ratio high enough, or technology to increase productivity so the ratio
can fall without destroying everybody's standard of living.

== 3 of 9 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 12:40 pm
From: clams_casino

Don Klipstein wrote:

> The USA broad stock market has actrually done fairly well from the 1971
>high to now.
>

Especially if one ignores the past ten years.

== 4 of 9 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 2:00 pm
From: "h"

"timeOday" <timeOday-UNSPAM@theknack.net> wrote in message
news:Db6dnYnw4LZzl03VnZ2dnUVZ_gydnZ2d@comcast.com...

>
> You can't design an economic system to negate shifting demographics.
> All you can do is rely on immigration to keep the worker-to-nonworker
> ratio high enough, or technology to increase productivity so the ratio
> can fall without destroying everybody's standard of living.

Human population needs to drop down to a manageable 3-4 billion as soon as
possible. Adding more people makes the problem worse, not better. The "make
more people to grow the economy" garbage is a ponzi scheme that will
inevitably have disastrous consequences. We're starting to see it already.
We have to either consume a helluva lot less of everything, or we need to
have fewer people around to do the consuming. Your choice, but I'll take the
fewer people option. If people would just limit themselves one child, (or
none) for just a few generations, we could stave off the coming collapse
when we run out of resources. I'm an only child of two only children, and
I'm childfree. I've done my part towards negative population growth, which
is what we really need to combat economic and climate issues, since the
government isn't doing anything about either.

== 5 of 9 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 2:33 pm
From: timeOday

h wrote:

> We have to either consume a helluva lot less of everything, or we need to
> have fewer people around to do the consuming. Your choice, but I'll take the
> fewer people option.

Oh, I know. Ultimately the population *will* level off whether or not
it's a conscious choice. I don't claim to know how close we are, but
eventually we'd all be shoulder to shoulder. Of course in practice
starvation will kick in long before that happens.

However, a mushrooming population does improve the standard of living
*while it lasts* because a youth-skewed population is more able-bodied.
That, and the fact that nothing is more central to evolution than the
biological imperative to reproduce, means it's an addiction that will be
very hard to break.

== 6 of 9 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 2:53 pm
From: "Rod Speed"

Chief Thracian <chief_thracian@yahoo.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

>>> No matter how you rejigger the numbers, it still boils down to workers supporting retirees.

>> No it doesnt, plenty have more for their time past work than just social security.

>> Its only the dregs that end up entirely dependant on social security.

> Such as the severely disabled?

Only the dregs of the severely disabled end up entirely dependant on social security.

> You sound like Der Fuhrer.

He gassed them, fool.

>>> There really are no guarantees.

>> Yes there are. The great democracys survived two world wars,
>> the great depression and countless other smaller wars fine

> Fine?

Yep, fine.

> What about the incalculable suffering

Pure fantasy.

> and deaths?

Everyone dies sometime.

> Not to mention all the INNOCENT victims wiped out by our so-called righteous battles?

Nothing to do with the guarantees being discussed.

> Our nation has terrorized many other nations for many years now...

Nothing to do with the guarantees being discussed.

You're always welcome to set fire to yourself in 'protest' or sumfin.

> and gotten away with it, so far. This time around, it won't work.

Corse it will, just like it did during the great depression and those world wars, you watch.

>> and we have worked out how to avoid depressions now

> Nope.

Yep.

> Capitalism has diligently wiped out all those safeguards put in place by FDR.

They werent put in place by FDR, they were put in place by Congress.

And we wouldnt have seen the bailout of Bear Stearns, Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac if your lie was true.

>> and even if we do have another, it will be much easier to take than the great depression was.

> Nope.

Yep, you watch. There isnt even a technical recession yet.

> It will be far more disastrous, and most likely unrecoverable.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant fantasys, you watch.

> 3 billion MORE people are in the capitalist game now ("Chindia"), grabbing
> as much and as fast as they can, limited resources of oil and gas.

And we have invented the technology that allows us to yawn about that, nukes.

>>> All that said, yeah, the markets are way too volatile for people in or very near retirement.

>> Wrong again. All those close to retirement have to do is avoid the most volatile markets.

> EVERY market is highly volatile, dufus.

