http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* 10 Things the Food Industry Doesn't Want You to Know - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/255b376899016709?hl=en
* Obama gets it! Oil is FINITE, regardless of current price. - 3 messages, 3
authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/5b131e99a30a9010?hl=en
* DVR won't work with cable unplugged, just an FYI - 3 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/14562729a2dde9d6?hl=en
* Doorbell always uses electricity! - 6 messages, 5 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3198294a289e9e57?hl=en
* Do you want your tax money to pay a forklift operator $103,000.00 a year - 9
messages, 6 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/ddfc45ecb2d7616d?hl=en
* How you can save fuel and the environment - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/29147f37f33b890a?hl=en
* learn to prevent diseases and reverse any diseases at http://www.cidpusa.org
- 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/6c0d781b92f0b1c1?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: 10 Things the Food Industry Doesn't Want You to Know
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/255b376899016709?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 12:42 pm
From: "h"
"Tim Campbell" <timcall@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:afc3411b-48e8-4b16-b757-fe2d47126a9e@x38g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>10 Things the Food Industry Doesn't Want You to Know
All you really need to do is declare high fructose corn syrup unfit for
human consumption, like most other civilized countries. That will cut
obesity by at least one quarter, within a year. Fat doesn't make you fat,
sugar makes you fat. Easy peasy.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Obama gets it! Oil is FINITE, regardless of current price.
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/5b131e99a30a9010?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 12:30 pm
From: Curly Surmudgeon
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 14:18:45 -0500, Jeff wrote:
> At cabinet meetings, he says the president was "like a blind man in a
> roomful of deaf people. There is no discernible connection," forcing top
> officials to act "on little more than hunches about what the president
> might think."
Thanks, that is my recollection but didn't remember the fine points.
Can you say, "Pirates of the Economy"?
--
Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Bible: Slavery Good, Gays Bad, Snakes Talk
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
................................................................
Posted via TITANnews - Uncensored Newsgroups Access
>>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<<
-=Every Newsgroup - Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 12:42 pm
From: Jeff
Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 14:18:45 -0500, Jeff wrote:
>
>> At cabinet meetings, he says the president was "like a blind man in a
>> roomful of deaf people. There is no discernible connection," forcing top
>> officials to act "on little more than hunches about what the president
>> might think."
>
> Thanks, that is my recollection but didn't remember the fine points.
>
> Can you say, "Pirates of the Economy"?
That pretty much sums it up.
Jeff
>
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 5:25 pm
From: hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com
On Nov 21, 1:20 pm, Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote:
> <snip>
>
> >>> That puts you at a gross intellectual disadvantage.
> >> You have a lot of opinions that you can't substantiate. These things
> >> can happen listening to wingnut radio where they only give you the
> >> synopsis of what to believe and never the background info to prove it.
>
> > That you choose to ignore truth because one person says it, and not
> > your media hero, puts you at an intellectual disadvantage, doesn't
> > it? Some would call it ignorance.
>
> I missed this first time out.
Why am I not surprised?
> No, it is not truth if it is unsubstantiated.
Do you lie to yourself often?
> You see that you are
> confusing opinion programs with news programs.
Actually, I'm not.
> There is no journalistic
> standard for your opinion talk shows. They can say whatever they want
> and there is no recourse for when they are wrong. In fact you never even
> know it.
You may not.
> If a journalist is wrong, he risks being fired (ex. Dan Rather).
Dan was fired? I thought I saw him retire?
That bitch handler of his should have been fired.
> If
> Rush errs, it is just another day on the air. He serves only to please
> his gullible audience not the truth.
And the mainstream media is gullible whenever Barack or Hillary start
moving their lips.
"The first thing Barack has to do is to win over the media." I almost
pissed myself laughing over that one.
> The fact is that you see the whole world through your colored
> glasses.
Actually, my lens have no tint and I'm color blind.
> You see Obama as "media hero" becuse you wholly bought into
> that McCain commercial. In fact you can't see beyond that. He is a man
> of real substance and he is putting together a very competent staff to
> actually run government, something that clearly isn't being done now.
Barack has no substance. Like Joe Biden said...
> BTW, I read the republican pundits, just not the opinion meisters
> that you apparently follow. Hell, I even watch the news segment of the
> 700 Club, they have some standards.
You are so learned and wise. I am not worthy. Ha ha ha ha ha. That
was fun.
