http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Do you want your tax money to pay a forklift operator $103,000.00 a year - 3
messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/ddfc45ecb2d7616d?hl=en
* Doorbell always uses electricity! - 4 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3198294a289e9e57?hl=en
* Any cheap sites for Books? - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/4195d511d9cf97ef?hl=en
* Bailout costs every taxpayer $24,000.00. Are Americans just fat sheeple? - 2
messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/a7c77e2271603a4f?hl=en
* www.cicigogo.cn Nike AirMax,nike shox,Air Jordan,air force one,dunk - 1
messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/0aabd14fa6a991d5?hl=en
* What does one get when milk spoils? - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/cdb0345f0221733f?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Do you want your tax money to pay a forklift operator $103,000.00 a
year
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/ddfc45ecb2d7616d?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 26 2008 5:55 pm
From: LeRoy Blue
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 23:57:10 GMT, TruthTeller@nospam.net wrote:
>
>
>The problem is a Big 3 management failure. Not a worker failure.
>Furthermore, you are using the total per hour labor cost that is given
>out. That includes current workers and retirees. Using it as a current
>worker number -- as you guys are doing, is spinning the facts to suite the
>nonsense.
>
>The problem will not be changed by whining.
The auto workers got where they are drawing a ridiculous wage and
benefit package by collective whining (of course that will go
swooooosh, right over your pointed head.)
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 26 2008 5:57 pm
From: LeRoy Blue
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 22:29:14 -0600, Snowbound
<loosebowels@ixnay.invalid> wrote:
>In article <gg4t3b$76f$1@news.datemas.de>, Marsha <mas@xeb.net> wrote:
>
>> The subject was health benefits for union workers to cover abortion
>> (among other things), to which you gave an idiotic response.
>
>People like you should count your blessings. You could live under an
>enforced abortion regime, which this country has never seen. Plenty of
>regimes have been, though.
>
>Your advocacy of outlawing abortion only for women who can't afford to
>travel someplace where it is safe and legal is worse. It is a direct
>throwback to the days of slavery, the closest this land has ever been to
>enforced abortion. You would condemn the entire nation into being a
>prison for women simply to enforce your anti-empirical policies, usually
>based on religious faith. Then you would staunchly ignore the very pain
>and suffering you cultivated, claiming "they" have no right to your
>greedy prosperity.
>
>There has NEVER been any just law based solely on any religious faith,
>never in the all the history of mankind. It is essential to peace that
>any church or organized faith seriously attempting to intervene in the
>laws of man be buried by the fury of those they would enslave.
>Christian, Muslim, Jew, all the same. Piety is only real when it is
>humble and hopeful. Real faith forever shuns worldly ambition, all else
>is corrupt and false.
Damn! That post has got to set some sort of record for the number of
red herrings, straw men and fallacies it contains.
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 26 2008 6:33 pm
From: "Billzz"
"BE-VA" <blackwater-evangalist@testland.net> wrote in message
news:5uuri491cj25df3d478k4mkv04b6usqdfv@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 10:07:35 -0800 (PST), Daniel
> <sabot120mm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Nov 22, 7:58 pm, BE-VA <blackwater-evangal...@testland.net> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 06:52:42 -0800 (PST), Daniel
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> <sabot12...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> >On Nov 21, 5:51 pm, BE-VA <blackwater-evangal...@testland.net> wrote:
>>> >> On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:57:39 -0800 (PST), Daniel
>>>
>>> >> <sabot12...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >On Nov 19, 9:34 pm, BE-VA <blackwater-evangal...@testland.net>
>>> >> >wrote:
>>> >> >> On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:23:55 -0800 (PST), Daniel
>>>
>>> >> >> <sabot12...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >> >On Nov 18, 5:22 pm, TruthTel...@nospam.net wrote:
>>> >> >> >> In
>>> >> >> >> <96c903fc-9181-4782-a256-6a80cc40e...@a17g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
>>> >> >> >> on
>>> >> >> >> 11/18/2008
>>> >> >> >> at 01:32 PM, Daniel <sabot12...@hotmail.com> said:
>>>
>>> >> >> >> >On Nov 18, 1:29 pm, TruthTel...@nospam.net wrote:
>>> >> >> >> >> You people need to do some homework. The so-called $73 ph,
>>> >> >> >> >> is not cash.