Cash under the bed isnt, fool.

> There is NO safe haven when it comes to gambling...er, I mean investing.

Wrong, as always. You can keep it in FDIC guaranteed accounts if you want to, fool.

== 7 of 9 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 3:03 pm
From: "Rod Speed"

timeOday <timeOday-UNSPAM@theknack.net> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

>>> Even if every retiree stacks up a pile of cash, they can't spend it unless somebody
>>> is ready and willing to take a job cooking meals, changing bedpans, etc.

>> Wrong again. They can spend it on what they provide for themselves instead.

> What does that mean?

That they dont have to employ anyone to do what you listed.

> Imagine everybody in a hypothetical society decides to
> spend their money on their 401K's instead of raising children.

Wont ever happen, there will always be plenty that choose to have children or keep having them by accident.

> After that society ages and there is nobody to provide
> goods and services, what use are the investments?

Thats a completely silly question because that will never happen.

You might as well ask how we would avoid getting gassed if everyone choose to eat beans and all farted at once.

> Their value would be destroyed by inflation as all the "wealthy"
> retirees outbid each other for the services of the last guy healthy
> enough to grow their food and push them around in a wheelchair.

Mindlessly silly and completely irrelevant scenario. Taint gunna happen.

> You can't design an economic system to negate shifting demographics.

Corse you can. The current economic system does that by allowing immigration.

> All you can do is rely on immigration to keep the worker-to-nonworker ratio high enough,

And that is part of the design of the current economic system.

> or technology to increase productivity

Which it ALWAYS does.

> so the ratio can fall without destroying everybody's standard of living.

And both of those keep happening, to ensure that everyone's standard of living continues fine.

Even Japan that chooses to minimise immigration still manages to maintain its living standards
fine, essentially by relying on technology mechanise what previously used a lot more manual
labor, and to import what is produced using very heavily mechanised agriculture in other parts
of the world, and pays for those by essentially swapping those for the cars etc that are produced
in highly automated factorys in Japan etc. Works fine.

== 8 of 9 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 3:11 pm
From: "Rod Speed"

h <tmclone@searchmachine.com> wrote
> timeOday <timeOday-UNSPAM@theknack.net> wrote

>> You can't design an economic system to negate shifting demographics.
>> All you can do is rely on immigration to keep the worker-to-nonworker
>> ratio high enough, or technology to increase productivity so the
>> ratio can fall without destroying everybody's standard of living.

> Human population needs to drop down to a manageable 3-4 billion as soon as possible.

Nope, not in the modern first world which isnt even self replacing on population now if you take out immigration.

> Adding more people makes the problem worse, not better.

Nope, not in the modern first world which isnt even self replacing on population now if you take out immigration.

> The "make more people to grow the economy" garbage is a ponzi scheme that will inevitably have disastrous
> consequences.

Nope, not in the modern first world which isnt even self replacing on population now if you take out immigration.

> We're starting to see it already.

Nope, not in the modern first world which isnt even self replacing on population now if you take out immigration.

> We have to either consume a helluva lot less of everything, or we need to have fewer people around to do the
> consuming.

It aint that binary. We can move to better sources of energy like nukes instead.

> Your choice, but I'll take the fewer people option.

I'll take the improved technology route myself.

> If people would just limit themselves one child, (or none) for just a few generations,

No need in the modern first world which isnt even self replacing on population now if you take out immigration.

> we could stave off the coming collapse when we run out of resources.

We wont ever run out of resources, the most we will ever do is change the resources we use.

> I'm an only child of two only children, and I'm childfree. I've done my part towards negative population growth,

And you didnt need to do that because you are part of the modern first world
which isnt even self replacing on population now if you take out immigration.

> which is what we really need to combat economic and climate issues,

Nope, we'll survive them fine, you watch.

> since the government isn't doing anything about either.

Nothing needs to be done in the first world.

It would be handy if the worst of the third world came to their senses, but thats unlikely while every those fools
in Rome and the Muslims dont come to their senses on the number of kids they encourage their fools to have.