> Jeff
==============================================================================
TOPIC: DVR won't work with cable unplugged, just an FYI
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/14562729a2dde9d6?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 12:38 pm
From: "Dave"
"Seerialmom" <seerialmom@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d8c5ecd5-68f2-4fc9-b396-217d7726e6a6@k1g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
> I'm currently getting carpet installed in my house and out of boredom
> (and curiosity) thought I'd see if I could "play" some previously
> recorded shows from the cable DVR to this 5 in. color TV/boombox I
> have. Got everything connected, turned on the TV part of the boombox
> and switched on the DVR. I managed to get the DVR "display"...but it
> apparently has to talk to Comcast to let me use it. Dang it. Oh
> well...it was worth a shot. So if anyone asks...no, you have to be
> connected to the cable to view recordings as well. I was hoping I'd
> be able to access the DVR menu and play a show I recorded last night.
> Guess I'll have to wait I suppose.
Yet another reason not to get a DVR from a cable company, satellite company,
or Tivo. -Dave
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 1:34 pm
From: "Ian S. Salisbury"
Dave wrote:
>
> "Seerialmom" <seerialmom@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:d8c5ecd5-68f2-4fc9-b396-217d7726e6a6@k1g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
>> I'm currently getting carpet installed in my house and out of boredom
>> (and curiosity) thought I'd see if I could "play" some previously
>> recorded shows from the cable DVR to this 5 in. color TV/boombox I
>> have. Got everything connected, turned on the TV part of the boombox
>> and switched on the DVR. I managed to get the DVR "display"...but it
>> apparently has to talk to Comcast to let me use it. Dang it. Oh
>> well...it was worth a shot. So if anyone asks...no, you have to be
>> connected to the cable to view recordings as well. I was hoping I'd
>> be able to access the DVR menu and play a show I recorded last night.
>> Guess I'll have to wait I suppose.
>
> Yet another reason not to get a DVR from a cable company, satellite
> company, or Tivo. -Dave
TiVo lets you play recorded shows without service, as do the DirecTV
TiVo DVR.
The new DirecTV DVR (HR-21) does not.
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 3:41 pm
From: "Bob F"
"Ian S. Salisbury" <isalisb@nospam.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:gg79hj$aj5$1@ftupet.ftupet.com...
> Dave wrote:
>>
>> "Seerialmom" <seerialmom@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:d8c5ecd5-68f2-4fc9-b396-217d7726e6a6@k1g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
>>> I'm currently getting carpet installed in my house and out of boredom
>>> (and curiosity) thought I'd see if I could "play" some previously
>>> recorded shows from the cable DVR to this 5 in. color TV/boombox I
>>> have. Got everything connected, turned on the TV part of the boombox
>>> and switched on the DVR. I managed to get the DVR "display"...but it
>>> apparently has to talk to Comcast to let me use it. Dang it. Oh
>>> well...it was worth a shot. So if anyone asks...no, you have to be
>>> connected to the cable to view recordings as well. I was hoping I'd
>>> be able to access the DVR menu and play a show I recorded last night.
>>> Guess I'll have to wait I suppose.
>>
>> Yet another reason not to get a DVR from a cable company, satellite company,
>> or Tivo. -Dave
>
> TiVo lets you play recorded shows without service, as do the DirecTV TiVo DVR.
>
> The new DirecTV DVR (HR-21) does not.
My computer with BeyondTV and 3 tuner cards has no such limitations.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Doorbell always uses electricity!
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3198294a289e9e57?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 12:56 pm
From: Jeff Wisnia
Boden wrote:
> E Z Peaces wrote:
>
>> Jeff Wisnia wrote:
>>
>>> The Daring Dufas wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>
>>>> I had a friend some years ago who ran the communications
>>>> division of the local power company. This was back when
>>>> they had HF radios for communications and the techs actually
>>>> had to know something about electronics. They would get
>>>> electronic interference complaints which were often traced
>>>> to doorbell transformers. It was a very common problem and
>>>> one that many people don't even think of today.
>>>>
>>>> TDD
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry, but I have a hard time believing that.
>>>
>>> If it was "a very common problem", can you offer a cite proving that
>>> a 60 hz transformer and 10-50 feet of unshielded wire with 24 vac on
>>> it can cause interference at radio frequencies?
>>>
>>> Wouldn't you expect that if that story was true those big pole pig
>>> transformers and all that higher voltage wiring running on the poles
>>> on nearly every street would have caused the radios to melt? <G>
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>
>> According to the FCC Interference Handbook, defective doorbell
>> transformers are often a source of interference to TVs and other
>> household electronics. It may be a neighbor's transformer. I think
>> it happens when part of the core comes loose and vibrates.
>
>
> If the Guberment says so it must be so. I just don't believe it.
There's always something new to learn....
When I asked for a cite I was thinking only of properly operating
doorbell equipment.
I located this FCC cite:
(It's on page 14 of the .pdf document.)
It sayss there's a thermostatic overload inside (some?) doorbell
xformers designed to protect them from overheating and starting a fire
if the doorbell button sticks on - or there's a short in the secondary
side wiring.
The report says that those thermal overloads (which I expect break the
120 volt primary circuit.) cycle off and back on around once every seven
seconds and that the inductive spark at its contacts can propogate
through house wiring and cause flashes of interference on a tv or
"static clicks" in radios.
Who woulda thunk it?
I wonder how long that cycling mode would continue before those thermal
overload contacts got burned enough to stop connecting and leave an open
circuit there.
That's the second time I've made a mistake this year...Thank G_d it's
almost December. <G>
Jeff
--
Jeffry Wisnia
(W1BSV + Brass Rat '57 EE)
The speed of light is 1.8*10^12 furlongs per fortnight.
== 2 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 1:30 pm
From: clare@snyder.on.ca
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:38:04 -0600, The Daring Dufas
<the-daring-dufas@wtf.net> wrote:
>Jeff Wisnia wrote:
>> The Daring Dufas wrote:
>>> Bill wrote:
>>>
>
>>> I had a friend some years ago who ran the communications
>>> division of the local power company. This was back when
>>> they had HF radios for communications and the techs actually
>>> had to know something about electronics. They would get
>>> electronic interference complaints which were often traced
>>> to doorbell transformers. It was a very common problem and
>>> one that many people don't even think of today.
>>>
>>> TDD
>>
>>
>> Sorry, but I have a hard time believing that.
>>
>> If it was "a very common problem", can you offer a cite proving that a
>> 60 hz transformer and 10-50 feet of unshielded wire with 24 vac on it
>> can cause interference at radio frequencies?
>>
>> Wouldn't you expect that if that story was true those big pole pig
>> transformers and all that higher voltage wiring running on the poles on
>> nearly every street would have caused the radios to melt? <G>
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>
>Do you know what voltage most (USA) doorbells operate on?
>
>TDD
I've got 3 different ones floating around - 12, 16, and 24 volts AC.
(They would work just as well on lower voltage DC)
== 3 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 2:47 pm
From: PeterD
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:47:24 -0600, The Daring Dufas
<the-daring-dufas@wtf.net> wrote:
>PeterD wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 01:14:34 -0600, The Daring Dufas
>> <the-daring-dufas@wtf.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Leroy wrote:
>>>> The Daring Dufas wrote:
>>>>> Jeff Wisnia wrote:
>>>>>> The Daring Dufas wrote:
>>>>>>> Bill wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I had a friend some years ago who ran the communications
>>>>>>> division of the local power company. This was back when
>>>>>>> they had HF radios for communications and the techs actually
>>>>>>> had to know something about electronics. They would get
>>>>>>> electronic interference complaints which were often traced
>>>>>>> to doorbell transformers. It was a very common problem and
>>>>>>> one that many people don't even think of today.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> TDD
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry, but I have a hard time believing that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If it was "a very common problem", can you offer a cite proving that a
>>>>>> 60 hz transformer and 10-50 feet of unshielded wire with 24 vac on it
>>>>>> can cause interference at radio frequencies?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wouldn't you expect that if that story was true those big pole pig
>>>>>> transformers and all that higher voltage wiring running on the poles on
>>>>>> nearly every street would have caused the radios to melt? <G>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jeff
>>>>>>
>>>>> Do you know what voltage most (USA) doorbells operate on?
>>>>>
>>>>> TDD
>>>> twenty volts or under, while thermostat transformers are typically
>>>> twenty four volts.
>>>>
>>> I believe I asked Jeff. Do you know what your
>>> name is?
>>>
>>> TDD
>>
>> You didn't ask Jeff personally. Had you done so, it would have been an
>> email, instead you asked a general question on Usenet, and someone was
>> nice enough to reply with good information. And, yes, we know what
>> your name is: "Asshole".
>>
>
>I didn't ask you either. You obviously missed the
>point of the question, it was a little dig. I did
>not ask the general either. *snicker*
>
>TDD
You're still an asshole...
== 4 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 3:17 pm
From: KLS
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 07:52:28 -0600, Jim Redelfs
<jim.redelfs@NOSPAMredelfs.com> wrote:
>You could have saved yourself a lot of time, effort and money by simply
>turning-off the transformer and removing the doorbell button. Let 'em
>KNOCK.
Nice idea, but there are situations where that just won't suffice:
what about people who live up on the third floor of a big house, or
who are deaf and need lights to flash when someone rings?
== 5 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 3:58 pm
From: The Daring Dufas
PeterD wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:47:24 -0600, The Daring Dufas
> <the-daring-dufas@wtf.net> wrote:
>
>> PeterD wrote:
>>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 01:14:34 -0600, The Daring Dufas
>>> <the-daring-dufas@wtf.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Leroy wrote:
>>>>> The Daring Dufas wrote:
>>>>>> Jeff Wisnia wrote:
>>>>>>> The Daring Dufas wrote:
>>>>>>>> Bill wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I had a friend some years ago who ran the communications
>>>>>>>> division of the local power company. This was back when
>>>>>>>> they had HF radios for communications and the techs actually
>>>>>>>> had to know something about electronics. They would get
>>>>>>>> electronic interference complaints which were often traced
>>>>>>>> to doorbell transformers. It was a very common problem and
>>>>>>>> one that many people don't even think of today.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> TDD
>>>>>>> Sorry, but I have a hard time believing that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If it was "a very common problem", can you offer a cite proving that a
>>>>>>> 60 hz transformer and 10-50 feet of unshielded wire with 24 vac on it
>>>>>>> can cause interference at radio frequencies?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Wouldn't you expect that if that story was true those big pole pig
>>>>>>> transformers and all that higher voltage wiring running on the poles on
>>>>>>> nearly every street would have caused the radios to melt? <G>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jeff
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you know what voltage most (USA) doorbells operate on?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TDD
>>>>> twenty volts or under, while thermostat transformers are typically
>>>>> twenty four volts.
>>>>>
>>>> I believe I asked Jeff. Do you know what your
>>>> name is?
>>>>
>>>> TDD
>>> You didn't ask Jeff personally. Had you done so, it would have been an
>>> email, instead you asked a general question on Usenet, and someone was
>>> nice enough to reply with good information. And, yes, we know what
>>> your name is: "Asshole".
>>>
>> I didn't ask you either. You obviously missed the
>> point of the question, it was a little dig. I did
>> not ask the general either. *snicker*
>>
>> TDD
>
> You're still an asshole...
I consider myself to be an actinic sphincter.
It sounds more professional. People who know
my mother call me SOB.
TDD
== 6 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 4:22 pm
From: The Daring Dufas
clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:38:04 -0600, The Daring Dufas
> <the-daring-dufas@wtf.net> wrote:
>
>> Jeff Wisnia wrote:
>>> The Daring Dufas wrote:
>>>> Bill wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I had a friend some years ago who ran the communications
>>>> division of the local power company. This was back when
>>>> they had HF radios for communications and the techs actually
>>>> had to know something about electronics. They would get
>>>> electronic interference complaints which were often traced
>>>> to doorbell transformers. It was a very common problem and
>>>> one that many people don't even think of today.
>>>>
>>>> TDD
>>>
>>> Sorry, but I have a hard time believing that.
>>>
>>> If it was "a very common problem", can you offer a cite proving that a
>>> 60 hz transformer and 10-50 feet of unshielded wire with 24 vac on it
>>> can cause interference at radio frequencies?
>>>
>>> Wouldn't you expect that if that story was true those big pole pig
>>> transformers and all that higher voltage wiring running on the poles on
>>> nearly every street would have caused the radios to melt? <G>
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>> Do you know what voltage most (USA) doorbells operate on?
>>
>> TDD
> I've got 3 different ones floating around - 12, 16, and 24 volts AC.
> (They would work just as well on lower voltage DC)
Dang! Nobody seemed to get the little dig at Jeff.
What you will find are 6, 8, 10, 12, 16 and 24 volts
AC. Some really old stuff will be DC dry cell powered
but only if the owner wants to keep it original for
nostalgic or antique collecting purposes. Most of the
doorbell transformers I install have triple taps for
8, 16 and 24 volts. Many doorbells will need a 10 volt
transformer and if you need 24 volts to ring your ding
dong you're either deaf or have a seriously complicated
system. I have setup some serious systems for industrial
and commercial buildings by making use of the very loud
and fun to play with devices manufactured by Edwards
Signaling which now belongs to GE. My personal favorite:
TDD
==============================================================================
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 9 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 1:44 pm
From: "Fred Lorenzen"
<TruthTeller@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:JeyVk.1888$4g5.1067@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
:
: And the point all you right wingers keep ignoring is this; its not
the
: worker who caused the auto industry problems. Its *management, who
: decided to build cars people didn't want to buy.
:
:
: This is even more important for you goobers to learn -- and the big 3
: executives arrived in Washington begging in their own jets, and were
told
: to go home and don't come back until you have a plan to save the
business
: and pay the taxpayers back.
:
: PS: Congress didn't say one word about high wages for unskilled
labor.
: Connect the dots.
Besides not being able to read you also are unable to hear and/or
listen. During both the Senate (Banking) and House (Financial Services)
committee hearings UAW president Ron Gettelfinger was heavily criticized
for UAW's General Motors/Ford/Chrysler high labor cost which is over
twice the labor of cost of Honda/Toyota/Hyundai. The Big 3's high UAW
labor cost was in fact a key focal point of both the Senate (Banking)
and House (Financial Services) committee hearings. The UAW's contract
unrealistic requirement of UAW Membership "Full Pay" during General
Motors/Ford/Chrysler factory shutdowns was a "Hot Topic" during the
Senate (Banking) and House (Financial Services) committee hearings.
Before attempting to add any meaningful factual information to this
thread educate yourself to the true real facts instead of fabricating
your own 'made up facts'.
Fred
: In <vvqvk.388938$TT4.34528@attbi_s22>, on 11/21/2008
: at 04:08 AM, "Fred Lorenzen" <fearless-freddie-SpaMeNot@mchsi.com>
: said:
:
: ><TruthTeller@nospam.net> wrote in message
: >news:PilVk.1804$4g5.101@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
: >: In
: ><72046dc7-e3c0-42f8-9c71-2016d2aa2700@l39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
on :
: >11/20/2008
: >: at 12:40 PM, Daniel <sabot120mm@hotmail.com> said:
: >:
: >: >On Nov 20, 12:05 pm, TruthTel...@nospam.net wrote:
: >: >> In
: ><19d19ad2-38a9-47d7-8e77-b11665ab2...@s20g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
on :
: >>> 11/20/2008
: >: >> at 08:57 AM, Daniel <sabot12...@hotmail.com> said:
: >: >>
: >: >> >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.
: >: >>
: >: >> First prove you know what you are talking about; e.g., show us
that
: >the
: >: >> lug nut guy is getting the $103K!
: >:
: >: >Maybe you should pay some fucking attention to the thread you're
: >: >particiapting in.
: >:
: >: >http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122688631448632421.html
: >:
: >: You should learn to read goober. There is nothing -- zero -- in
that
: >: story about $103K per year -- unskilled laborer causeing the
problem .
: >: That is what the thread is about goober.
:
: >@ TruthTeller@nospam.net,
:
: >Before calling Daniel 'goober' did you read the original posters
: >(hpope@lycos.com) first posting in this thread?
:
: >In fact if you take the time and effort to actually read the very
first
: >posting in this thread originally posted by hpope@lycos.com on
Saturday,
: >November 15, 2008 5:51 PM you would in fact read quote - "One
: >blue-collar Delphi worker interviewed by the Detroit News makes
$103,000
: >a year operating a forklift and fears the consequences if his pay is
: >drastically reduced" - unquote.
:
: >This thread also reveals that the total average hourly compensation
for
: >a General Motors UAW employee is $73.26 an hour which is about $2,900
a
: >week or close to $150,000 a year.
:
: >Fred
== 2 of 9 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 1:51 pm
From: Daniel
On Nov 20, 5:14 pm, TruthTel...@nospam.net wrote:
> In <72046dc7-e3c0-42f8-9c71-2016d2aa2...@l39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, on
> 11/20/2008
> at 12:40 PM, Daniel <sabot12...@hotmail.com> said:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Nov 20, 12:05 pm, TruthTel...@nospam.net wrote:
> >> In <19d19ad2-38a9-47d7-8e77-b11665ab2...@s20g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>, on
> >> 11/20/2008
> >> at 08:57 AM, Daniel <sabot12...@hotmail.com> said:
>
> >> >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.
>
> >> First prove you know what you are talking about; e.g., show us that the
> >> lug nut guy is getting the $103K!
> >Maybe you should pay some fucking attention to the thread you're
> >particiapting in.
> >http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122688631448632421.html
>
> You should learn to read goober. There is nothing -- zero -- in that
> story about $103K per year -- unskilled laborer causeing the problem .
> That is what the thread is about goober.
So you didn't read it. Typical dumbshit.
== 3 of 9 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 2:51 pm
From: BE-VA
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:57:39 -0800 (PST), Daniel
<sabot120mm@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 $73 ph, is not cash.
>> >> >> it includes benefits and retirement costs.
>> >> >Which is STILL too much money for an unskilled laborer that does nothing
>> >> >more than hold a tool.
>>
>> >> Do your homework. Its not unskilled labor anymore.
>>
>> >Your job consists of holding a tool that does all the work for you.
>> >That by itself is the definition of unskilled. If you don't like it,
>> >tough.
>>
>> While I agree with you with regards to pay for work done I don't agree
>> with your premise -- by your premise a military pilot flying a 25
>> million dollar aircraft is unskilled labor since all he does is sit in
>> the cockpit and pull levers and push buttons.
>
>Except that pilot has a 4 year college education, and at least a year
>of flight school to learn to fly said aircraft, and does it for far
>less than the toothess goober that holds the machine to tighten lug
>nuts.
Never the less he is what you said is an unskilled worker because, in
most modern day aircraft, the pilot is only there to make sure that
the take-off and landing are performed properly. Everything else is
done by the machine.
== 4 of 9 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 3:13 pm
From: TruthTeller@nospam.net
Run along son. You are cherry-picking the info and putting your spin on
it. That does not make it factual.
I could detail it for you, but you're here to troll -- not think.
In <bZFVk.390159$TT4.159184@attbi_s22>, on 11/21/2008
at 09:44 PM, "Fred Lorenzen" <fearless-freddie-SpaMeNot@mchsi.com>
said:
><TruthTeller@nospam.net> wrote in message
>news:JeyVk.1888$4g5.1067@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
>:
>: And the point all you right wingers keep ignoring is this; its not
>the
>: worker who caused the auto industry problems. Its *management, who
>: decided to build cars people didn't want to buy.
>:
>:
>: This is even more important for you goobers to learn -- and the big 3
>: executives arrived in Washington begging in their own jets, and were
>told
>: to go home and don't come back until you have a plan to save the
>business
>: and pay the taxpayers back.
>:
>: PS: Congress didn't say one word about high wages for unskilled
>labor.
>: Connect the dots.
>Besides not being able to read you also are unable to hear and/or
>listen. During both the Senate (Banking) and House (Financial Services)
>committee hearings UAW president Ron Gettelfinger was heavily criticized
>for UAWÆs General Motors/Ford/Chrysler high labor cost which is over
>twice the labor of cost of Honda/Toyota/Hyundai. The Big 3Æs high UAW
>labor cost was in fact a key focal point of both the Senate (Banking)
>and House (Financial Services) committee hearings. The UAWÆs contract
>unrealistic requirement of UAW Membership ôFull Payö during General
>Motors/Ford/Chrysler factory shutdowns was a ôHot Topicö during the
>Senate (Banking) and House (Financial Services) committee hearings.
>Before attempting to add any meaningful factual information to this
>thread educate yourself to the true real facts instead of fabricating
>your own æmade up factsÆ.
>Fred
>: In <vvqvk.388938$TT4.34528@attbi_s22>, on 11/21/2008
>: at 04:08 AM, "Fred Lorenzen" <fearless-freddie-SpaMeNot@mchsi.com>
>: said:
>:
>: ><TruthTeller@nospam.net> wrote in message
>: >news:PilVk.1804$4g5.101@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
>: >: In
>: ><72046dc7-e3c0-42f8-9c71-2016d2aa2700@l39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
>on :
>: >11/20/2008
>: >: at 12:40 PM, Daniel <sabot120mm@hotmail.com> said:
>: >:
>: >: >On Nov 20, 12:05 pm, TruthTel...@nospam.net wrote:
>: >: >> In
>: ><19d19ad2-38a9-47d7-8e77-b11665ab2...@s20g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
>on :
>: >>> 11/20/2008
>: >: >> at 08:57 AM, Daniel <sabot12...@hotmail.com> said:
>: >: >>
>: >: >> >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.
>: >: >>
>: >: >> First prove you know what you are talking about; e.g., show us
>that
>: >the
>: >: >> lug nut guy is getting the $103K!
>: >:
>: >: >Maybe you should pay some fucking attention to the thread you're
>: >: >particiapting in.
>: >:
>: >: >http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122688631448632421.html
>: >:
>: >: You should learn to read goober. There is nothing -- zero -- in
>that
>: >: story about $103K per year -- unskilled laborer causeing the
>problem .
>: >: That is what the thread is about goober.
>:
>: >@ TruthTeller@nospam.net,
>:
>: >Before calling Daniel 'goober' did you read the original posters
>: >(hpope@lycos.com) first posting in this thread?
>:
>: >In fact if you take the time and effort to actually read the very
>first
>: >posting in this thread originally posted by hpope@lycos.com on
>Saturday,
>: >November 15, 2008 5:51 PM you would in fact read quote - "One
>: >blue-collar Delphi worker interviewed by the Detroit News makes
>$103,000
>: >a year operating a forklift and fears the consequences if his pay is
>: >drastically reduced" - unquote.
>:
>: >This thread also reveals that the total average hourly compensation
>for
>: >a General Motors UAW employee is $73.26 an hour which is about $2,900
>a
>: >week or close to $150,000 a year.
>:
>: >Fred
== 5 of 9 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 3:13 pm
From: TruthTeller@nospam.net
I read it goober. It did not state there $103K per year -- unskilled
laborers -- causing the problem. And that point is what the thread is
about.
In <f74263a1-75dc-431a-b188-f85193bd1a62@h20g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, on
11/21/2008
at 01:51 PM, Daniel <sabot120mm@hotmail.com> said:
>On Nov 20, 5:14 pm, TruthTel...@nospam.net wrote:
>> In <72046dc7-e3c0-42f8-9c71-2016d2aa2...@l39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, on
>> 11/20/2008
>> at 12:40 PM, Daniel <sabot12...@hotmail.com> said:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Nov 20, 12:05 pm, TruthTel...@nospam.net wrote:
>> >> In <19d19ad2-38a9-47d7-8e77-b11665ab2...@s20g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>, on
>> >> 11/20/2008
>> >> at 08:57 AM, Daniel <sabot12...@hotmail.com> said:
>>
>> >> >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.
>>
>> >> First prove you know what you are talking about; e.g., show us that the
>> >> lug nut guy is getting the $103K!
>> >Maybe you should pay some fucking attention to the thread you're
>> >particiapting in.
>> >http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122688631448632421.html
>>
>> You should learn to read goober. There is nothing -- zero -- in that
>> story about $103K per year -- unskilled laborer causeing the problem .
>> That is what the thread is about goober.
>So you didn't read it. Typical dumbshit.
== 6 of 9 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 3:36 pm
From: clams_casino
TruthTeller@nospam.net wrote:
>I read it goober. It did not state there $103K per year -- unskilled
>laborers -- causing the problem. And that point is what the thread is
>about.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Hint - UAW -
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Economy/wm2135.cfm
Most of the Big Three's UAW workers' compensation comes as benefits, not
cash. These affluent wages and benefits prevent the Detroit automakers
from successfully competing.
The average private sector worker earned $25.36 an hour in 2006--$17.91
an hour in cash wages and $7.45 an hour in benefits such as pensions,
paid time off, and health insurance. Autoworkers at Japanese plants
located in the United States earn substantially more than this: between
$42 and $48 an hour in wages and benefits, which amounts to over $80,000
a year in total compensation
The typical UAW worker at the Big Three earned between $71 and $76 an
hour in 2006. This amount is triple the earnings of the typical worker
in the private sector and $25 to $30 an hour more than American workers
at Japanese auto plants. The average unionized worker at the Big Three
earns over $130,000 a year in wages and benefits.
Furthermore -
UAW employees also receive the following extraordinary provisions:
* 30-and-Out contracts. UAW employees work under a 30-and-Out
contract that allows them to retire with generous pension benefits
after 30 years on the job, irrespective of age.
* Seven weeks' vacation. A Chrysler worker with 15 years' tenure was
entitled to 34.5 paid holidays and vacation days in 2006--seven
weeks in paid time off. This is three weeks more paid vacation
than the average private sector
worker with similar tenure.
* Paid not to work. Under UAW contracts, workers whom the automakers
let go when plants close are not laid off. Instead, after
exhausting regular unemployment payments from the automakers and
the government, they are transferred to a JOBS bank where they are
paid nearly full wages to not work.
== 7 of 9 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 3:57 pm
From: TruthTeller@nospam.net
The problem is a Big 3 management failure. Not a worker failure.
Furthermore, you are using the total per hour labor cost that is given
out. That includes current workers and retirees. Using it as a current
worker number -- as you guys are doing, is spinning the facts to suite the
nonsense.
The problem will not be changed by whining.
In <iCHVk.832$ve.264@newsfe23.iad>, on 11/21/2008
at 06:36 PM, clams_casino <PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> said:
>TruthTeller@nospam.net wrote:
>>I read it goober. It did not state there $103K per year -- unskilled
>>laborers -- causing the problem. And that point is what the thread is
>>about.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>Hint - UAW -
>http://www.heritage.org/Research/Economy/wm2135.cfm
>Most of the Big Three's UAW workers' compensation comes as benefits, not
>cash. These affluent wages and benefits prevent the Detroit automakers
>from successfully competing.
