http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Doorbell always uses electricity! - 8 messages, 7 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3198294a289e9e57?hl=en
* Trade marketplace,fashion product,luxury Porduct,Discount Price - 1 messages,
1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/8b38d700fdd657cd?hl=en
* Obama gets it! Oil is FINITE, regardless of current price. - 5 messages, 2
authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/5b131e99a30a9010?hl=en
* Do you want your tax money to pay a forklift operator $103,000.00 a year - 8
messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/ddfc45ecb2d7616d?hl=en
* OT: Hurray! - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3e5868bd595cb6b2?hl=en
* Vaccine safety physician form - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/2f2245a974192963?hl=en
* 403(b) plans will have fewer investment options, more restrictions in 2009 -
1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/d2e4e10b83285954?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Doorbell always uses electricity!
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3198294a289e9e57?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 7:39 am
From: "Bill"
And what was your electric bill last month?
My electric bill is about $120 less each month because of things I have done
in the past to save energy. Basically many little things and a couple of big
things which all add up.
1 plus 2 plus 1 plus 8 plus 1 plus 1 = 14
This same idea works at the gas station. 10 cents less a gallon at a
particular station, fill up 15 gallon tank, do this 3 times a week... Can
make quite a difference if you know how to add.
This project was paid for by money I am saving on my electric bill. And it
was only about $8 because the transformer is in a closet by the door, so
short wire run. So $120 savings minus $8 leaves me with $112 *extra* money
actually.
Everything was installed and wired to code. Metal box and brass plate are
grounded, on GFCI circuit (wet location), wire is 14 gauge romex (regular
electrical wiring, not doorbell wiring), and the momentary push button
switch is rated at 120VAC (not a low voltage doorbell button).
This is my 401K. What better way to go into retirement than to set yourself
up for a low cost of living!
My electric rates went up 13 percent just this year. How much will they go
up in the next 20 years?
Basically there has been a trend to manufacture products which always use
electricity. I'm reversing that trend at my house. I turn this stuff off
when not in use (power strips with switches on them). And switches similar
to this...
http://www.orphanespresso.com/images/Illuminated%20wall%20switch.jpg
== 2 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 7:44 am
From: Cindy Hamilton
On Nov 20, 10:39 am, "Bill" <billnomailnosp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> And what was your electric bill last month?
>
Oh, I dunno, a couple of hundred dollars. We have an outdoor hot tub,
so
the power consumption of doorbells and light bulbs really is in the
noise.
Cindy Hamilton
== 3 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 7:50 am
From: Tony Hwang
Bill wrote:
> Wired doorbells have a transformer which is always on and always using
> electricity. This is yet one more thing in the house which does this like
> TV, microwave, remote control things, things with clocks, plug-in phones,
> etc.
>
> These things add up...
>
> I replaced/rewired my switch so the transformer is only on when the doorbell
> button is pressed! Thus the transformer is off most of the time now.
>
> I installed a regular electrical box at my front door, ran 14 ga. romex from
> this box to the doorbell transformer, then got a nice brass blank wall
> plate, drilled a hole in this plate, then installed a 120V momentary push
> switch in the plate. Then wired this to switch on the transformer when the
> button is pressed. Then connected the two wires which were going to the old
> button so the doorbell would ring as soon as it receives power from the
> transformer.
>
>
Hi,
So what is the pay back time for the materials you used? The transformer
when idle uses very small amount of energy. Turning it on/off frequently
may shorten it's life. computers, most appliances draws small amount of
energy when idle. Automobiles are same. Do you see decreased mount in
power bill as a result? I pay 7 cents for 1KW/h. For that door bell to
use 1KW/h will be quite long time. MTW, our house has motorozied chime
palying Westminster bells.
== 4 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 7:52 am
From: terry
On Nov 20, 12:39 pm, "Bill" <billnomailnosp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> And what was your electric bill last month?
>
> My electric bill is about $120 less each month because of things I have done
> in the past to save energy. Basically many little things and a couple of big
> things which all add up.
>
Wow that $120 is half my average total monthly energy bill for this 4
bedroom all-electric house in a cold climate!
What do you use for heating? Gas (said to be cheaper) not available
here. And oil just too expensive and too much of a liability and
maintenance expense.
A neighbour (also all electric house, as most are here) has gone all
CFLs but says it makes very little difference to their electric bill.
CFLs make sense for outdoor locations so maybe when our long life
incandescent burns out (after several years) will try one outside.
Can't use CFLs in our two motion sensor fixtures, but those only come
on for short periods when activated.
== 5 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 8:37 am
From: Boden
Red Green wrote:
> "Bill" <billnomailnospamx@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:6ojvt2F41153U1@mid.individual.net:
>
>
>>Wired doorbells have a transformer which is always on and always using
>>electricity. This is yet one more thing in the house which does this
>>like TV, microwave, remote control things, things with clocks, plug-in
>>phones, etc.
>>
>>These things add up...
>>
>>I replaced/rewired my switch so the transformer is only on when the
>>doorbell button is pressed! Thus the transformer is off most of the
>>time now.
>>
>>I installed a regular electrical box at my front door, ran 14 ga.
>>romex from this box to the doorbell transformer, then got a nice brass
>>blank wall plate, drilled a hole in this plate, then installed a 120V
>>momentary push switch in the plate. Then wired this to switch on the
>>transformer when the button is pressed. Then connected the two wires
>>which were going to the old button so the doorbell would ring as soon
>>as it receives power from the transformer.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> It's probably stamped right on it but I never looked. Any idea how many
> watts it's uses in it's standby state?
This whole thread is about chasing the "little yellow hole in the snow."
It's trivial.
When the bell is not ringing, the current that is measured is largely
reactive or imaginary current. It is the current determined by the
transformer's magnetizing inductance. The only dissipation is some
small core heating and trivial wire losses. The true dissipation is far
less than what most are calculating by multiplying measured volts and
measured current.
Worry about something important...like preserving the US Constitution.
Boden
== 6 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 10:17 am
From: E Z Peaces
terry wrote:
>
> Such a door bell transformer is typically capable of a maximum of 7
> watts or less when it is actually ringing the bell or door chime. Many
> are not designed for continuous use. Next time I have spare moment
> will measure the amount of electrcity such a transformer takes in it'
> 'idle' state.
> It's most likely a few milliamps. Well lets say 10 milliamps (A 100th
> of one amp) to be generous to a fairly low grade transformer.
> One 100th of an amp at 115 volts = 1.15 watts per hour, 27.6 watt
> hours per day or 10,074 watt hours per year. That's just over 10
> kilowatt hours per year. Although I doubt it is that high?
> At my cost of electrcity (ten cents per kilowatt hour) that's just
> about one dollar per year. A saving of one dollar per year (over 20
> years) could probably amortize a capital saving at the start of that
> period of around $12. Spend more that and it not economic.
> Our transformer which has been in place for the last 38 years does run
> slightly warm. In this cool climate that warmth does very, very
> slightly, but insignificantly, contribute to the electric house
> heating. Probably less so than normally leaving the bath and shower
> water to cool down to house temperature.
> Seemed like rather pointless exercise?
Actually, a big transformer that draws an amp with no load may use less
power than a little transformer that draws half an amp. It's resistance
from the copper windings and the iron core that uses power. Without
resistance, the current is 90 degrees out of phase with supplied
voltage, and that means no power.
I think the solution is a DC chime with a modern wall wart. To get the
Energy Star rating, a wall wart up to 50 watts can't use more than 0.3
watts idling. That would mean about 25 cents a year for electricity.
My remaining question is how long a particular wall wart would last.
== 7 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 10:23 am
From: E Z Peaces
Dave Garland wrote:
> E Z Peaces wrote:
>> I've tried battery-powered wireless door chimes. I used AA alkalines,
>> which have a much longer shelf life than conventional carbon-zinc. The
>> problem was the current draw of the receivers. A set of batteries would
>> last only a few months, and a lot of visitors might leave frustrated
>> before I realized my chime was out of service.
>
> Why use battery-powered chimes (as opposed to transmitters)? My
> wireless chimes plug into outlets (upstairs and downstairs chimes).
> Being as they make noise, it's not like precise location is critical.
> The transmitters use a "N" battery every 3-4 years. You do have to
> check occasionally to make sure it's still working.
>
> The operating cost (75 cents per year for batteries, and whatever the
> line draw is) is probably more than a transformer-operated bell but
> we're way down in the noise range of expense.
>
> Dave
If I went wireless again, I use an outlet-powered receiver. I'd be
concerned about its service life and how much power it sucked.
== 8 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 10:40 am
From: Jeff Wisnia
The Daring Dufas wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>
>> Wired doorbells have a transformer which is always on and always using
>> electricity. This is yet one more thing in the house which does this
>> like TV, microwave, remote control things, things with clocks, plug-in
>> phones, etc.
>>
>> These things add up...
>>
>> I replaced/rewired my switch so the transformer is only on when the
>> doorbell button is pressed! Thus the transformer is off most of the
>> time now.
>>
>> I installed a regular electrical box at my front door, ran 14 ga.
>> romex from this box to the doorbell transformer, then got a nice brass
>> blank wall plate, drilled a hole in this plate, then installed a 120V
>> momentary push switch in the plate. Then wired this to switch on the
>> transformer when the button is pressed. Then connected the two wires
>> which were going to the old button so the doorbell would ring as soon
>> as it receives power from the transformer.
>>
>>
> 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
--
Jeffry Wisnia
(W1BSV + Brass Rat '57 EE)
The speed of light is 1.8*10^12 furlongs per fortnight.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Trade marketplace,fashion product,luxury Porduct,Discount Price
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/8b38d700fdd657cd?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 7:43 am
From: cn
hi
We are supplier in china Footwear Apparel Handbags Jeans&Pants Cap
Accessory(world famous brand)
1) Top quality, reasonable price, safe shipping, and best service
2) Sport shoes for men, women and kids with all sizes available
3) Sport shoes with different colors and styles available in stock
4) The material and size can be required to make in accordance with
customers' requests
Price :8-35usd 6-30EURO 5-30Pounds
size chart
Men Size:
US: 7 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 13 14 15
UK: 6 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 12 13 14
EUR: 40 41 42 42.5 43 44 44.5 45 45.5 46 47.5 48 49
Women Size:
US: 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5
UK: 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6
EUR: 35.5 36 36.5 37.5 38 38.5 39 40
Kid's
US: 11C 12C 12.5C 13C 1Y 1.5Y 2.5Y 3Y
EUR:28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
Clothing Size:
S M L XL XXL XXXL XXXXL XXXXXL
Footwear
http://www.cicigogo.cn
Apparel
http://www.cicigogo.cn
Handbags
http://www.cicigogo.cn
Jeans&Pants
http://www.cicigogo.cn
Cap
http://www.cicigogo.cn
Accessory
http://www.cicigogo.cn
electronics
http://picasaweb.google.com/cicitrade.eleltronics
CiCi
www.cicigogo.cn
MSN:air jordan
Building Material Market, Goutou Denizen Committee, XiaChen Office
Putian City Chengxiang District CiCi Trade Co., Ltd
==============================================================================
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 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 8:38 am
From: "zzbunker@netscape.net"
On Nov 19, 11:13 pm, Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote:
> hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On Nov 19, 7:31 pm, Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote:
> >> hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Nov 19, 12:48 am, Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote:
> >>>> hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Nov 17, 11:40 am, Enough Already <enough_alre...@lycos.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> It was inspiring to hear President-elect Obama say this during a 60
> >>>>>> Minutes interview:
> >>>>>> [quote]
> >>>>>> (CBS) Kroft: When the price of oil was at $147 a barrel, there were a
> >>>>>> lot of spirited and profitable discussions that were held on energy
> >>>>>> independence. Now you've got the price of oil under $60.
> >>>>>> Mr. Obama: Right.
> >>>>> Uh, wrong. O'bama didn't get the price under $60 per barrel.
> >>>> Such answers make the right seem more brain dead than you actually are.
> >>> That you accept blatant lies makes you seem exactly as brain dead as
> >>> you actually are.
> >> Your mind is closed.
>
> > My mind is open. I read. I comprehend. I comment.
>
> >> Of course Obama had nothing to do with the fall in
> >> oil prices.
>
> > Absolutely nothing to do with it.
>
> > Yet Kroft, talking to O'bama says, "Now you've got the price of oil
> > under $60," which is a blatant lie.
>
> Boy, you are reading a lot into that line. Did it *not* occur to you
> that "you have" did not refer to Obama but rather in a more general
> collective sense? Are you right wingers that suspicious?
>
>
>
> > Then O'bama replies, "Right," another blatant lie.
>
> I guess not because you keep bringing that up.
>
> You really need some conversational English skills. Or loosen up a bit.
>
>
>
> > You tell me I'm brain dead after you've accepted two blatant lies, so
> > that is a lie.
>
> > I reject Kroft's lie. I reject O'bama's lie, and I reject your lie.
>
> You reject a straw man argument that lives only in your mind.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> Bush is both the reason for the extraordinary rise and then
> >> the subsequent collapse of oil. The first was conscious, the second an
> >> unintended consequence of Bush economics.
>
> > Why does Kroft think that O'bama has the price of oil under $60, and
> > why does O'bama agree?
>
> >> No small matter that Obama won the vote of those making more than
> >> $100,000.
>
> > Are you now changing the subject? Squirrelly Curmudgeon classifies a
> > subject change as a lie by diversion, but I don't.
>
> >>>> If you read what you snipped then you'll see that no such implication
> >>>> was made:
> >> <snip>
> >>>> Kroft: Why?
> >>>> Mr. Obama: Well, because this has been our pattern. We go from shock
> >>>> to trance. You know, oil prices go up, gas prices at the pump go up,
> >>>> everybody goes into a flurry of activity. And then the prices go back
> >>>> down and suddenly we act like it's not important, and we start, you
> >>>> know filling up our SUVs again.
> >> This is absolutely accurate.
>
> > Actually, I was always able to fill up my truck except that my debit/
> > credit card shuts off at $75.00. It still shuts off at $75.00, but my
> > tank is full before doing so.
>
> Take a look at the resale value of a large SUV. For that matter look at
> their sales figures, Ford SUV sales are off 54%. Now consider what
> happened after the Arab Oil Embargo. Fuel Efficiency and lower
> consumption reigned for a while. By the time of Reagan it was all in the
> past.
But that's ALWAYs going to be the way with wank Ford, no matter
WHAT
the price of gasoline. Which is also why Post Ford Batteries, Solar
Energy,
Holograms, lasers, masers, RISC, Optical Computers, Fiber Optics,
Pv Cells, Satellites, GPS, Wind Energy, Biodiesel, Autonomous
Vehciles,
HDTV, CD, DVD, and On-Line-Publishling were invented
Since Ford lives on *Wal-Mart*, rather than science, logic,
engineering, medicine,
gasoline, energy, or SUVs.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>>> And, as a consequence, we never make any progress. It's part of the
> >>>> addiction, all right. That has to be broken. Now is the time to break
> >>>> it.
> >>>> [end quote]
> >>>> Jeff
> >>> You mean when Bush said we were addicted to oil it meant nothing.
> >>> When O'bama says we are addicted to oil it means something.
> >> Nothing Bush says means anything.
>
> > I'll chalk that up as your opinion. Squirrelly Curmudgeon would say
> > it was a lie, but I won't try anything underhanded like that.
>
> >> Name one thing W said that was more than just words being spoken.
>
> > He said the war on terror would be a long war. He repeatedly said
> > it. And it was so long that everyone forgot he said it.
>
> Actually he said it last, long after it was obvious to everyone else:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_War_(21st_century)
>
> Care to try again?
>
>
>
> >> Was it the ownership society?
> >> Was that we would get binLaden?
> >> Was it that the economy is strong?
> >> Was it, heckuva job Brownie.
>
> >> Never has a president of any party been such a poor steward of the
> >> government.
>
> > In your opinion. Squirrelly Curmudgeon would say it was a lie, but I
> > won't try anything underhanded like that.
>
> > I recall the hyper-inflation of Jimmy Carter and the lack of jobs back
> > then. Do you?
>
> Now, I find it amusing that you have to go back 30 years to Carter.
>
> But let me say a few words about what Carter was able to do that Bush
> has failed completely at.
>
> He brought peace between the nations of the Middle East. Specifically
> Israel and Egypt had fought a long series of wars every 6 years or so.
> Today Egypt and Israel remain at peace.
>
> Back then a large portion (1/3 +) of electric power was generated
> from petroleum, Carter changed that.
>
> I don't believe Bush has anything positive in his legacy to match.
> Even Nixon has some positives in his record.
>
> >> If you look at the picks that Obama has made you will see that he is
> >> going for competence, a nice change from W's Texas buds.
>
> > He's picked Bill's buds. Do you think they will stab O'bama in the
> > back for Hillary's gain?
>
> Stop falling for every conspiracy theory you hear of. They are not
> all Clinton people but they are all people that have deep experience in
> government and specifically in the fields they are nominated for. Where
> else would you mine for experienced Democrats but in the Clinton WH?
> Most of the experienced people W had came from his Dads staff and many
> of those came out of Ford. Of course the neocons W took on were called
> "the crazies" back then by the rest of the WH staff.
>
> Most of government has been rudderless for the last year. The top
> levels of many many departments are empty. The business of government,
> vastly more bloated under W, has virtually ground to a halt. What Obama
> has chosen is people with a track record to get the government working
> again. What you don't realize is *that* his most important short term
> goal, and he will be very pragmatic (not a word I can associate with
> Republicans) in achieving that.
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
>
>
> >>> I understand where you are coming from.
>
> >> You understand nothing beyond your preconceived notions.
>
> >> Jeff
>
> > I understand you for the most part. Had I been Squirrelly Curmudgeon,
> > your lie tally would be five, but I can't honestly categorize your
> > misguided opinions as lies.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 9:14 am
From: Curly Surmudgeon
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 04:36:36 +0000, Michael Coburn wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 18:52:18 -0800, hot-ham-and-cheese wrote:
>
>> On Nov 19, 7:31Â pm, Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote:
>>> hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>> > On Nov 19, 12:48 am, Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote:
>>> >> hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>> >>> On Nov 17, 11:40 am, Enough Already <enough_alre...@lycos.com>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>>> It was inspiring to hear President-elect Obama say this during a
>>> >>>> 60 Minutes interview:
>>> >>>> [quote]
>>> >>>> (CBS) Kroft: When the price of oil was at $147 a barrel, there
>>> >>>> were a lot of spirited and profitable discussions that were held
>>> >>>> on energy independence. Now you've got the price of oil under
>>> >>>> $60. Mr. Obama: Right.
>>> >>> Uh, wrong. Â O'bama didn't get the price under $60 per barrel.
>>> >> Â Such answers make the right seem more brain dead than you Â
>>> >> actually are.
>>>
>>> > That you accept blatant lies makes you seem exactly as brain dead as
>>> > you actually are.
>>>
>>> Your mind is closed.
>>
>> My mind is open. I read. I comprehend. I comment.
>>
>>> Of course Obama had nothing to do with the fall in oil prices.
>>
>> Absolutely nothing to do with it.
>>
>> Yet Kroft, talking to O'bama says, "Now you've got the price of oil
>> under $60," which is a blatant lie.
>
> And you and I an others also have the price of oil under $60. There is
> no implication that we _caused_ it. But we HAVE it.
>
>> Then O'bama replies, "Right," another blatant lie.
>
> You are an idiot.
>
>> You tell me I'm brain dead after you've accepted two blatant lies, so
>> that is a lie.
>>
>> I reject Kroft's lie. I reject O'bama's lie, and I reject your lie.
>
> Sounds like a religious problem.
>
>>> Bush is both the reason for the extraordinary rise and then the
>>> subsequent collapse of oil. The first was conscious, the second an
>>> unintended consequence of Bush economics.
>>
>> Why does Kroft think that O'bama has the price of oil under $60, and
>> why does O'bama agree?
>
> You are an idiot.
>
>>> Â Â No small matter that Obama won the vote of those making more than
>>> $100,000.
>>
>> Are you now changing the subject? Squirrelly Curmudgeon classifies a
>> subject change as a lie by diversion, but I don't.
>
> Obama won the vote of just about all segments.
>
>>> >> Â Â If you read what you snipped then you'll see that no such Â
>>> >> implication
>>> >> was made:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>> >> Kroft: Why?
>>>
>>> >> Mr. Obama: Well, because this has been our pattern. We go from
>>> >> shock to trance. You know, oil prices go up, gas prices at the pump
>>> >> go up, everybody goes into a flurry of activity. And then the
>>> >> prices go back down and suddenly we act like it's not important,
>>> >> and we start, you know filling up our SUVs again.
>>>
>>> This is absolutely accurate.
>>
>> Actually, I was always able to fill up my truck except that my debit/
>> credit card shuts off at $75.00. It still shuts off at $75.00, but my
>> tank is full before doing so.
>
> My debit card shuts off at $500. But I usually pay cash for the gas.
> And the need for alternative fuels is more important that the soaring
> and plunging price of gasoline.
>
>>> >> And, as a consequence, we never make any progress. It’s part of
>>> >> the addiction, all right. That has to be broken. Now is the time to
>>> >> break it.
>>>
>>> >> [end quote]
>>>
>>> >> Â Â Jeff
>>>
>>> > You mean when Bush said we were addicted to oil it meant nothing.
>>> > When O'bama says we are addicted to oil it means something.
>>>
>>> Nothing Bush says means anything.
>>
>> I'll chalk that up as your opinion. Squirrelly Curmudgeon would say it
>> was a lie, but I won't try anything underhanded like that.
>
> George Bush can tell 2 contradictory lies in the same breath and believe
> both of them.
>
>>> Name one thing W said that was more than just words being spoken.
>>
>> He said the war on terror would be a long war. He repeatedly said it.
>> And it was so long that everyone forgot he said it.
>
> Good point. It would be long because Bush and the Republicans need it
> to be long.
>
>>> Was it the ownership society?
>>> Was that we would get binLaden?
>>> Was it that the economy is strong?
>>> Was it, heckuva job Brownie.
>>>
>>> Â Never has a president of any party been such a poor steward of the
>>> government.
>>
>> In your opinion. Squirrelly Curmudgeon would say it was a lie, but I
>> won't try anything underhanded like that.
>>
>> I recall the hyper-inflation of Jimmy Carter and the lack of jobs back
>> then. Do you?
>
> I remember those days and I did very well, thank you. Wages were
> actually rising and people bought homes and 5 years later the payments
> were a very small part of their living expenses. But the Republicans
> managed to convince all persons that inflation was THE problem.
>
>>> Â Â If you look at the picks that Obama has made you will see that he
>>> Â is
>>> going for competence, a nice change from W's Texas buds.
>>
>> He's picked Bill's buds. Do you think they will stab O'bama in the
>> back for Hillary's gain?
>
> No.
>
>>> > I understand where you are coming from.
>>
>>> Â You understand nothing beyond your preconceived notions.
>>>
>>> Â Â Jeff
>>
>> I understand you for the most part. Had I been Squirrelly Curmudgeon,
>> your lie tally would be five, but I can't honestly categorize your
>> misguided opinions as lies.
>
> I don't categorize yours as lies either. Where does that leave you.
> Other news groups have their problems we have you at $60.
Perhaps you are forgetting who you are speaking to or his history of
lying. Lying even when there is no need to lie, making shit up, twisting
your words, taking words out of context, and fabricating houses of cards.
You were speaking to the Liar of misc.survivalism. Does the following
passage not describe his behavior to a 'T'?
Profile of the Sociopath
This website summarizes some of the common features of descriptions of the
behavior of sociopaths.
* Glibness and Superficial Charm
* Manipulative and Conning
They never recognize the rights of others and see their self-serving
behaviors as permissible. They appear to be charming, yet are
covertly hostile and domineering, seeing their victim as merely an
instrument to be used. They may dominate and humiliate their
victims.
* Grandiose Sense of Self
Feels entitled to certain things as "their right."
* Pathological Lying
Has no problem lying coolly and easily and it is almost impossible
for them to be truthful on a consistent basis. Can create, and get
caught up in, a complex belief about their own powers and abilities.
Extremely convincing and even able to pass lie detector tests.
* Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
A deep seated rage, which is split off and repressed, is at their
core. Does not see others around them as people, but only as targets
and opportunities. Instead of friends, they have victims and
accomplices who end up as victims. The end always justifies the
means and they let nothing stand in their way.
* Shallow Emotions
When they show what seems to be warmth, joy, love and compassion it
is more feigned than experienced and serves an ulterior motive.
Outraged by insignificant matters, yet remaining unmoved and cold by
what would upset a normal person. Since they are not genuine,
neither are their promises.
* Incapacity for Love
* Need for Stimulation
Living on the edge. Verbal outbursts and physical punishments are
normal. Promiscuity and gambling are common.
* Callousness/Lack of Empathy
Unable to empathize with the pain of their victims, having only
contempt for others' feelings of distress and readily taking
advantage of them.
* Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature
Rage and abuse, alternating with small expressions of love and
approval produce an addictive cycle for abuser and abused, as well
as creating hopelessness in the victim. Believe they are
all-powerful, all-knowing, entitled to every wish, no sense of
personal boundaries, no concern for their impact on others.
* Early Behavior Problems/Juvenile Delinquency
Usually has a history of behavioral and academic difficulties, yet
"gets by" by conning others. Problems in making and keeping friends;
aberrant behaviors such as cruelty to people or animals, stealing,
etc.
* Irresponsibility/Unreliability
Not concerned about wrecking others' lives and dreams. Oblivious or
indifferent to the devastation they cause. Does not accept blame
themselves, but blames others, even for acts they obviously
committed.
* Promiscuous Sexual Behavior/Infidelity
Promiscuity, child sexual abuse, rape and sexual acting out of all
sorts.
* Lack of Realistic Life Plan/Parasitic Lifestyle
Tends to move around a lot or makes all encompassing promises for
the future, poor work ethic but exploits others effectively.
* Criminal or Entrepreneurial Versatility
Changes their image as needed to avoid prosecution. Changes life
story readily.
http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html
Don't get sucked into the cockroach's fantasies.
--
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=-
== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 9:46 am
From: Curly Surmudgeon
On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 23:13:37 -0500, Jeff wrote:
> hot-ham-and-cheese@hotmail.com wrote:
>> On Nov 19, 7:31 pm, Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote:
>>> hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Nov 19, 12:48 am, Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote:
>>>>> hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Nov 17, 11:40 am, Enough Already <enough_alre...@lycos.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> It was inspiring to hear President-elect Obama say this during a 60
>>>>>>> Minutes interview:
>>>>>>> [quote]
>>>>>>> (CBS) Kroft: When the price of oil was at $147 a barrel, there were
>>>>>>> a lot of spirited and profitable discussions that were held on
>>>>>>> energy independence. Now you've got the price of oil under $60. Mr.
>>>>>>> Obama: Right.
>>>>>> Uh, wrong. O'bama didn't get the price under $60 per barrel.
>>>>> Such answers make the right seem more brain dead than you actually
>>>>> are.
>>>> That you accept blatant lies makes you seem exactly as brain dead as
>>>> you actually are.
>>> Your mind is closed.
>>
>> My mind is open. I read. I comprehend. I comment.
>>
>>> Of course Obama had nothing to do with the fall in oil prices.
>>
>> Absolutely nothing to do with it.
>>
>> Yet Kroft, talking to O'bama says, "Now you've got the price of oil
>> under $60," which is a blatant lie.
>
>
> Boy, you are reading a lot into that line. Did it *not* occur to you that
> "you have" did not refer to Obama but rather in a more general collective
> sense? Are you right wingers that suspicious?
It's another sign of a sociopath, the world revolves around them so third
person references morph into accusations.
>> Then O'bama replies, "Right," another blatant lie.
>
> I guess not because you keep bringing that up.
>
> You really need some conversational English skills. Or loosen up a bit.
In the world of the sociopath the boundary between fact and fiction, lies
and truth, doesn't exist. Whatever fantasy justifies their current
thought becomes truth, past, future, and present, events which conflict
become lies.
It's a comfortable world, that of the sociopath, because there are no
moral grey areas. Black and White are the rule making it simple to
villify anyone/thing that violates their fantastical world.
>> You tell me I'm brain dead after you've accepted two blatant lies, so
>> that is a lie.
>>
>> I reject Kroft's lie. I reject O'bama's lie, and I reject your lie.
>
> You reject a straw man argument that lives only in your mind.
Thankfully. In a position of power the sociopath is dangerous.
>>> Bush is both the reason for the extraordinary rise and then the
>>> subsequent collapse of oil. The first was conscious, the second an
>>> unintended consequence of Bush economics.
>>
>> Why does Kroft think that O'bama has the price of oil under $60, and why
>> does O'bama agree?
>>
>>> No small matter that Obama won the vote of those making more than
>>> $100,000.
>>
>> Are you now changing the subject? Squirrelly Curmudgeon classifies a
>> subject change as a lie by diversion, but I don't.
Stop twisting my words, cockroach. When _you_ change the subject it's
invariably a lie by diversion. When non-sociopaths bring other evidence
to bear it's usually for a rational reason.
Your paranoia is showing.
>>>>> If you read what you snipped then you'll see that no such
>>>>> implication
>>>>> was made:
>>> <snip>
>>>>> Kroft: Why?
>>>>> Mr. Obama: Well, because this has been our pattern. We go from shock
>>>>> to trance. You know, oil prices go up, gas prices at the pump go up,
>>>>> everybody goes into a flurry of activity. And then the prices go
>>>>> back
>>>>> down and suddenly we act like it's not important, and we start, you
>>>>> know filling up our SUVs again.
>>> This is absolutely accurate.
>>
>> Actually, I was always able to fill up my truck except that my debit/
>> credit card shuts off at $75.00. It still shuts off at $75.00, but my
>> tank is full before doing so.
>
> Take a look at the resale value of a large SUV. For that matter look at
> their sales figures, Ford SUV sales are off 54%. Now consider what
> happened after the Arab Oil Embargo. Fuel Efficiency and lower
> consumption reigned for a while. By the time of Reagan it was all in the
> past.
>>
>>>>> And, as a consequence, we never make any progress. It's part of the
>>>>> addiction, all right. That has to be broken. Now is the time to
>>>>> break it.
>>>>> [end quote]
>>>>> Jeff
>>>> You mean when Bush said we were addicted to oil it meant nothing.
>>>> When O'bama says we are addicted to oil it means something.
>>> Nothing Bush says means anything.
>>
>> I'll chalk that up as your opinion. Squirrelly Curmudgeon would say it
>> was a lie, but I won't try anything underhanded like that.
>>
>>> Name one thing W said that was more than just words being spoken.
>>
>> He said the war on terror would be a long war. He repeatedly said it.
>> And it was so long that everyone forgot he said it.
>
> Actually he said it last, long after it was obvious to everyone else:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_War_(21st_century)
>
> Care to try again?
Bush lied us into invading Iraq based on filtered intelligence,
assumptions, innuendo, and falsehoods. He did not, as you rightfully
point out, say this was to be a long war, his administration, all of them,
said this would be a "cakewalk" in various phrasings. "Days or weeks,
certainly not months" was another variation.
It was all lies, just as HH&C continues the attempt to rewrite history.
>>> Was it the ownership society?
>>> Was that we would get binLaden?
>>> Was it that the economy is strong?
>>> Was it, heckuva job Brownie.
>>>
>>> Never has a president of any party been such a poor steward of the
>>> government.
>>
>> In your opinion. Squirrelly Curmudgeon would say it was a lie, but I
>> won't try anything underhanded like that.
>>
>> I recall the hyper-inflation of Jimmy Carter and the lack of jobs back
>> then. Do you?
>
> Now, I find it amusing that you have to go back 30 years to Carter.
>
> But let me say a few words about what Carter was able to do that Bush
> has failed completely at.
>
> He brought peace between the nations of the Middle East. Specifically
> Israel and Egypt had fought a long series of wars every 6 years or so.
> Today Egypt and Israel remain at peace.
>
> Back then a large portion (1/3 +) of electric power was generated
> from petroleum, Carter changed that.
>
> I don't believe Bush has anything positive in his legacy to match.
> Even Nixon has some positives in his record.
Bush's legacy will take patience to fully comprehend, the shoes are still
dropping. From shredding the Constitution and Bill of Rights, to massive
Federal corruption, to plundering the treasury, to violating the church -
state separation, to lying to Congress and "We, The People," to treason,
Bush's legacy will require time to understand.
>>> If you look at the picks that Obama has made you will see that he
>>> is
>>> going for competence, a nice change from W's Texas buds.
>>
>> He's picked Bill's buds. Do you think they will stab O'bama in the
>> back for Hillary's gain?
>
> Stop falling for every conspiracy theory you hear of. They are not
> all Clinton people but they are all people that have deep experience in
> government and specifically in the fields they are nominated for. Where
> else would you mine for experienced Democrats but in the Clinton WH?
> Most of the experienced people W had came from his Dads staff and many
> of those came out of Ford. Of course the neocons W took on were called
> "the crazies" back then by the rest of the WH staff.
That is the point I made in another topic, the Executive Branch is
designed and controlled by the President, not the various Secretaries nor
appointees. At least in a normal presidency, Bush was so inept that the
neocons directed most every move. Obama, even though I didn't vote for
him, has shown laudable management skills in selecting knowledgeable
people to help him push his own agenda. That will allow him to make
progress rapidly and without the changes in direction that plagued the
Bush administration.
Consistancy is critical in the Excutive office.
> Most of government has been rudderless for the last year. The top
> levels of many many departments are empty. The business of government,
> vastly more bloated under W, has virtually ground to a halt. What Obama
> has chosen is people with a track record to get the government working
> again. What you don't realize is *that* his most important short term
> goal, and he will be very pragmatic (not a word I can associate with
> Republicans) in achieving that.
True, and I wish Obama well. We must give Obama the same slack we gave
Bush during his formulative period. If/when Obama errs then it's time to
castigate him, not now when he's not even in office.
I distinctly remember HH&C telling us that he supported the President as
an excuse for not speaking a bad word about Bush. Apparently that is
another lie for he's not giving Obama the same slack.
> Jeff
>
>
>>>> I understand where you are coming from.
>>
>>> You understand nothing beyond your preconceived notions.
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>
>> I understand you for the most part. Had I been Squirrelly Curmudgeon,
>> your lie tally would be five, but I can't honestly categorize your
>> misguided opinions as lies.
You can't "honestly" speak. Not for yourself, let alone others. Cease
misrepresenting the words of others and only lie for your self. We've
come to accept that you lie for yourself is your pattern, lying about the
words of others is unacceptable.
Do not paraphrase others, misrepresent, modify, or misstate our words. Lie
only for yourself.
--
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=-
== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 9:49 am
From: Curly Surmudgeon
On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:22:27 -0600, Ken Lay wrote:
> In article <xaKdndIXlcNyMrnUnZ2dnUVZ_jWdnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
> Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote:
>
>> Name one thing W said that was more than just words being spoken.
>
> You misunderestimate our Great Leader. He's smarter than Dan Quayle.
You think? Don't equate success in election fraud with intelligence.
By the way, I've always wondered if Ken Lay were really dead or living on
a carribbean island after facial reconstruction surgery with new passports...
Your presence here lends credence to the fantasy. How'd you get your
bucks out unnoticed?
--
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=-
== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 9:51 am
From: Curly Surmudgeon
On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:03:17 +0000, Michael Coburn wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 03:42:13 -0800, hot-ham-and-cheese wrote:
>
>> You mean when Bush said we were addicted to oil it meant nothing. When
>> O'bama says we are addicted to oil it means something.
>
> I think you have busted the code here....
>
> The proclamation is essentially correct. When someone intelligent tells
> you something it has a much larger influence then when a moron says it.
Ha! <standing applause>
/s/influence/credibility
--
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=-
==============================================================================
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 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 8:51 am
From: Daniel
On Nov 19, 1:42 pm, TruthTel...@nospam.net wrote:
> Stop your driveling goober. Operating/monitoring a robot line that
> assembles cars is not unskilled work. Nor, is it unskilled work to
> manually install parts that the robots only do part of the assembly for.
>
> That you can't figure that out, indicates the you lack the skills for such
> a job.
Face it, a janitor is as much a skilled laborer as you are. You're
nothing more than an overpaid monkey. The FACT that I have hit a nerve
by calling you an unskilled laborer just proves my point.
== 2 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 8:57 am
From: Daniel
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.
== 3 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 9:05 am
From: TruthTeller@nospam.net
In <19d19ad2-38a9-47d7-8e77-b11665ab2ded@s20g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>, on
11/20/2008
at 08:57 AM, Daniel <sabot120mm@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!
== 4 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 9:05 am
From: TruthTeller@nospam.net
Stop driveling goober. You're just pissed because you can't get a good
assembly line job.
In <ff5fd3ac-e7e5-4a4a-9b1c-b76729b248c4@41g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>, on
11/20/2008
at 08:51 AM, Daniel <sabot120mm@hotmail.com> said:
>On Nov 19, 1:42 pm, TruthTel...@nospam.net wrote:
>> Stop your driveling goober. Operating/monitoring a robot line that
>> assembles cars is not unskilled work. Nor, is it unskilled work to
>> manually install parts that the robots only do part of the assembly for.
>>
>> That you can't figure that out, indicates the you lack the skills for such
>> a job.
>Face it, a janitor is as much a skilled laborer as you are. You're
>nothing more than an overpaid monkey. The FACT that I have hit a nerve by
>calling you an unskilled laborer just proves my point.
== 5 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 9:48 am
From: Cindy Hamilton
On Nov 19, 9:49 pm, Wilma6...@gmail.com wrote:
> What has happened to America? We are fighting over whether or not some
> worker is making too much at around $100,000 a year. This not right,
> everyone who works should make enough to afford a home and to send
> their children to college and to plan for retirement.
No, they shouldn't. Different jobs have different values. If
employers had
to pay high wages for very low-skill jobs, this country would soon go
out
of business. Suppose some job adds $10,000 in value to the company.
What would happen if the employer paid that worker $20,000? The
company
would go bankrupt.
> OTOH, we have the CEO for Ford making in excess of $25 million a year,
> or $500,000 a week or $100,00 a day. The CEO who helped bring to ruin
> his company makes more in one day than the worker who safely installs
> life saving brakes on cars at a rate of about 60 an hour. Life is not
> fair, but I thought my Pledge of Aligience said this country stood for
> justice for all.
The Pledge of Alllegiance is not a governing document of the United
States
of America. It is a bit of patriotic fluff that makes people feel
good.
> So, not only does the the CEO make more than 250 times more than some
> 'overpaid' worker, he flies to Washington DC in a private plane that
> brings the flight cost for the CE to more than $40,000 round trip. He
> could have flown coach for less than $300 or splurged and gone first
> class for around $1000. Instead he needs to go private jet to meet
> with elected millionaires and plead that Ford needs money.
Still, I won't argue that many CEOs are ridiculously overpaid. It's
obviously
not about the money for them. It's a way of keeping score against
other
CEOs.
Cindy Hamilton
== 6 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 9:53 am
From: Cindy Hamilton
On Nov 19, 9:37 pm, Amos Nandy <amos_na...@cebu.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:55:21 -0800 (PST), Cindy Hamilton
>
> <angelicapagane...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >On Nov 18, 7:32 pm, Amos Nandy <amos_na...@cebu.net> wrote:
>
> >> Yes, and the Labor Unions who supported LaBomba have made ridiculous
> >> demands that equal $1500 added to the price of a car JUST TO COVER
> >> HEALTH BENEFITS (alcohol and drug rehab, abortion,
>
> >Isn't covering abortion more cost-effective than covering childbirth
> >and subsequent
> >medical expenses until age 18?
>
> It depends on what value you put on the life of a human being.
In this context, that is irrelevant. We're talking about health
insurance costs.
As it happens, I have a formula for assessing the value of a human
life.
It's completely fair, but it works most accurately for adult
Americans:
The value of a human life is the amount of life insurance that they
carry.
Each person determines their own value. What could be more fair?
Cindy Hamilton
== 7 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 9:55 am
From: Cindy Hamilton
On Nov 19, 6:27 pm, Marsha <m...@xeb.net> wrote:
> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> > On Nov 18, 7:32 pm, Amos Nandy <amos_na...@cebu.net> wrote:
> >>Yes, and the Labor Unions who supported LaBomba have made ridiculous
> >>demands that equal $1500 added to the price of a car JUST TO COVER
> >>HEALTH BENEFITS (alcohol and drug rehab, abortion,
>
> > Isn't covering abortion more cost-effective than covering childbirth
> > and subsequent
> > medical expenses until age 18?
>
> > Cindy Hamilton
>
> Isn't covering the elimination of people with a low IQ or elderly people
> more cost effective than covering their medical expenses? Depending on
> who makes the rules, you could be on the next list.
Happily, elimination of people is rarely a covered benefit under most
health
insurance plans. You offer a scenario that is completely irrelevant
to
the discussion at hand.
Cindy Hamilton
== 8 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 11:07 am
From: "Rod Speed"
Cindy Hamilton <angelicapaganelli@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 19, 9:37 pm, Amos Nandy <amos_na...@cebu.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:55:21 -0800 (PST), Cindy Hamilton
>>
>> <angelicapagane...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Nov 18, 7:32 pm, Amos Nandy <amos_na...@cebu.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> Yes, and the Labor Unions who supported LaBomba have made
>>>> ridiculous demands that equal $1500 added to the price of a car
>>>> JUST TO COVER HEALTH BENEFITS (alcohol and drug rehab, abortion,
>>
>>> Isn't covering abortion more cost-effective than covering childbirth
>>> and subsequent
>>> medical expenses until age 18?
>>
>> It depends on what value you put on the life of a human being.
>
> In this context, that is irrelevant. We're talking about health insurance costs.
> As it happens, I have a formula for assessing the value of a human life.
No you dont.
> It's completely fair, but it works most accurately for adult Americans:
Its completely useless.
> The value of a human life is the amount of life insurance that they carry.
No it isnt.
> Each person determines their own value.
No they dont.
> What could be more fair?
It aint about fair.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: OT: Hurray!
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3e5868bd595cb6b2?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 9:24 am
From: Rick
Hello group,
We received our first confirmed vendor for our 2009 Fiber Arts &
Animals Festival ( www.FiberArtFest.com ) yesterday for both venues in
Marshall, Michigan! We are truly excited about vendors starting to
reserve their space so far in advance.
Our first vendor has committed to demonstrating hand spinning to the
public with hand made spinning wheels, selling hand spun yarn and
finished goods. And – they have committed to being at our June and
October venues.
Regards,
Rick Boesen
www.FiberArtFest.com
www.QuesoCabezaFarm.com
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Vaccine safety physician form
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/2f2245a974192963?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 11:09 am
From: "AllEmailDeletedImmediately"
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/janak/080313
==============================================================================
TOPIC: 403(b) plans will have fewer investment options, more restrictions in
2009
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/d2e4e10b83285954?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Nov 20 2008 11:09 am
From: "AllEmailDeletedImmediately"
==============================================================================
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