== 9 of 9 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 3:15 pm
From: "Rod Speed"

timeOday <timeOday-UNSPAM@theknack.net> wrote:
> h wrote:
>
>> We have to either consume a helluva lot less of everything, or we
>> need to have fewer people around to do the consuming. Your choice,
>> but I'll take the fewer people option.
>
> Oh, I know. Ultimately the population *will* level off whether or not it's a conscious choice.

It has already right thruout the modern first and second world. Not one of
them is even self replacing on population now if you take out immigration.

> I don't claim to know how close we are, but
> eventually we'd all be shoulder to shoulder.

Nope, nothing like it. It isnt even like that in the highest density of population
places in the world like HongKong.

> Of course in practice starvation will kick in long before that happens.

Its likely that the rest of the world will end up self limiting without
that just like ALL of the modern first and second world has done.

> However, a mushrooming population does improve the standard of living
> *while it lasts* because a youth-skewed population is more able-bodied.

Have fun explaining china compared with india.

> That, and the fact that nothing is more central to evolution than the biological
> imperative to reproduce, means it's an addiction that will be very hard to break.

Nope, thats happened right thruout the modern first and second world without any explicit action at all.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Dry pet food recalled due to harboring Salmonella
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/ac49610c6ba81d91?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 11:30 am
From: blackwidow@spiders.com

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:20:33 -0400, "h" <tmclone@searchmachine.com>
wrote:

>
><blackwidow@spiders.com> wrote in message
>news:ivjvc49ptigjdao56j9nkbdukdq5itrbib@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 01:37:45 -0400, "h" <tmclone@searchmachine.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Mark Anderson" <mea@nospambrandylion.com> wrote in message
>>>news:MPG.2338fa0ab294d54a989ac3@chi.news.speakeasy.net...
>>>> In article letterman@invalid.com says...
>>>>> Has anyone noticed that almost all of these contaminated and recalled
>>>>> human and pet foods in recent years is ALWAYS the stuff sold at
>>>>> Walmart. Just one of several reasons I will not buy any foods from
>>>>> Walmart anymore.
>>>>>
>>>>> The following are sold at Walmart
>>>>> * Pedigree
>>>>> * Ol' Roy
>>>>> * PetPride
>>>>> * Special Kitty
>>>
>>>My two cats were poisoned last March by the Special Kitty (Walmart) pouch
>>>brand. They both lived, but they're still on meds and I'm out over $3k and
>>>climbing. I still buy pouch cat food at Walmart, but only Purina brand,
>>>since Purina (supposedly) controls all the ingredients of their products,
>>>and nothing comes from China.
>>>
>>
>> I'll agree that Purina is good feed, but I'd bet you can get it
>> cheaper somewhere other than Walmart.
>
>No other store around here sells the pouches cheaper than Walmart. I don't
>like Walmart either, but I will always shop where the prices are lowest.
>

I look for the cheapest prices too, but I'm not willing to sell out my
country for a few pennies. The cost of Purina cat food is 46 cents
more at a local feed mill. The feed mill is closer, so I save those
pennies in gas. At the same time, I can buy mens socks at Dollar
General (a bag of 6 pairs) for almost $2 less than at Walmart, and
it's the same brand. There again, Dollar General is closer than
Walmart so I save more on gas. Walmart wants you to believe they are
cheaper, but are they really? Yes, some items are cheaper, but many
are the same or more. Most of their food is quite a bit more than the
local grocery store. Motor Oil for my car is around 70 cents more per
quart at Walmart than at Dollar General. Both are Penzoil of the same
grade. The generic oil at Walmart is more than a dollar more per
quart. I only go to Walmart when I need something at 2am and it's
critical, such as toilet paper. I do everything to avoid that place.
They are ruining the economy and our country.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 1:50 pm
From: "h"

<blackwidow@spiders.com> wrote in message
news:l8uvc4tjfk53fin6ql5e1ssd0fimv9im03@4ax.com...
> Walmart wants you to believe they are
> cheaper, but are they really? Yes, some items are cheaper, but many
> are the same or more.