>The average private sector worker earned $25.36 an hour in 2006--$17.91
>an hour in cash wages and $7.45 an hour in benefits such as pensions,
>paid time off, and health insurance. Autoworkers at Japanese plants
>located in the United States earn substantially more than this: between
>$42 and $48 an hour in wages and benefits, which amounts to over $80,000
>a year in total compensation
>The typical UAW worker at the Big Three earned between $71 and $76 an
>hour in 2006. This amount is triple the earnings of the typical worker
>in the private sector and $25 to $30 an hour more than American workers
>at Japanese auto plants. The average unionized worker at the Big Three
>earns over $130,000 a year in wages and benefits.
>Furthermore -
>UAW employees also receive the following extraordinary provisions:
> * 30-and-Out contracts. UAW employees work under a 30-and-Out
> contract that allows them to retire with generous pension benefits
> after 30 years on the job, irrespective of age.
> * Seven weeks' vacation. A Chrysler worker with 15 years' tenure was
> entitled to 34.5 paid holidays and vacation days in 2006--seven
> weeks in paid time off. This is three weeks more paid vacation
>than the average private sector
> worker with similar tenure.
> * Paid not to work. Under UAW contracts, workers whom the automakers
> let go when plants close are not laid off. Instead, after
> exhausting regular unemployment payments from the automakers and
> the government, they are transferred to a JOBS bank where they are
> paid nearly full wages to not work.
== 8 of 9 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 4:37 pm
From: clams_casino
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.
>
>
>
>
>
It's a management failure to the point that they have always bowed to
the UAW in fear of strikes.
When GM controlled the market, the UAW shared in the wealth. Now that
GM's share has tanked, the UAW need to take some serious cuts in
benefits to get into line with the market..
== 9 of 9 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 4:55 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Cindy Hamilton <angelicapaganelli@hotmail.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>> And risks him killing you to get that money if things are tight
> He carries as much insurance as I do. It could easily go the other way.
And if you two werent silly enough to piss all that money against the wall in insurance, it couldnt.
And your 'lives' wouldnt change value if you stopped insuring them either.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: How you can save fuel and the environment
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/29147f37f33b890a?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 4:09 pm
From: "Lou"
"Cindy Hamilton" <angelicapaganelli@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3b262b9a-329c-4852-a50c-71ff798607f3@t2g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 20, 8:17 pm, "Lou" <lpog...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "The Real Bev" <bashley101+use...@gmail.com> wrote in
messagenews:df6Vk.21905$9Z6.1318@newsfe01.iad...
>
> > Lou wrote:
>
> > > On the contrary - tests conducted by the SAE have shown that air
> > > conditioning in general use more gas than rolling down the windows, on
> the
> > > test vehicles at any rate. See
> > >http://www.sae.org/events/aars/presentations/2004-hill.pdffor
> instance - I
> > > think the most telling part is the graphs on pages 14 and 15.
>
> > I don't trust what somebody writes who isn't smart enough to hire a
> > proofreader for the title page.
>
> Well, to my mind it should be "effect" not "affect". But Webster's defines
> affect as "to produce an effect upon" and for usage directs us to "see
> EFFECT", so I guess the word choice isn't actually incorrect.
>It should be "effect". The noun "affect" is typically only used by
>psychologists.
And engineers, apparently. I routinely see enough confusion of usuage to
make me think most people consider the two words synonymous.
>The dictionary definition you quote is for the verb rather than the
>noun.
Well, duh. Isn't that implicit in the definition - "to produce . . ."?
>However, this isn't alt.usage.english...
Indeed it is not. And none of this fuss over the title page alters the
conclusion of the cited document - after careful testing, the evidence
supports the contention that using a vehicle's air conditioning uses more
gasoline than rolling down the windows.
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 4:39 pm
From: clams_casino
Lou wrote:
>
>
>Indeed it is not. And none of this fuss over the title page alters the
>conclusion of the cited document - after careful testing, the evidence
>supports the contention that using a vehicle's air conditioning uses more
>gasoline than rolling down the windows.
>
>
>
>
>
From what I recall, it depends greatly on the speed. While city
driving, air resistance is greatly reduced vs. interstate driving.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: learn to prevent diseases and reverse any diseases at http://www.
cidpusa.org
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/6c0d781b92f0b1c1?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 21 2008 4:27 pm
From: Al Bundy
On Nov 21, 2:31 pm, Jennifer <imran.kha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> learn to prevent diseases and reverse any diseases athttp://www.cidpusa.org
> All the diseases are caused by your own immune functions gone astray
> by drugs, surgeries, diet and vaccination
Seems like quackery to me. Anything that purportedly cures everything,
cures nothing.
==============================================================================
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