>>> >> >> >> >> it includes benefits and retirement costs.
>>> >> >> >> >Which is STILL too much money for an unskilled laborer that
>>> >> >> >> >does nothing
>>> >> >> >> >more than hold a tool.
>>>
>>> >> >> >> Do your homework. Its not unskilled labor anymore.
>>>
>>> >> >> >Your job consists of holding a tool that does all the work for
>>> >> >> >you.
>>> >> >> >That by itself is the definition of unskilled. If you don't like
>>> >> >> >it,
>>> >> >> >tough.
>>>
>>> >> >> While I agree with you with regards to pay for work done I don't
>>> >> >> agree
>>> >> >> with your premise -- by your premise a military pilot flying a 25
>>> >> >> million dollar aircraft is unskilled labor since all he does is
>>> >> >> sit in
>>> >> >> the cockpit and pull levers and push buttons.
>>>
>>> >> >Except that pilot has a 4 year college education, and at least a
>>> >> >year
>>> >> >of flight school to learn to fly said aircraft, and does it for far
>>> >> >less than the toothess goober that holds the machine to tighten lug
>>> >> >nuts.
>>>
>>> >> Never the less he is what you said is an unskilled worker because, in
>>> >> most modern day aircraft, the pilot is only there to make sure that
>>> >> the take-off and landing are performed properly. Everything else is
>>> >> done by the machine.
>>>
>>> >Never flown a fighter jet I see.
>>>
>>> And you're never seen the cockpit of one (excepting in your computer
>>> games.) I have more time as crew in military aircraft than you have in
>>> your local bar, cillivillian.
>>
>>
>>Of course you do, and I'm no civilian.
>
>
> Of course you are. Other wise you would recognize the stupidity of the
> civilians arguing about what work is skilled and what isn't.
I was just passing by and wonder why people want to argue over things.
Anyway I took a college course in "Occupational Choice" (since the US Army
was paying for my degree and they wanted all "generalist" courses) and it
seems to be that if the job requires formal training, and a qualifying exam,
which results in a certification or license, then it is, by definition, a
skilled trade. So to make very veteran (I am posting from soc veterans)
secure in their past, I can state that, without any exeption, all military
jobs are a skilled trade. The infantry rifleman may be told to dig a
latrine (unskilled job) but he is actually a trained rifleman (got the
score, got the badge, etc.) and, by definition, a skilled occupation. I
hope that this has helped, and a Happy Thanksgiving to all.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Doorbell always uses electricity!
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3198294a289e9e57?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 26 2008 6:21 pm
From: don@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein)
In article <pirmi4hd88bqivrgvec4jf4gqq4i04m6ta@4ax.com>,
clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:
>On 25 Nov 08 01:22:33 +0 UTC, don@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein) wrote:
>
>>In <40c66d71-3ccd-4ec0-9c63-d8a772443a55@x14g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
>>meow2222@care2.com wrote:
>>
>>>Jim Redelfs wrote:
>><SNIP what was already said>
>>>
>>>The other point worth making is that the power and cost figures for
>>>standby power are routinely exaggerated.
>>
>> The ones I mentioned in this thread are actual measurements. I have a
>>watt meter!
>>
>>> Those with political interest
>>>in having everyone else unplug everything are either not competent in
>>>the subject, or are happy to be lses than honest to try to motivate
>>>others to unplug.
>>>
>>>And of course, biggest of all... youve only got one life, try to spend
>>>the time doing something useful. Speaking of which.... later.
>>
>> - Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
>
>
>I have quite an assortment of "wall warts" and other assorted power
>supplies for devices that have been discarded over the years.
>
>All of them work.
>I tested 19 of them for idle current draw on a digital meter that
>reeds to the closes 0.01 amp.
A true RMS one? If th meter is a true RMS one, it will boast about
that.
>6 of the 19 registered no parasitic draw at all, and the rest varied
>from .02 to .06 amps
>
>Additionally:
>
>My PC draws .05A
>The charger for my Craftsman battery drill draws 0.05A
>
>Both battery chargers for nicads / nimh batteries showed no idle
>current at all.
>
>A 200watt Variac shows no draw at all.
I have trouble a Variac that size not drawing a watt or two, And aren't
they rated in VA and not watts?
- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 26 2008 6:23 pm
From: don@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein)
In <i8aoi4dbeegge86aeio6sj4b13n9hllrkf@4ax.com>, clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:
>On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 05:36:33 -0800 (PST), meow2222@care2.com wrote:
>
>>cl...@snyder.on.ca wrote:
>>> On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 01:22:33 +0000 (UTC), don@manx.misty.com (Don
>>> Klipstein) wrote:
>>> >In <40c66d71-3ccd-4ec0-9c63-d8a772443a55@x14g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
>>> >meow2222@care2.com wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>Jim Redelfs wrote:
>>> ><SNIP what was already said>
>>> >>
>>> >>The other point worth making is that the power and cost figures for
>>> >>standby power are routinely exaggerated.
>>> >
>>> > The ones I mentioned in this thread are actual measurements. I have a
>>> >watt meter!
>>
>>I believe you already said that. Its good to have real figures.
>>
>>> I have quite an assortment of "wall warts" and other assorted power
>>> supplies for devices that have been discarded over the years.
>>>
>>> All of them work.
>>> I tested 19 of them for idle current draw on a digital meter that
>>> reeds to the closes 0.01 amp.
>>> 6 of the 19 registered no parasitic draw at all, and the rest varied
>>> from .02 to .06 amps
>>
>>Unfortunately its not current that counts, but power. Idle current on
>>transformers does not havea power factor of 1.
>
>True, as I stared before - however if there is no CURRENT draw, there
>is no POWER. The ones that draw no current consume no power. Those
>that draw .o5A consume somewhat less than the calculated 5.85 watts at
>117 volts.
>>
>>> Additionally:
>>>
>>> My PC draws .05A
>>> The charger for my Craftsman battery drill draws 0.05A
>>>
>>> Both battery chargers for nicads / nimh batteries showed no idle
>>> current at all.
>>>
>>> A 200watt Variac shows no draw at all.
>>
>>sounds like your meter's faulty
>
>Nope. 0 amps indicated means less than 0.01 amp. As I clearly stated,
>accurate to 0.01 amp.
If it indicates less than .01 amp for that Variac, and the Variac is not
disconnected somehow, I doubt the emeter is accurate at all.
- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 26 2008 9:19 pm
From: clare@snyder.on.ca
On Thu, 27 Nov 2008 02:23:05 +0000 (UTC), don@manx.misty.com (Don
Klipstein) wrote:
>In <i8aoi4dbeegge86aeio6sj4b13n9hllrkf@4ax.com>, clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 05:36:33 -0800 (PST), meow2222@care2.com wrote:
>>
>>>cl...@snyder.on.ca wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 01:22:33 +0000 (UTC), don@manx.misty.com (Don
>>>> Klipstein) wrote:
>>>> >In <40c66d71-3ccd-4ec0-9c63-d8a772443a55@x14g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
>>>> >meow2222@care2.com wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >>Jim Redelfs wrote:
>>>> ><SNIP what was already said>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>The other point worth making is that the power and cost figures for
>>>> >>standby power are routinely exaggerated.
>>>> >
>>>> > The ones I mentioned in this thread are actual measurements. I have a
>>>> >watt meter!
>>>
>>>I believe you already said that. Its good to have real figures.
>>>
>>>> I have quite an assortment of "wall warts" and other assorted power
>>>> supplies for devices that have been discarded over the years.
>>>>
>>>> All of them work.
>>>> I tested 19 of them for idle current draw on a digital meter that
>>>> reeds to the closes 0.01 amp.
>>>> 6 of the 19 registered no parasitic draw at all, and the rest varied
>>>> from .02 to .06 amps
>>>
>>>Unfortunately its not current that counts, but power. Idle current on
>>>transformers does not havea power factor of 1.
>>
>>True, as I stared before - however if there is no CURRENT draw, there
>>is no POWER. The ones that draw no current consume no power. Those
>>that draw .o5A consume somewhat less than the calculated 5.85 watts at
>>117 volts.
>>>
>>>> Additionally:
>>>>
>>>> My PC draws .05A
>>>> The charger for my Craftsman battery drill draws 0.05A
>>>>
>>>> Both battery chargers for nicads / nimh batteries showed no idle
>>>> current at all.
>>>>
>>>> A 200watt Variac shows no draw at all.
>>>
>>>sounds like your meter's faulty
>>
>>Nope. 0 amps indicated means less than 0.01 amp. As I clearly stated,
>>accurate to 0.01 amp.
>
> If it indicates less than .01 amp for that Variac, and the Variac is not
>disconnected somehow, I doubt the emeter is accurate at all.
>
> - Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
Well, I tested it and it works - and the idle current IS less than .01
amps. I'll check it with my lab meter when I get a chance.
== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 26 2008 9:30 pm
From: clare@snyder.on.ca
On Thu, 27 Nov 2008 02:21:21 +0000 (UTC), don@manx.misty.com (Don
Klipstein) wrote:
>In article <pirmi4hd88bqivrgvec4jf4gqq4i04m6ta@4ax.com>,
>clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:
>
>>On 25 Nov 08 01:22:33 +0 UTC, don@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein) wrote:
>>
>>>In <40c66d71-3ccd-4ec0-9c63-d8a772443a55@x14g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
>>>meow2222@care2.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>Jim Redelfs wrote:
>>><SNIP what was already said>
>>>>
>>>>The other point worth making is that the power and cost figures for
>>>>standby power are routinely exaggerated.
>>>
>>> The ones I mentioned in this thread are actual measurements. I have a
>>>watt meter!
>>>
>>>> Those with political interest
>>>>in having everyone else unplug everything are either not competent in
>>>>the subject, or are happy to be lses than honest to try to motivate
>>>>others to unplug.
>>>>
>>>>And of course, biggest of all... youve only got one life, try to spend
>>>>the time doing something useful. Speaking of which.... later.
>>>
>>> - Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
>>
>>
>>I have quite an assortment of "wall warts" and other assorted power
>>supplies for devices that have been discarded over the years.
>>
>>All of them work.
>>I tested 19 of them for idle current draw on a digital meter that
>>reeds to the closes 0.01 amp.
>
> A true RMS one? If th meter is a true RMS one, it will boast about
>that.
>
>>6 of the 19 registered no parasitic draw at all, and the rest varied
>>from .02 to .06 amps
>>
>>Additionally:
>>
>>My PC draws .05A
>>The charger for my Craftsman battery drill draws 0.05A
>>
>>Both battery chargers for nicads / nimh batteries showed no idle
>>current at all.
>>
>>A 200watt Variac shows no draw at all.
>
> I have trouble a Variac that size not drawing a watt or two, And aren't
>they rated in VA and not watts?
>
> - Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
It is rated at 200 va - which at unity power factor would be 200
watts. As it was used for controlling a heating element it had a 200
watt limit. It is a 0 - 110% voltage transformer, and the idle current
does not change from min to max .
The meter I am using is a UPM EM100 energy meter set to the amp scale.
The watt scale also reads 0, and when I plug one of the wall warts in
it does read - HOWEVER, the minimum reading is 2 watts and 0.02 amps,
so when it says 0, it means less than 0.02 amps, and less than 2
watts. (not less than 1, which I had previously reported)
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Any cheap sites for Books?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/4195d511d9cf97ef?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 26 2008 7:23 pm
From: Shawn Hirn
In article <Yr9Xk.693$no6.201@newsfe04.iad>,
Neil Jones <castellan2004-nschap@remove-this.yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am interested in buying some computer related books. Most of these
> computer books are out dated in 2 years. So I don't want to spend too
> much money on such books. Are there any web sites that sell computer
> books at better discounts than Amazon/Borders?
>
> Thank you in advance.
Check out your town's local public library to see what they have to
borrow. If there's a used bookstore in your area, check there too and
local flea markets.
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 26 2008 9:37 pm
From: gheston@hiwaay.net (Gary Heston)
In article <Yr9Xk.693$no6.201@newsfe04.iad>,
Neil Jones <castellan2004-nschap@remove-this.yahoo.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>I am interested in buying some computer related books. Most of these
>computer books are out dated in 2 years. So I don't want to spend too
>much money on such books. Are there any web sites that sell computer
>books at better discounts than Amazon/Borders?
Search for whatever you want at http://www.abebooks.com/ and pick
whichever bookstore has the best price.
>Thank you in advance.
You're welcome.
Gary
--
Gary Heston gheston@hiwaay.net http://www.thebreastcancersite.com/
"Behind every successful woman there is an astonished man"
General of the Army (four stars) Ann Dunwoody
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Bailout costs every taxpayer $24,000.00. Are Americans just fat sheeple?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/a7c77e2271603a4f?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 26 2008 7:28 pm
From: Shawn Hirn
In article <v4iqi4du0i45cvha5f0dq856a8a1ttdmbk@4ax.com>,
§tarkiller© <NoSpamSKS_SKanz@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 05:50:00 -0500, Shawn Hirn <srhi@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article
> ><fead5ddb-7ba0-413b-a804-246bf5bf972c@w24g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
> > Siobhan Medeiros <sbm2006@shaw.ca> wrote:
> >
> >> On Nov 24, 8:33 am, wis...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >> > Is it not interesting that the masses wander about scratching their
> >> > ample butts while accepting the
> >> > theft of their money?
> >> >
> >> > ted
> >>
> >> They stand to lose a lot more than that.
> >
> >We taxpayers would end up paying even more if the bailout isn't done.
> >The problem with Wall Street is that there is too much money managed by
> >two few firms. We need to diversify Wall Street and Detroit. Our economy
> >should depend so heavily on a few Wall Street firms and three automobile
> >manufacturers in Detroit.
>
> Where do you com,e up with such nonsense that the taxpayers will have
> to pay more if they don't give charity to a bunch of non managing
> buffoons?
Allowing the big three automakers to go bankrupt would plunge millions
into joblessness and cause many suppliers to close. The cost to deal
with all the new jobless claims, loss of wage taxes, etc. will easily
run more then the cost of lending the automakers a few billion dollars.
> You claim that the taxpayers will pay more by not bailing them out yet
> fail to think about the fact that this bullshit will end up setting a
> standard whereas dumb greedy bastards will continue to line up at the
> federal trough every time they place their own companies in financial
> jeopardy. Forget nationalized healthcare placing any burden on the
> taxpayer. This kind of garbage will eat up cash faster than a health
> plan could ever dream of doing.
Not at all. We need to tie the bailout with improved regulations that
prevent businesses from engaging in the practices that would give rise
to such problems again.
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 26 2008 9:09 pm
From: §tarkiller©
On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 22:28:32 -0500, Shawn Hirn <srhi@comcast.net>
wrote:
>In article <v4iqi4du0i45cvha5f0dq856a8a1ttdmbk@4ax.com>,
> §tarkiller© <NoSpamSKS_SKanz@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 05:50:00 -0500, Shawn Hirn <srhi@comcast.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article
>> ><fead5ddb-7ba0-413b-a804-246bf5bf972c@w24g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
>> > Siobhan Medeiros <sbm2006@shaw.ca> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Nov 24, 8:33 am, wis...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> >> > Is it not interesting that the masses wander about scratching their
>> >> > ample butts while accepting the
>> >> > theft of their money?
>> >> >
>> >> > ted
>> >>
>> >> They stand to lose a lot more than that.
>> >
>> >We taxpayers would end up paying even more if the bailout isn't done.
>> >The problem with Wall Street is that there is too much money managed by
>> >two few firms. We need to diversify Wall Street and Detroit. Our economy
>> >should depend so heavily on a few Wall Street firms and three automobile
>> >manufacturers in Detroit.
>>
>> Where do you com,e up with such nonsense that the taxpayers will have
>> to pay more if they don't give charity to a bunch of non managing
>> buffoons?
>
>Allowing the big three automakers to go bankrupt would plunge millions
>into joblessness and cause many suppliers to close. The cost to deal
>with all the new jobless claims, loss of wage taxes, etc. will easily
>run more then the cost of lending the automakers a few billion dollars.
You honestly believe that GM would just simply go broke and padlock
their doors?
Why all of the sudden do you all think that there is no such thing as
a buy out or a merger?
Goldman Sachs was given as one of the primary reasons for the
financial bailout. They got bought out before the bailout got
finalized and ended up not needing it.
If GM or Ford were to go bankrupt it would not instanlty mean all of
their employees would be jobless. Large corporations have been in
bankruptcy before and managed to reorganize into a profitable
business. Seems "kneejerk" is the word for the day as of late.
And since when has the government ever been able to manage any
business? Hell the feds owned a whorehouse and ended up bankrupting
it. You honestly think that an entity that isn't capable of making a
profit from a whorehouse has enough sense to run anything else that
they have no clue about?
And so they give GM a big fat check and say "you're going to make the
kind of green vehicles that we tell you to make". And then if those
vehicles end up not being the big boon to the market and don't sell
for shit, then what? You gonna give them more money with more strings
attached? How long are you willing to prop them up?
>
>> You claim that the taxpayers will pay more by not bailing them out yet
>> fail to think about the fact that this bullshit will end up setting a
>> standard whereas dumb greedy bastards will continue to line up at the
>> federal trough every time they place their own companies in financial
>> jeopardy. Forget nationalized healthcare placing any burden on the
>> taxpayer. This kind of garbage will eat up cash faster than a health
>> plan could ever dream of doing.
>
>Not at all. We need to tie the bailout with improved regulations that
>prevent businesses from engaging in the practices that would give rise
>to such problems again.
Dream on. As I asked, when has the government ever been able to make
a profit doing a damned thing? You're talking about the most wasteful
entity in the nation possibly the world telling someone how not to go
broke.
BTW, you people keep throwing the figure out there that "millions" of
employees would lose their jobs. Funny, the UAW has a total
membership of just around 500,000. That's all of the big three and
then some. And no one has yet explained with any kind of logic how a
GM bankruptcy, for example, extrapolates to "millions" losing jobs.
You people have talked of "fear mongering" for years now and damned if
ya'll aren't doing the exact same thing with this bullshit propaganda
aimed at putting the governments fingers more into the auto industry.
Regards
§tarkiller©
'A government big enough to give you everything you want, is
big enough to take away everything you have.'
"You cannot enrich the poor by impoverishing the rich."
==============================================================================
TOPIC: www.cicigogo.cn Nike AirMax,nike shox,Air Jordan,air force one,dunk
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/0aabd14fa6a991d5?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 26 2008 8:48 pm
From: cicitrade04@yahoo.cn
Nike Air Jordan 15 XV Force 1 Jordan Fusion AJF 15 AJF15 AJ15F
www.cicigogo.cn Jordan 15 fusion
Nike Air Jordan 16 XVI Force 1 Jordan Fusion AJF 16 AJF16 AJ16F
www.cicigogo.cn Jordan 16 fusion
Nike Air Jordan 17 XVII Force 1 Jordan Fusion AJF 17 AJF17 AJ17F
www.cicigogo.cn Jordan 17 fusion
Nike Air Jordan 18 XVIII Force 1 Jordan Fusion AJF18 AJF18 AJ18F
www.cicigogo.cn Jordan 18 fusion
Nike Air Jordan 19 XIX Force 1 Jordan Fusion AJF 19 AJF19 AJ19F
www.cicigogo.cn Jordan 19 fusion
Nike Air Jordan 20 XX Force 1 Jordan Fusion AJF 20 AJF20 AJ20F
www.cicigogo.cn Jordan 20 fusion
Nike Air Jordan 21 XXI PE Force 1 Jordan Fusion AJF 21 AJF21 AJ21F
www.cicigogo.cn Jordan 21 fusion
Nike Air Jordan XXII 22 Force 1 Jordan Fusion AJF 22 AJF22 AJ22F
www.cicigogo.cn Jordan 22 fusion
Nike Air Jordan XXIII 23 Force 1 Jordan Fusion AJF 23 AJF23 AJ23F
www.cicigogo.cn Jordan 23 fusion
Jordan 4-11 Fusion www.cicigogo.cn
Jordan 7-8 Fusion www.cicigogo.cn
Jordan 10-12 Fusion www.cicigogo.cn
Jordan 11-13 Fusion www.cicigogo.cn
Jordan 9-23 Fusion www.cicigogo.cn
Jordan 13-23 Fusion www.cicigogo.cn
Jordan 1 jordan 4 jordan 5 jordan 5 fusion jordan 5 jordan 3 fusion
jordan 3 Jordan 23 jordan 11 jordan 12
jordan 7 jordan 8 jordan 6 jordan 6 rings
jordan 13 jordan 14 jordan 15 jordan 2 Jordan 7.5 Jordan 9.5 Jordan
12.5 Jordan 3.5 Jordan 4.5 Jordan
15.5 Jordan 19.5 Jordan 21.5 Jordan 21 Jordan 22
AIR Jordan 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23
shoes on www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 1 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 2 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 3 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 4 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 5 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 6 Rings www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 6 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 7 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 8 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 9 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 10 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 11 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 12 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 13 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 14 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 15 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 16 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 17 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 18 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 19 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 20 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 21 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 22 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 23 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 3.5 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR AIR Jordan 4.5 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 7.5 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 9.5 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 12.5 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 15.5 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 19.5 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan 21.5 www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan Large Size Jordan www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan Size 14 Jordan www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan Size 15 shoes www.cicigogo.cn
AIR Jordan DMP www.cicigogo.cn
air jordan
Air max 87 www.cicigogo.cn
Air max 89 www.cicigogo.cn
Air max 90 www.cicigogo.cn
Air max 91 www.cicigogo.cn
Air max 95 www.cicigogo.cn
Air max 97 www.cicigogo.cn
Air max 2003 www.cicigogo.cn
Air max 2006 www.cicigogo.cn
Air max tn www.cicigogo.cn
Air max ltd www.cicigogo.cn
Air max stab www.cicigogo.cn
www.cicigogo.cn
air jordan
Shox R3 www.cicigogo.cn
Shox R4 www.cicigogo.cn
Shox R5 www.cicigogo.cn
Shox R6 www.cicigogo.cn
Shox OZ www.cicigogo.cn
Shox NZ www.cicigogo.cn
Shox Zoom www.cicigogo.cn
Shox TL3 www.cicigogo.cn
Shox Monester www.cicigogo.cn
Nike shox www.cicigogo.cn
air jordan
Nike air force one, air force 1, air force one low cut, air force one
high cut, air force one release date
Air force one, air foce one 25TH, af 1, af 1 25TH, Nike air force one
new releases, limited version
Air Force One www.cicigogo.cn
Air Force one 25TH www.cicigogo.cn
AF 1 www.cicigogo.cn
AF 1 25TH www.cicigogo.cn
www.cicigogo.cn
air jordan
Dunk sb nike sb dunk nike dunk sb dunk sb high dunk sb low dunk sb
woman
Nike sb dunk Nike Dunk High SB nike dunk low premuim sb Nike SB Dunk
High Shimizu
Nike SB Dunk Pro Nike SB Dunk Dunk SB www.cicigogo.cn
Nike Dunk shoes www.cicigogo.cn
Dunk shoes for woman www.cicigogo.cn
Dunk low cut www.cicigogo.cn
Dunk high cut www.cicigogo.cn
Timberland Boots - Timberland Shoes - Timberland Footwear
UGG? boots for women, men and kids
UGG Classic Short, Classic Short Boots, Classic Sheepskin Boots
==============================================================================
TOPIC: What does one get when milk spoils?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/cdb0345f0221733f?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 26 2008 10:35 pm
From: Kompu Kid
Hello All:
I heated a cup of milk for one minute four days ago, then forget it in
the microwave.
I discovered that I now have a yogurt-like substance.
Is this edible? Is it yogurt? Could it be toxic?
Thanks,
Deguza
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Nov 26 2008 10:49 pm
From: "Bob F"
"Kompu Kid" <deguza@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:487f7c5a-bc29-4efd-bb26-ac40b6cfa3c0@23g2000pry.googlegroups.com...
> Hello All:
>
> I heated a cup of milk for one minute four days ago, then forget it in
> the microwave.
>
> I discovered that I now have a yogurt-like substance.
>
> Is this edible? Is it yogurt? Could it be toxic?
>
I'm no expert, other than making a gallon of yogurt a week. If it smells OK, I'd
try a little taste. Maybe you've discovered a delicious new culture.
==============================================================================
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
No comments:
Post a Comment