Well, for me the Wal-Mart is the closest store, and MUCH cheaper on
everything I buy (except meat) than the grocery stores, so yeah, they are
cheaper. Granted, I buy practically no packaged food of any kind except for
pet food, and I get my meat once a month from the butcher, so I don't really
buy that much at Walmart. We grow most of our veg and we don't eat grains,
so dairy and fruit are pretty much the only things we buy from Walmart.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: china discount shoes www.straat-pattas.com
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/96c48beea3020b9c?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 11:31 am
From: paypal nike

china discount shoes www.straat-pattas.com
china discount shoes www.straat-pattas.com china discount shoes
china
www.straat-pattas.com use discount price sell shoes, discount
shoes , is best price

dicount shoes, our company is big shoes you can use paypal buy
product

of you like
discount shoes jordan shoes china shoes factory

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Reusing Water
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/fd655be017f95057?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 12:44 pm
From: Lou

On Sep 16, 4:31 am, Petepeng...@webtv.net (P T) wrote:
> In a similar vein, I read an article about a man near me who rigged up a
> series of pipes, chutes, and a large container, to store rain water that
> ran off his roof, for reuse in the garden. Not only that, but he
> convinced his two neighbors to allow him to channel their run off into
> his cistern also.

I'm trying to figure a way to bury a few 50 gallon plastic drums
to drain the tub and shower, then use the water to water the
lawn and maybe flush the toilets. It seems to ridiculous to just use
the water once when you should at least be able to flush the
toilets with it.

Lou

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 1:40 pm
From: Seerialmom

On Sep 14, 6:36 am, Lou <loup...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I'm trying to think of a way to use bath and shower water to water the
> lawn. Has anyone come across a household underground system either
> professional or home made that could be retrofitted?
> Lou

Not doing it exactly that way but do have a 5 gallon bucket sitting in
the shower to catch some of the spray and the brief cups of water I
draw in pursuit of "hot". I've been watering my plants around the
house for the past month or so using this method.

Best bet would be to see if 1. it's legal where you are to redirect
"grey" water in the plumbing system (vs the passive approach I
mentioned above). 2. Google "grey water" or "home grey water".

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 3:16 pm
From: "Rod Speed"

Lou <loupark@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 16, 4:31 am, Petepeng...@webtv.net (P T) wrote:
>> In a similar vein, I read an article about a man near me who rigged
>> up a series of pipes, chutes, and a large container, to store rain
>> water that ran off his roof, for reuse in the garden. Not only
>> that, but he convinced his two neighbors to allow him to channel
>> their run off into his cistern also.
>
> I'm trying to figure a way to bury a few 50 gallon plastic drums
> to drain the tub and shower, then use the water to water the
> lawn and maybe flush the toilets. It seems to ridiculous to just use
> the water once when you should at least be able to flush the
> toilets with it.

All you need is the standard water tank and put that water in that.

Dont even need to bury it.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: CVS Pharmacist calls customer a "Fucking AIDS freak"
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/5f6c5d62367cf192?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 2:31 pm
From: Patriot Games

On Fri, 12 Sep 2008 00:56:10 GMT, "Martha Adams" <mhada@verizon.net>
wrote:
>"Patriot Games" <Patriot@America.Com> wrote in message
>news:7r0jc4ltaepcsbcteta3tv2qvmt7dlomld@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 22:25:19 -0700 (PDT), ultimauw@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>http://consumerist.com/5047882/cvs-employee-calls-customer-a-fucking-aids-freak
>>>Check out this stunning exchange between a Philadelphia CVS employee
>>>and a customer:
>>> His response was "Whatever, somebody needs to come deal with this
>>>because I'm about to go off..."
>>> "You're about to 'Go off?', I asked him."Do you really think
>>>that's the best thing to say to a paying customer?"
>>> And at this point, with his back turned to me, the young man
>>>muttered "Fucking AIDS freak."
>> Bwahahahahhahahaha!!
>> Most people don't like fags, and just about everybody doesn't like
>> AIDS-Fags!
>>>We are both currently on a
>>>medicaid-related health insurance plan, a situation that is new to us
>>>and directly related to his current health issues.
>> And the taxpayers are paying good money to keep a fag alive!?!?!
>> Now THAT is an INJUSTICE!
>==========
>Anybody want to guess if this fellow is a Republican?

Yes, I am. Cunt.

Any questions?

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 2:36 pm
From: Patriot Games

On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 04:37:17 GMT, chief_thracian@yahoo.com (Chief
Thracian) wrote:
>On Thu, 11 Sep 2008 16:47:43 -0400, Patriot Games
><Patriot@America.Com> wrote:
>>Most people don't like fags, and just about everybody doesn't like
>>AIDS-Fags!
>Hatred is nothing to be proud of. Nor is a prejudice justified, just
>because it's a majority opinion. Germans made that mistake, and it led
>to a holocaust.

You weren't paying attention, FAG.

>I feel terribly sorry for your wife or girlfriend (you have one) and
>for your children (if you have any). Must be a living hell to have to
>exist under the same roof with such a shitbagfull of hetero feces as
>yourself!

1 conservative heterosexual wife, 5 conservative heterosexual
children, 12 conservative heterosexual grandchildren.

That means we have YOU outnumbered, FAG.

>Gaymerica: love it or leave it!

There's NO SUCH THING.

At best maybe 4% of the population is FAGGOTS.

Which means we could EXTERMINATE ALL OF YOU and not miss any of ya's.

Fuck off, FAG.

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 2:37 pm
From: Patriot Games

On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 02:26:42 -0700 (PDT), ultimauw@hotmail.com wrote:
>On Sep 11, 1:47 pm, Patriot Games <Patr...@America.Com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 22:25:19 -0700 (PDT), ultim...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> >http://consumerist.com/5047882/cvs-employee-calls-customer-a-fucking-...
>> >Check out this stunning exchange between a Philadelphia CVS employee
>> >and a customer:
>> > His response was "Whatever, somebody needs to come deal with this
>> >because I'm about to go off..."
>> > "You're about to 'Go off?', I asked him."Do you really think
>> >that's the best thing to say to a paying customer?"
>> > And at this point, with his back turned to me, the young man
>> >muttered "Fucking AIDS freak."
>> Bwahahahahhahahaha!!
>> Most people don't like fa love ponies ponies, I want more ponies! Give me some ponies, I want to buy a pony!
>wait, you were sayin?

Editing someone's QUOTED WORDS is malicious posting.

Now you no longer exist.

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 3:08 pm
From: Jeff

Martha Adams wrote:
> "Patriot Games" <Patriot@America.Com> wrote in message
> news:7r0jc4ltaepcsbcteta3tv2qvmt7dlomld@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 22:25:19 -0700 (PDT), ultimauw@hotmail.com wrote:
>>> http://consumerist.com/5047882/cvs-employee-calls-customer-a-fucking-aids-freak
>>>
>>> Check out this stunning exchange between a Philadelphia CVS employee
>>> and a customer:
>>> His response was "Whatever, somebody needs to come deal with this
>>> because I'm about to go off..."
>>> "You're about to 'Go off?', I asked him."Do you really think
>>> that's the best thing to say to a paying customer?"
>>> And at this point, with his back turned to me, the young man
>>> muttered "Fucking AIDS freak."
>>
>> Bwahahahahhahahaha!!
>>
>> Most people don't like fags, and just about everybody doesn't like
>> AIDS-Fags!
>>
>>> We are both currently on a
>>> medicaid-related health insurance plan, a situation that is new to us
>>> and directly related to his current health issues.
>>
>> And the taxpayers are paying good money to keep a fag alive!?!?!
>>
>> Now THAT is an INJUSTICE!
>
> ==========
>
> Anybody want to guess if this fellow is a Republican?

Yes. Mr Games is a member of the party of closeted homosexuals.

He gets overly excited himself. You'll see him go off the loose end
time and again.

Jeff
>
> Titeotwawki -- mha [sci.med 2008 Sep 11]
>
>
>
>

==============================================================================
TOPIC: George Foreman Grill
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/5150d26d00ad4bfc?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 2:56 pm
From: Al Bundy

Chief Thracian wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 04:19:20 -0700 (PDT), Kevin <kevmarket@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >If you are looking for a wonderful blog that gives you details about
> >the George Foreman Grill, The Lean Mean Grilling Machine. You will find it to be helpful
> >to finding grill information and recipes.
>
> I don't see anything there, like you describe. Certainly, no
> "details". The blog is a ruse. You need to change the blog's subtitle
> from "Everything about the George Foreman Grill" to "Nothing about the
> George Foreman Grill".
>
>
Hey, what the heck. A high school kid has to start somewhere.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: help please
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/da20ade9242f8253?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 2:59 pm
From: Al Bundy

dmax5646@gmail.com wrote:
> make that free money
>
>
> BEST WAY TO EARN EXTRA POCKET CASH!
> Turn $6 into $600,000 OR MORE! : MAKE QUICK EASY MONEY FAST! EARN
> LOADS OF MONEY, HONESTLY, FAIRLY, AND LEGALLY! Greetings All, I found

Too late. Most of the $6 people have moved on to blogging scams now.
You are the last one in. your $6 is lost.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Regular Homeowner's H03 policy allowed for a Condo instead of H06?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/38bdd551b6e86ff5?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 3:27 pm
From: JayN

I live in a large Condo (it is a townhouse but is still a condo). I'm
shopping around for insurance, since my existing insurance company
raised the rates by 12%.

One agent, who works directly for one of the insurance companies, is
telling me that he checked with his manager, and they can write me a
regular Homeowner's policy HO3 instead which will be less expensive
than if I were covered on an HO6 (condo policy). He claims this is
allowed.

I believe the reason they are talking about an HO3 is because my
existing policy has almost 150K insured for the "Building Property" on
the inside of my unit. My unit is 3000 square feet if you include
the finished basement. They consider that to be unusual for a condo,
and he says that would be cheaper to just get a regular HO3, and they
claim this is allowed. The quote I am being giving is a couple
hundred less than what I am currently paying.

Just want to confirm that this is really allowed?

Thanks,

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Real Estate Exchanges beat Capitol Gains?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/40cc20de8723dfa1?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 3:32 pm
From: Gordon

Community Organizer <georgewkspam@humboldt1.com> wrote in
news:georgewkspam-0C0B66.08251416092008@sn-ip.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net:

> we were looking at a property in town to move to if and when we sell our
> homestead or I die and the wife wants to be closer to services.
> But we don't want to sell the country place and finding a Reverse
> Mortgage is proving difficult. The place doesn't qualify under HUD rules.
> So, I thought an Exchange of properties. the R.M. for possession of the
> place in town.
> Is there a book on how to do that? Do you need a broker that specializes?

It's called a Starker 1031 Exchange. IT's only for investment property,
not personal property. You don't need a broker, but you do need
a company to facilitate the exchange. There are many conditions that
have to be met. If you haven't ever done this, you should get
expert help or you can get yourself in trouble with the IRS.

But Note: You and your wife can may be able to take a combined
$500,000 Capitol gains deduction when you sell your property.

Do you need a broker? No. But, There are things you can do
like using part of your property now for income. Then you
can claim it as income property for the the 1031 exchange.
then you can take the $500,000 Capitol gains exclusion on
the personal portion of the property. If you are at all
hazy on the specifics of all this (IE: What I'm telling you
is news to you), you should definitly find a broker that
specilizes in 1031 exchanges and formulate a plan. Do it
now, not when you are ready to sell, since many of the things
you have to do need to be in place for 5 years or more.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: In-house visit by a "Rainbow vacuum" salesperson
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/8cbbcbc71d84da35?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Sep 16 2008 3:38 pm
From: Lew Hartswick

krw wrote:
> In article <weqdnUPrb--lSlPVnZ2dnUVZ_q3inZ2d@earthlink.com>,
> lhartswick@earthlink.net says...
>>And if you are a little (maybe a lot) older the radios, especially
>>by "Midwest" (as I remember the name), were competing by the number
>>of tubes. In some cases I think only with the heaters connected. :-)
>
> Weren't they all "five tube wonders"? Dangerous things! 50% chance
> of the metal chasis being live. The only thing between the operator
> and 120V was the plastic knob.
>
Most of them were 5 tubes but the Midwest ones advertized 8 and 10
tubes with dummies. And yes the chassis were at one side of the line
so if pluged in the wrong way could be HOT.
...lew...

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

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, September 16, 2008

25 new messages in 11 topics - digest

No comments: