Frugal Living: misc.consumers.frugal-living - 25 new messages in 10 topics

Sunday, December 14, 2008

misc.consumers.frugal-living - 25 new messages in 10 topics - digest

misc.consumers.frugal-living
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en

misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Tracfone analog question.
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/76554cc728d7e996?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 7:05 am
From: "'nam vet."

My Tracfone uses U.S.cellular and I assume is an analog device.
When in February all services will be digital. Will my phone and minutes
be obsolete?
--
When the Power of Love,replaces the Love of Power.
that's Evolution.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Do not purchase a new Big 3 vehicle in 2009.
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/8da7acb0e572db51?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 14 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 7:07 am
From: clams_casino

lorad wrote:

>On Dec 13, 3:57 pm, clams_casino <PeterGrif...@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Brent wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Track record? What is the track record? It's a series of people's
>>>perceptions. Try to get someone who got a honda lemon to buy one again.
>>>
>>>
>>Don't know of any. I do, however, know many who will likely never
>>again consider a GM product.
>>
>>
>
>And I know manay who just love their US made cars and would never buy
>asian crap.
>
>

As Brent repeatedly points out - it's all perception, until you own one
of the Honda, Toyota, Nissan products - only then can you make an
intelligent comparison.

== 2 of 14 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 7:09 am
From: clams_casino

lorad wrote:

>On Dec 13, 2:35 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
>
>
>>In article <gi1cl1$4s...@news.motzarella.org>, "Dave" <no...@nohow.not>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>No. "Honda et al" have been very good at producing cars that don't
>>>>*need* much care.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Have you ever owned a Malibu? I have. It doesn't *need* much care to keep
>>>it running and looking good for many years. Same as a Camry or Accord.
>>>
>>>
>>Not even close. The build quality, the fit and finish, the quality of
>>components...
>>
>>...all are inferior to a Honda Civic or Toyota Corolla.
>>
>>
>
>Prove it... and compare prices while you are at it, bakersan.
>
>

It's not the original price that matters - it's the original cost plus
cost of repairs and maintainance divided by the total miles driven that
matters.

== 3 of 14 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 7:29 am
From: clams_casino

lorad wrote:

>On Dec 13, 5:18 pm, clams_casino <PeterGrif...@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:
>
>
>>lorad wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>If we lose the auto industry in America, we also lose 1/7th of all US
>>>jobs.
>>>Think about that.
>>>
>>>
>>I am - Does that include all the US plants run by Honda, Toyota, BMW,
>>Mercedes, etc? Does that figure also include all the car dealers who
>>provide more jobs than the car companies?
>>
>>
>
>Those are all foreign cars.. All of the benefits of manufacturing go
>back to their parent countries - not the US.
>
>
>
>>Does that assume all production will go overseas and no one will be
>>driving (buying cars) in the US?
>>
>>
>
>Don't be obtuse..
>If all we have is foreign cars.. then all our money will also go back
>overseas.
>
>
>
>>Sounds like propaganda to me.
>>
>>
>
>Yours... your propaganda.
>Get a brain.
>
>
>
>
>
So what you are saying, is buy a Korean built Chevy Aveo or Corsa vs. a
Honda Civic built in Greensburg, Indiana using an engine built in Anna, OH.

What about the 9 million Accords made in the Marysville, OH plant over
the past 25 years with current production of 1800 per day?

Or the Impala, Monte Carlo and Buick Lacross made in Canda, or the
Cavalier, Sunfire, Silverado, Suburban, and Aztek made in Mexico?

Hmm - get a brain.

== 4 of 14 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 7:37 am
From: clams_casino

clams_casino wrote:

> lorad wrote:
>
>> On Dec 13, 5:18 pm, clams_casino <PeterGrif...@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> lorad wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> If we lose the auto industry in America, we also lose 1/7th of all US
>>>> jobs.
>>>> Think about that.
>>>>
>>> I am - Does that include all the US plants run by Honda, Toyota, BMW,
>>> Mercedes, etc? Does that figure also include all the car dealers who
>>> provide more jobs than the car companies?
>>>
>>
>> Those are all foreign cars.. All of the benefits of manufacturing go
>> back to their parent countries - not the US.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Does that assume all production will go overseas and no one will be
>>> driving (buying cars) in the US?
>>>
>>
>> Don't be obtuse..
>> If all we have is foreign cars.. then all our money will also go back
>> overseas.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Sounds like propaganda to me.
>>>
>>
>> Yours... your propaganda.
>> Get a brain.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> So what you are saying, is buy a Korean built Chevy Aveo or Corsa vs.
> a Honda Civic built in Greensburg, Indiana using an engine built in
> Anna, OH.
>
> What about the 9 million Accords made in the Marysville, OH plant over
> the past 25 years with current production of 1800 per day?
>
> Or the Impala, Monte Carlo and Buick Lacross made in Canda, or the
> Cavalier, Sunfire, Silverado, Suburban, and Aztek made in Mexico?
>
> Hmm - get a brain.

A few other examples::

The US sold Camry is actually built in America -- at Toyota's plant in
Kentucky.

• Ford's best-selling F-Series pickup is built at a plant in Cuautitlán
Izcalli, Mexico, as well as in other plants throughout North America.

• GM's popular Chevy Tahoe/GMC Yukon SUVs are also assembled south of
the border -- at GM's Toluca, Mexico, plant.

• German automaker BMW has a large assembly plant in Spartanburg, S.C.,
where the 3 Series sport sedan, Z4 roadster and X5 sport-ute are built
-- by American, not German, workers.

• Honda has six facilities in Ohio -- including plants in Anna, East
Liberty and Marysville.

== 5 of 14 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 7:39 am
From: "Daniel T."

edward ohare <edward_ohare@nospam.yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 09:29:08 -0500, "Daniel T."
> <daniel_t@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > Non-Sequitur. Let me ask another way... If GM declares bankruptcy,
> > but continues to build cars (just like the airlines declared
> > bankruptcy but continued to fly planes,) is it "lost"?
>
> I have seen this thought several times and need to point out that GM
> etc in bankruptcy reorganizations are **not** like the airlines.
> Airline tickets have a short expected useful life, no need for a
> supply of repair parts, no need for a warranty, no concern for
> resale value, and cost comparatively little. People know
> reorganization sometimes often does not work and because of the
> issues I've identified, bankruptcy reorganization **does not** work
> for manufacturers of duable goods.
>
> Wagoner has said bankruptcy is not an option. He's right. But I
> also think that faced with that as the only choice, he'll try it...
> one idiotic last roll of the dice.

Well, repair parts will be manufactured as long as the need exists, and
resale value has little/nothing to do with whether the company exists.
So if the warranty was guaranteed by the government?

But even so, do you then think that if they go bankrupt, that is "lost"?
As in the moment they go bankrupt, we will loose 1/7th of our jobs?

== 6 of 14 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 7:44 am
From: clams_casino

Daniel T. wrote:

> I seriously doubt that 1/7th of the US
>population works for three companies.
>
>

You don't believe 22 billion people work in the domestic three auto
companies?

== 7 of 14 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 7:49 am
From: Dave Head

On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 10:02:57 -0500, edward ohare
<edward_ohare@nospam.yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:

>On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 11:24:11 GMT, Dave Head <rally2xs@att.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Why don't you start hating your own foot? Advocating the destruction of
>>American manufacturing capability is pretty much shooting yourself in the foot.
>
>
>Who is advocating? Its happened.

Advocating would be opposing measures required to help them survive. America
needs _more_ manufactuing, not less.
>
>>The less manufacturing we have here, the less prosperity we have here. Wonder
>>why wages have stagnated since the 70's, and studies claim that our parents in
>>the 70's actually had a better standard of living than we do today? Well, its
>>because we have lost a lot of manufactuering. There's 3 ways to make wealth -
>>grow something (farming), dig something (mining), and build something
>>(manufacturing.) Any one of these three that we lose should be done only in
>>spite of everyone in the country doing everything we can do retain it, as if
>>our own personal financial well-being depends on it, because it does.
>
>Subsidizing anything is a loser.

Oh, really? The French subsidized the snot out of Airbus, and look where it
is. It is now threatening Boeing, which not only is _not_ getting subsidies
from the gov't, but is operating in the 2nd highest corporate tax structure on
the planet. And look where they are. That's not fair, and it doesn't reflect
the worth of the product.

The US Gov't subsidizes the hell out of the trucking industry, and you can see
what happens by just looking ahead of you and see what's at the front of that
line that is holding up traffic on the interstate. They subsidize it by
building the roads that the trucks run upon, without doing the same thing for
railroads. Those damn big "We Pay X Tax" on the trucks doesn't begin to cover
the cost, since an 18 wheeler at 80,000 lbs does 10,000 times the damage of a
car to the interstates (and now they want to be allowed to go to 100,000 lbs.
Transportation suicide. The roads would be continuously under repair.)

>Because of world wide overcapacity
>and because they are the weakest of the large automakers, Detroit
>requires permanent subsidies to survive... unless capacity is reduced
>by letting some of them fail.

If something is going to fail, let it be something other than US companies. We
need them here - if all three go TU, the economy is going to be devastated in
the short term, and we will _never again_ reach the level of prosperity that we
have even now. There will be more people below the poverty line, more people
living / trying to live on credit alone, etc. as one of the 3 significant
engines of wealth is lost forever. We'll never be able to restart a
competitive auto industry. Right now, we have a chance, and the American built
cars have just been getting better and better over the last 20 years.

== 8 of 14 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 7:52 am
From: clams_casino

Dave Head wrote:

> I saw an article that quotes the _real_ paycheck-labor
>average for the big 3 - $29.87 an hour. Toyota, when asked about their
>American labor rate, said, "about $30."
>
>
>
Why did you conveniently ignore the part about added benefits costs of
about $18/ hr for the Toyota workers vs. $32 /hr for active UAW worker
(plus about $7 for retiree benefits)?

== 9 of 14 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 7:56 am
From: Nate Nagel

Dave Head wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 07:59:56 -0500, Nate Nagel <njnagel@roosters.net> wrote:
>
>> Dave Head wrote:
>>> On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 06:16:00 -0500, necromancer
>>> <55_sux@worldofnecromancer_NO-SPAM_NO-WAY.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 16:13:54 -0800 (PST), lorad <lorad474@cs.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Rather than sending your dollars to Tokyo or Seoul, try to help your
>>>>> neighbors and yourself by buying a US made automobile. As is well
>>>>> known.. keeping one dollar in your local economy, generates even more
>>>>> dollars as that money recirculates creating compounded wealth.
>>>> Kia is spending US$1.2 Billion of its own money (not DC bailout,
>>>> "loans," that the big 3 are asking for) to bulid a major manufacturing
>>>> facility in West Point, GA that is estimated to employ up to 6000 of
>>>> my neighbors. This a few years after FORD bailed out of Georgia by
>>>> closing its Atlanta assembly line.
>>> Yeah, and the money made there is going right back to Korea. Talk about
>>> myopia.
>>>
>>>> Fuck Detroit. Fuck Wall Street. And Fuck Bush.
>>> Why don't you start hating your own foot? Advocating the destruction of
>>> American manufacturing capability is pretty much shooting yourself in the foot.
>>> The less manufacturing we have here, the less prosperity we have here. Wonder
>>> why wages have stagnated since the 70's, and studies claim that our parents in
>>> the 70's actually had a better standard of living than we do today? Well, its
>>> because we have lost a lot of manufactuering. There's 3 ways to make wealth -
>>> grow something (farming), dig something (mining), and build something
>>> (manufacturing.) Any one of these three that we lose should be done only in
>>> spite of everyone in the country doing everything we can do retain it, as if
>>> our own personal financial well-being depends on it, because it does.
>> The problem is that the Big Three feel entitled to that kind of
>> attention and indeed have been riding on it since the early 70's, all
>> the while producing new model after new model that is just as
>> uninspiring,
>
> I dunno, the Liberty that I just investigated I fould to be fairly exciting. I
> was only looking for a price comaparison with something similar from Toyota,
> and ended up wanting to buy it. It looks really sweet.
>
>> overpriced,
>
> The Liberty was similarly priced to the Toyota equivalent.
>
>> and unreliable as the one it replaces.
>
> My '98 Jeep Cherokee has been pretty reilable. I've taken it on lots of long
> drives, and it hasn't let me down yet. I would expect a 2008 to do no worse.
>
>> Goodwill only goes so far and the Big Three have made little effort to
>> produce appealing products.
>
> Disagree. The Jeep Cherokee was, I think, the best answer to a snow-going SUV
> that I could have bought at the time, and the Liberty looks like the answer
> today. At 22 mpg, it beat the Toyota's 20 mpg as well. That's 10 percent
> better than the Toyota.
>
>> nate

I don't share your opinion of the Liberty, and the Cherokee is not a big
three product (it's actually a leftover AMC design.) The Cherokee is
one of the few "recent" (not really) American vehicles that I would buy
without reservation.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

== 10 of 14 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 8:16 am
From: Vic Smith

On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 20:12:39 -0500, clams_casino
<PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:

>Brent wrote:
>
>>So was the cimmeron but dressing up a cavalier didn't make it so.

>>
>Owned an 82 Cavalier wagon. Steering went out at 52k, at which time I
>learned that it was covered by a recall only until 50k. Engine died at
>85k - only 4 cylinder I ever owned. Mileage was poor from what I
>recall,

The 2.0 was almost bulletproof. You probably didn't take of it
because, as Brent suggested, it's a Chevy.
I gave my '85 to my brother about 2000 because it was rotted out.
It always got good mileage - compared to sixes and eights.
Had 130k miles and he put another 20k on it.
Only "serious" repairs I ever did to it were a water pump and heater
core. Oh wait, ECU, starter motor and 1 CV joint. Paid a mechanic to
do those. Cheap GM parts.
The door hardware was crap too.
But it was a cheap ass car, and I knew it.
Paid $700 for it in '93 and the wife drove if for 5 years. Stopped
twice on her - but she had an all city commute. I put about $500 in
repairs, and some time. Not bad for 5 years, but I wouldn't recommend
the car.
Wife was highly pissed at it because it "stranded" her 3 times, and
when she picked up the kids at H.S. they asked her to
park around the corner so nobody would see it (-:
Replaced it with a '90 Corsica 2.2 and that's a much better car.
Paid $2500 for it and still driving it as a second car.
About 135k mile, all city driving. 10 years now. Only failed once,
when the ignition switch broke. Cost a couple hundred with the tow
and mechanic. Again, a cheap GM part. Really crap that they put that
in a car. My mechanic had seen a number of them. The replacement
part was re-engineered.
The Big 3's major problem was offering no equivalent to the
Camry/Accord/Corolla/Civic. They could have - easily.
The late '80's Chevy Celebrity 2.8 and it's GM brethren were every bit
the value of the Camry/Accord sixes, but they were discontinued after
short lives.
Improving something good and standing behind it wasn't in their blood.
Short-term thinking.
They made their bed.
Though you and I see cars differently - I get max value because I take
advantage of GM discounted used prices - you are absolutely correct
about how buyers won't go back to GM once they're burned.
Can't blame them.
This has been a boon to me because I always buy used.
If I was a new car buyer, I would look at the Malibu and Impala.
They have a pretty good track record.
I see a used one in my pretty near future.
But if I bought new, seeing as how GM still hasn't shown any
"cultural" character in standing behind its products long-term, I'd
probably go with the Japs.
That's why when a woman asks me to recommend a car, and I think about
how she works hard for her money, and can't do her own work, and I
won't do it for her, I just tell her to get a new Corolla.
No-brainer.
Cars and peoples feelings towards them are often fraught with
little-understood emotions. The polls about bailing out the Big 3
are reflective of Big 3 market share.
One of my daughters wasn't willing to go with the $2500 GM first car I
set up for most of my kids, and spent $14k on a 2 year old Mitsu
Eclipse. It's been less reliable than what I would have provided, and
cost her a lot of money - beyond the $11.5k she kicked in she coughed
up +$2k for rebuilding the trans after she had it 2 years and another
$500 for a harmonic balancer. And it uses premium gas.
But other than some minor bitching depression when she suffered the
big hits, she's been happy with it. We fought her tooth and nail
about it, but she prevailed. Her money. I'm happy she's happy.
She looks good in it. Or she feels she looks good in it. Or
whatever.
Me, I just think about cost. A car is an appliance to me.

--Vic

== 11 of 14 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 8:19 am
From: Dave Head

On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 10:52:23 -0500, clams_casino <PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com>
wrote:

>Dave Head wrote:
>
>> I saw an article that quotes the _real_ paycheck-labor
>>average for the big 3 - $29.87 an hour. Toyota, when asked about their
>>American labor rate, said, "about $30."
>>
>>
>>
>Why did you conveniently ignore the part about added benefits costs of
>about $18/ hr for the Toyota workers vs. $32 /hr for active UAW worker
>(plus about $7 for retiree benefits)?

Because the Republican congresscritters want the American auto workers to take
a huge paycut to the "level of the foreign car workers in this country." Well,
the take-home pay is what counts when an employee goes to Wal Mart to buy
something, and that's about the same.

As for the benefits, note that the foreign car companies factories haven't been
here all that long. Has anybody retired out of one of them? H no - they
don't have a "20 years and out" retirement scheme. Nobody does. So the
foreign car workers have an advantage that will be mitigated with the passage
of time.

Health care? What do we want to subject American workers to? The auto workers
have a _great_ health care package if you believe the network news, but so do
government workers. In fact, the cure for this is not to make the auto workers
have mediocre or non-existent health care, it is to force the rest of the
industry to provide the great health care.

And that's another thing worth mentioning. In addition to the price advantage
of using cheaper labor overseas, most everywhere else has free healthcare from
their governments. American industries have to cough that up. Foreign auto
industries don't It isn't being accounted for as people scream to force the US
auto companies out of business to make way for the foreign auto companies.

But meanwhile, Republicans will attempt to take that $30 or so difference
between the supposed wage difference between foreign car workers here and
American car workers here and of course that would leave them with $0.
Otherwise, they'd have to give up the vast majority of their benefits, and be
unable to afford health care if anything really big hit. That's just the way
we want Americans to live.... not...

== 12 of 14 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 8:21 am
From: clams_casino

Nate Nagel wrote:

>
> I don't share your opinion of the Liberty, and the Cherokee is not a
> big three product (it's actually a leftover AMC design.) The Cherokee
> is one of the few "recent" (not really) American vehicles that I would
> buy without reservation.
>
> nate
>

Changing the topic somewhat - The strength of the domestic three has
historically been styling vs. the quality of Japanese models. With
perhaps the exception of the Datsun 240Z, a few British imports and the
high priced designer cars (Porsche, lamborghini, etc), I'm not sure
there has every really been much styling to affordable Toyotas, Hondas,
Nissans, etc. At best they are functional, cost effective vehicles,
typically available in any shade of gray you'd ever want - platinum.
charcoal, medium gray, dark gray, etc. With respect to styling, none
really compare with the classics such as Mustang, GTO, Challenger,
Corvette, Firebird, Torino, Camaro, etc.

Face it - in 20 years will there be any of today's (affordable) cars in
parades & car shows, except perhaps a few Mini Coopers or a Jeep? Does
anyone really look back at their first car and wish they once again had
that Civic, Caravan, Corolla, Prius, Malibu?

== 13 of 14 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 8:35 am
From: Dave Head

On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 10:56:43 -0500, Nate Nagel <njnagel@roosters.net> wrote:

>Dave Head wrote:
>> On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 07:59:56 -0500, Nate Nagel <njnagel@roosters.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Dave Head wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 06:16:00 -0500, necromancer
>>>> <55_sux@worldofnecromancer_NO-SPAM_NO-WAY.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 16:13:54 -0800 (PST), lorad <lorad474@cs.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Rather than sending your dollars to Tokyo or Seoul, try to help your
>>>>>> neighbors and yourself by buying a US made automobile. As is well
>>>>>> known.. keeping one dollar in your local economy, generates even more
>>>>>> dollars as that money recirculates creating compounded wealth.
>>>>> Kia is spending US$1.2 Billion of its own money (not DC bailout,
>>>>> "loans," that the big 3 are asking for) to bulid a major manufacturing
>>>>> facility in West Point, GA that is estimated to employ up to 6000 of
>>>>> my neighbors. This a few years after FORD bailed out of Georgia by
>>>>> closing its Atlanta assembly line.
>>>> Yeah, and the money made there is going right back to Korea. Talk about
>>>> myopia.
>>>>
>>>>> Fuck Detroit. Fuck Wall Street. And Fuck Bush.
>>>> Why don't you start hating your own foot? Advocating the destruction of
>>>> American manufacturing capability is pretty much shooting yourself in the foot.
>>>> The less manufacturing we have here, the less prosperity we have here. Wonder
>>>> why wages have stagnated since the 70's, and studies claim that our parents in
>>>> the 70's actually had a better standard of living than we do today? Well, its
>>>> because we have lost a lot of manufactuering. There's 3 ways to make wealth -
>>>> grow something (farming), dig something (mining), and build something
>>>> (manufacturing.) Any one of these three that we lose should be done only in
>>>> spite of everyone in the country doing everything we can do retain it, as if
>>>> our own personal financial well-being depends on it, because it does.
>>> The problem is that the Big Three feel entitled to that kind of
>>> attention and indeed have been riding on it since the early 70's, all
>>> the while producing new model after new model that is just as
>>> uninspiring,
>>
>> I dunno, the Liberty that I just investigated I fould to be fairly exciting. I
>> was only looking for a price comaparison with something similar from Toyota,
>> and ended up wanting to buy it. It looks really sweet.
>>
>>> overpriced,
>>
>> The Liberty was similarly priced to the Toyota equivalent.
>>
>>> and unreliable as the one it replaces.
>>
>> My '98 Jeep Cherokee has been pretty reilable. I've taken it on lots of long
>> drives, and it hasn't let me down yet. I would expect a 2008 to do no worse.
>>
>>> Goodwill only goes so far and the Big Three have made little effort to
>>> produce appealing products.
>>
>> Disagree. The Jeep Cherokee was, I think, the best answer to a snow-going SUV
>> that I could have bought at the time, and the Liberty looks like the answer
>> today. At 22 mpg, it beat the Toyota's 20 mpg as well. That's 10 percent
>> better than the Toyota.
>>
>>> nate
>
>I don't share your opinion of the Liberty, and the Cherokee is not a big
>three product (it's actually a leftover AMC design.) The Cherokee is
>one of the few "recent" (not really) American vehicles that I would buy
>without reservation.
>
>nate

Up until last night when I went to their web page and actually investigated the
Liberty, I also didn't like it. I based my opinion on what I learned when they
1st came out. One of the car magazines said, "It's getting us 13 miles per
gallon, but nobody seems to care." That's about the best word-for-word that I
remember for that review. I saw the Liberty as bigger, heavier, and with
poorer mileage. I looked at one on the lot and it had 3 rows of seats and NO
cargo area. It was essentially a small 4-wheel drive minivan. I seriously
didn't want it.

The car I saw on the web last night is just the opposite. 2 rows of seats,
lots of cargo space, 22 mpg on the highway (my Cherokee gets about 18 tops) and
those 22 mpg are measured under a new measurement scheme that has seen the
ratings for a lot of cars drop severly. My Subaru WRX was 27 mpg under the old
measuring system. Coming back from vacation last winter, I was getting 26.9
coming across the Appalacians and a lot of that was done about 77 mph, not 55.
They've also redesigned the WRX so that there's no way to compare it now, so
I'm not. (This new gas mileage rating scheme, I think, will make the new CAFE
of 35 mpg to be met by, I think 2020, unattainable by any company but Harley
Davidson and maybe the various go-kart manufacturers. But that's another
thread.)

Go look at the Liberty again:

http://tinyurl.com/6832bh

But be careful. You may end up wanting one.

PS - There is supposed to be a diesel version coming. If so... WOW. That will
be really exciting, and, I think, a winner. Not on the web page yet,
unfortunately.

== 14 of 14 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 8:40 am
From: Dave Head

On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 11:21:14 -0500, clams_casino <PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com>
wrote:

>Nate Nagel wrote:
>
>>
>> I don't share your opinion of the Liberty, and the Cherokee is not a
>> big three product (it's actually a leftover AMC design.) The Cherokee
>> is one of the few "recent" (not really) American vehicles that I would
>> buy without reservation.
>>
>> nate
>>
>
>Changing the topic somewhat - The strength of the domestic three has
>historically been styling vs. the quality of Japanese models. With
>perhaps the exception of the Datsun 240Z, a few British imports and the
>high priced designer cars (Porsche, lamborghini, etc), I'm not sure
>there has every really been much styling to affordable Toyotas, Hondas,
>Nissans, etc. At best they are functional, cost effective vehicles,
>typically available in any shade of gray you'd ever want - platinum.
>charcoal, medium gray, dark gray, etc. With respect to styling, none
>really compare with the classics such as Mustang, GTO, Challenger,
>Corvette, Firebird, Torino, Camaro, etc.
>
>Face it - in 20 years will there be any of today's (affordable) cars in
>parades & car shows, except perhaps a few Mini Coopers or a Jeep? Does
>anyone really look back at their first car and wish they once again had
>that Civic, Caravan, Corolla, Prius, Malibu?

Chrysler Crossfire. BEAUTIFUL Car. $15K off right now:

http://www.08chryslercrossfire.com/offer/

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Pennies on the street
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/d8ebb8d9fdd5bbd9?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 7:08 am
From: "Bill"

I sure do pick up pennies. I always have and always will!

Something interesting I have noticed related to this...

Those people I know, who pick up pennies, are in very good shape
financially!

But those people I know, who "throw away" pennies, tell the cashier at
stores to keep the pennies, and walk past pennies on the ground, are in
TERRIBLE shape financially. They can't pay their bills on time, live beyond
their means, are impatient, make foolish purchases, etc.

Note that the people in poor shape financially may in fact make more money
than those in good financial condition, they just can't manage their money.
So not a matter of income levels necessarily.

"Macuser" wrote in message
> For years, I saw lots of pennies on the side because they were no longer
> of interest. Now, I hardly ever see them. It seems that people have
> returned to picking up pennies. Do you pick up coins? I prefer they be
> five cents or higher before I'll bend down.
>

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 8:12 am
From: "Macuser"

I agree. And lots of people get rich from simply being thrifty. What I
mentioned in my original post was that I see far fewer pennies available to
be picked up now. More people seem to be willing to pick up free small
change these days.

--
http://cashcuddler.com

"Thrift is sexy."

"Bill" <billnomailnospamx@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6qklrdFd1po8U1@mid.individual.net...

> Note that the people in poor shape financially may in fact make more money
> than those in good financial condition, they just can't manage their
> money. So not a matter of income levels necessarily.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Folks, this is a real depression, protect your assets
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/cb1cc803cf7130ab?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 7:39 am
From: "Macuser"

I agree, and Obama seems to be using FDR's administration as a template for
his own. The public works projects planned echo the WPA and TVA, which
brought parts of the US into the 20th century. I have reservations about
Obama's plan to build new roads, and would rather see the money spent on
repairs and new mass transit projects.

> Roosevelt had the trust of the people and so far so does Obama. Sure
> he will make mistakes and lose backing just as FDR did. But the
> bottom line is that it was the mistakes of Hoover and Bush that got us
> into depression.

To be completely fair about the above, Bush had a big part, but there is
blame to share. Deregulation was also favored by Clinton and Greenspan.
Blame must be shared by the banks which pushed loans on people who didn't
have the income to pay them back, the people who took on loans knowing they
couldn't pay them back, the real estate agents who pushed houses on people
who couldn't pay for them, the people who took loans on their home equity to
finance a flamboyant lifestyle.

Who have I missed?

--
http://cashcuddler.com

"Thrift is sexy."

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 8:27 am
From: "Don Phillipson"

"Macuser" <spamisaluncheon@meat.com> wrote in message
news:NM91l.1797$7I6.334@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...

> . . . Bush had a big part, but there is
> blame to share. Deregulation was also favored by Clinton and Greenspan.
> Blame must be shared by the banks which pushed loans on people who didn't
> have the income to pay them back, the people who took on loans knowing
they
> couldn't pay them back, the real estate agents who pushed houses on people
> who couldn't pay for them, the people who took loans on their home equity
to
> finance a flamboyant lifestyle.
>
> Who have I missed?

1. Banks and assoociated brokerages who were inventing
as fast as they could new "investment products" to sell to
clients, e.g. Real Estate Investment Trusts.
2. Federal regulators of banking, who permitted approx.
2000 "credit default swaps," i.e. betting on the future default
of other parties (to whom the purchaser of a CDS was
neither creditor nor debtor) which had been illegal since
approx. 1920 under the legislation that forbade bucket shops
etc. Alan Greenspan told Congress some weeks ago that
he had believed business ethics and prudence would prevent
catastrophic collapse of the CDS pyramid, and admitted
he had been wrong.

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

==============================================================================
TOPIC: stay healthy and avoid medical insurance read http://www.cidpusa.org
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/b8cfeb1da6da1d5a?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 7:53 am
From: Jennifer

stay healthy and avoid medical insurance read http://www.cidpusa.org
guidelines for diet and diseases prevention

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Coinstar Offer (and Caveat)
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/d588469c33c799f3?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 7:56 am
From: "Macuser"

Deal over, as of 12/7. Oh, well. I would have hustled for the $10.

--
http://cashcuddler.com

"Thrift is sexy."

==============================================================================
TOPIC: how 'bout a "new' 1957 VW?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/f5f1ebefb4f9a6ac?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 8:06 am
From: MSfortune@mcpmail.com

On Dec 13, 6:05 pm, "'nam vet." <georgewks...@humboldt1.com> wrote:
> http://www.jps-motorsports.com/Gallery/source/blkoutlaw.html
> --
> When the Power of Love,replaces the Love of Power.
> that's Evolution.

It's a VW, but not a Beetle. Either way, that old VW is not very
functional today. It's a death trap and the mileage is not all that
good as I recall. I think a Beetle got about 25 m.p.g.m, which was
good then, but not now. I liked the idea of being able to overhaul the
engine in the living room and the clutches were bullet proof. I can't
live in the past. I believe I could drive something much newer at a
lower cost per mile. I get close to 20 M.P.G. on my GMC truck. Parts
are plentiful and fairly priced. It's a beast and people get out of my
way. The next vehicle will probably be much smaller.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Your favorite free e-card?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/8bf2062ff2236938?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 8:12 am
From: MSfortune@mcpmail.com

On Dec 13, 5:56 pm, "Bob F" <bobnos...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "The Real Bev" <bashley10...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:gi1ec2$j5r$3@news.motzarella.org...
>
> > James wrote:
> >> Have you found a really good one that you would recommend?
>
> > Maybe. What's an e-card?
>
> I think it is a way to give your friends e-mail addresses to companies so they
> can sell them to spammers.

I did not want to say that, but that is sometimes true. And they keep
bugging you if you don't go to their site to view the card. People
that send ecards are the same people that forward Internet myths and
mail that warns them that they "must" forward this to ten people or
die tomorrow. Generally, they are not heavy thinkers.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Customer suffering diarrhea shits herself because Jo-Ann Fabrics would
not let her use the bathroom.
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3492db825691db70?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 9:05 am
From: ultimauw@gmail.com

http://consumerist.com/consumer/worst-customer-service-ever/jo+ann-fabrics-refuses-to-let-customer-use-bathroom-even-as-she-suffers-diarrhea-right-in-front-of-them-274441.php

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Jo-Ann Fabrics customer suffering diarrhea shits herself because they
would not let her use the bathroom.
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/cd8f48b5f61f57ba?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Dec 14 2008 9:06 am
From: ultimauw@gmail.com

http://consumerist.com/consumer/worst-customer-service-ever/jo+ann-fabrics-refuses-to-let-customer-use-bathroom-even-as-she-suffers-diarrhea-right-in-front-of-them-274441.php

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

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "misc.consumers.frugal-living"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to misc.consumers.frugal-living+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en

Frugal Living

Blog Archive

Sunday, December 14, 2008

misc.consumers.frugal-living - 25 new messages in 10 topics - digest

No comments: