http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Folks, this is a real depression, protect your assets - 13 messages, 4
authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/cb1cc803cf7130ab?hl=en
* supreme court to determine obama presidential eligibilty - 8 messages, 4
authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/546a49e0512f561c?hl=en
* Profession Wholesale world famous brand bag(handbags) 25$-30$ - 1 messages,
1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/55a620b6e94b87b1?hl=en
* useing a curved pot with an induction heater? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/8510c23808cd8a87?hl=en
* Firewood prices - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3484c3a01685a9fe?hl=en
* The Constitution of the Kingdom of God, effective as of 08.08.08 (www.
grishenkoff.com) - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/fe2bd7bda3dfe136?hl=en
* Shrinking Canned Tuna. Smaller, more Expensive - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/993839ff415de549?hl=en
==============================================================================
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 13 ==
Date: Wed, Dec 3 2008 10:38 pm
From: Clam Bake
On Wed, 03 Dec 2008 17:59:35 -0500, Jeffrey Turner
<jturner@localnet.com> wrote:
>Dave wrote:
>> <EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com> wrote in message
>> news:gh6rg6$oqh$3@reader1.panix.com...
>>> In misc.survivalism phil scott <phil@philscott.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> a crucial difference between then and now Ted, is that cash was backed
>>>> by gold and silver then...
>>>> today the cash is pure hot air, backed by zip...and 8 trillion more of
>>>> it issued in the last month.
>>> So how will cuting federal spending boost GDP?
>>
>> It won't, unless there is corresponding tax cuts. -Dave
>
>Keep repeating your mantra. It won't make what you're saying any less
>of a religious faith. You won't find any examples in reality, though.
>
>--Jeff
So what's your solution? Raise taxes? On who and how much? Since
you like "reality" so much, give us some examples of where raising
taxes and feeding the government beast is better for the economy than
providing tax incentives for private companies to create jobs.
You leftists are all the same one trick pony. Your only solution to
anything is to raise taxes(on other people than yourselves of
course!). I guess you think government is a better steward of our
money than we are. Your slavish devotion to government bureaucracy
and its vast legions of incompetent backoffice paper pushers is just
plain bizarre.
== 2 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 4:11 am
From: clams_casino
Dave wrote:
>
>
>Really? Ok, Obama's plan boils down to, raise taxes and use those taxes to
>employ people building roads and bridges, etc. It's a pyramid scheme
>though.
>
Hmm - Clinton raised taxes and the economy soared.
GW cut taxes through borrowed money and the economy tanked.
== 3 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 4:20 am
From: clams_casino
Dave wrote:
>
>
>Holy SHIT! You want the 3 or 4 remaining employers in the U.S. to be more
>efficient? How do you figure that is going to help?
>
>
>
Any explanation why Honda, Toyota, BMW, Mercedes, Hyundai, Nissan etc
and now Volkswagen built production plants in the US?
== 4 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 4:25 am
From: clams_casino
Dave wrote:
>
>I honestly believe we need someone like Sarah Palin, I hope she runs for
>PRESIDENT in 2012.
>
>
>
>
Now I'm really confused. You condemn taxes, yet you support Palin
who's sole means to govern is by taxing oil company profits and
redistributing the bounty as welfare checks to all AK residents.
== 5 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 5:37 am
From: EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com
In misc.survivalism Dave <noway1@noway2.not> wrote:
> Ok, that was a sarcastic exaggeration of course. But what you fail to
> consider is, while we are raising taxes to improve infrastructure, we are
> ALSO giving employers strong incentives to CUT production and/or move
> production out of the country.
Not if the infrastructure improvemets are done wisely, so that they are
worth more than what they cost. It's obvious that we shouldn't waste
money where it will do little good. But you seem to think that congested,
unusable highways and inadequete ports are irrelevant to a business's
decision on where to locate.
--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel
== 6 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 5:43 am
From: EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com
In misc.survivalism clams_casino <PeterGriffin@drunkinclam.com> wrote:
> Considering about half the federal budget goes to the military, do you
> believe the military "produces nothing"?
It depends on how you define nothing. If you think of the military as a
jobs creation program, we'd be just as well off if all those folks spent
their time digging holes and then filling them back in. To take it to a
further extreme, if they bombed American cities, we could employ folks to
rebuild them too.
IOW, the military is a necessary evil. From a purely economic standpoint,
it is pure waste. It produces no economic activity that grows the
economy, because all the production ends up being destroyed in war.
Think of it this way - every time we use a million-dollar "smart bomb", we
could have instead endowed a research position at a university, or built a
school, or immunized kids against disease, or improved our electric grid,
or whatever. We could have spent the money on something that produces
dividends, instead of making a crater.
--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel
== 7 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 5:53 am
From: EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com
In misc.survivalism Dave <noway1@noway2.not> wrote:
> Or put another way...government, as an employer, is VERY inefficient. The
> same money in non-government business use will create more jobs. -Dave
True, but trivial. There are things that the government is in a unique
position to accomplish. Goernment make-work programs are not a good idea.
Government expenditures to improve business conditions are an investment
we should all be making.
I have in mind:
Pure Reseach
Education
Infrastructure
The Arts
All of these things will make businesses want to locate here. We will
NEVER be the lowest cost place to do business. Not unless we want a huge
army of uemployed folks who will work for less than starving
third-worlders. And most folks think that competing to be the cheapest is
a poor strategy, while competing to be the best is viable.
We need the best educated, most productive workforce if we are to compete
with starving third worlders. We need to to produce the most innovative,
best-made products in the world, and we need to have the ability to export
those products.
And without proper infrastructure, we cannot accomplish that. It dies
little good to have an army of starving workers, for example, if the
products cannot be transported and the electric grid is unreliable and
raw materials and building materials cannot be obtained.
--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel
== 8 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 5:57 am
From: EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com
In misc.survivalism Dave <noway1@noway2.not> wrote:
> Government (all programs) need to be cut DRAMATICALLY. Taxes (all taxes)
> need to be cut DRAMATICALLY. Failure to do this will keep the country in
> depression, indefinitely.
You ignore the fact that taxes are currently lower than they were during
significant expansions.
> The simplest thing we could do which would go a LONG WAY toward balancing
> the budget is to immediately STOP acting like the world police force. If
> two countries want to destroy each other, LET THEM. Keep our military on
> U.S. soil. Keep them strong, but keep them HOME. Be strong enough that
> nobody even thinks about fucking with us, but we need to keep our troops OUT
> of foreign countries.
We need to defend our customers and to defend our suppliers of raw
materials. You are somewhat correct, but your simplistic back and white
thinking causs you to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
> Just look at the money we've thrown at Iraq. If we'd have minded our own
> business, that money would have paid for the current and PROPOSED "bailout"
> measures, a thousand times over!!!! And still have plenty left over to
> shore up Social Security, STRENGTHEN the military, rebuild all the roads,
> improve public education, etc.
That is but one example. On that one, you are correct.
--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel
== 9 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 6:00 am
From: EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com
In misc.survivalism Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote:
> The time to have balanced the budget was when times were good.
Bingo. Indeed, we should have been running a surplus when times were
good, or instead, we shuould have been investing in education
and infrastructure. Instead, we bought expensive military equipment which
was then destroyed. We would have accomplished the same thing by building
huge structures and then burning them down.
--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel
== 10 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 6:03 am
From: EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com
In misc.survivalism Dave <noway1@noway2.not> wrote:
> Dude, you have a two-income family with a balanced family budget. Times are
> good. Now the husband (one of the income earners) gets laid off. Is it now
> less important to balance the budget? HELL NO!!! It is now more important
> than ever to balance the budget. If you keep spending money based on your
> previous income, you are going to dig yourself into a hole so deep that you
> will have trouble getting out of it even if the husband finds gainful
> employment later.
Maybe instead the husband should get a loan and go back to school, or
maybe buy a car so he can go on job interviews, or maybe move to a better
area, or maybe make some other kind of investment in the future.
One size does not fit all. Never did, never will.
> A more important question is, do you think it's a good idea to keep taxes at
> current level or even increase taxes, to drive employers out of the
> ountry? -Dave
During periods of higher business taxation, like the Eisenhower years,
business flourished.
If you only look at taxes, you miss zillions of other factors.
--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel
== 11 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 6:21 am
From: curly'q
EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com wrote:
> In misc.survivalism Jeff <nospam@nothanks.org> wrote:
>
>> If you want to stimulate the economy quickly through government
>> spending, among the best ways to do it are expanding food stamp and
>> unemployment benefits.
>
> Interesting ideas.
>
> I'd be inclined to support R&D, along with infrastructure spending to
> get long term benefits. Increase student aid?
>
>
>> Howver, I believe that spending on the crumbling national
> rastructure would address two problems at once.
>
> Yes.
>
How about constructing an entire, from the ground up, magnificent world
class university campus and support community, worthy of being called
'The University of the United States of America'..... 80K students all
of whom get a free education if qualified by way of competitive exam,
and who continue to be qualified for the entire term of their studies.
You screw up, you're out, period. Follow that by a commitment of 2 years
of public service to get a feel for the real world...and as a little
payback.
That's my kind of socialism. :-)
What would be the ROI on that?
LA
== 12 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 6:27 am
From: EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com
In misc.survivalism Clam Bake <mmmspam@spam.org> wrote:
> So what's your solution? Raise taxes?
That depends on many factors. Most folks think that deficit spending
during recessions and paying down debts during expanisons is a good idea.
But the decisions depend on the current levels of taxation (and a zillion
other factors) both here and in other economies.
--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel
== 13 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 6:29 am
From: EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com
In misc.survivalism Curly Surmudgeon <curlysurmudgeon@live.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Dec 2008 20:51:18 +0000, EskWIRED wrote:
> > In misc.survivalism phil scott <phil@philscott.net> wrote:
> >
> >> a crucial difference between then and now Ted, is that cash was backed
> >> by gold and silver then...
> >> today the cash is pure hot air, backed by zip...and 8 trillion more of
> >> it issued in the last month.
> >
> > So how will cuting federal spending boost GDP?
> Straw man argument. Where do you see his claim that cutting federal
> spending would boost GDP?
He said that a balanced budget is the current answer. I was responding to
the implication that cutting taxes and laying off gov't workiers was the
manner in which one could balance the federal budget.
I pointed out that Hoover tried it.
His response was that we were on the gold standard at that time. I asked
how that made a difference.
Try to keep up.
--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel
==============================================================================
TOPIC: supreme court to determine obama presidential eligibilty
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/546a49e0512f561c?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 1:08 am
From: JonL
Jeff wrote:
> AllEmailDeletedImmediately wrote:
>> it's all over the blogs.
>
> Doubtless the same bloggers that think George W Bush has been a good
> president. You guys will believe anything that a fellow wingnut spews.
>
> http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
>
"factcheck", brought to you by Annenberg Foundation (Obama sat on their
board in Chicago)
Inquiring Mindz want to know:
When he was in Hawaii not long ago, he could have produced/released the
vault copy of his birth certificate, if one exists....why didn't he??,
All we've seen was this Certificate of Live Birth, which only proves
that a live birth occurred....somewhere, not necessarily in Hawaii.
(Israeli experts pronounced it a crude forgery)
Notice, no hospital in Hawaii is celebrating or putting up a plaque:
"birthplace of President Barack Obama".
The only celebration is in Kenya, where his grandma said she's so proud
cuz she witnessed his birth (at Coast Province Hospital in Mombasa).
He could still qualify as natural born if Stanley moved back to the US
for 5 yrs.
I guess "factcheck" forgot he was adopted (new name Barry Soerto) and
became a naturalized citizen of Indonesia.
How'd he manage to get into Pakistan when it was on the State
Department's Forbidden list, or whatever it's called (Pak was under
martial law)
My guess is, he had an Indonesian passport.
I also suspect he registered at Columbia and Harvard as a foreign student.
== 2 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 1:24 am
From: JonL
Marsha wrote:
> Dennis wrote:
>> I do find it interesting that the Obama camp has so far spent almost a
>> million dollars in legal fees to avoid simply releasing a piece of
>> paper that would put this whole issue to bed. What could their
>> reasoning possibly be?
>> (And don't even try to suggest some mythical "right to privacy".
>> Recent campaigns have proven that there is no such thing in the
>> political area.)
>>
>> Dennis (evil)
>
> True, but you would think Hillary's camp would have fought this to the
> bitter end a long time ago. Then again, Obama has fought to keep a lot
> of things under wraps.
>
> Marsha
Just a few things under wraps:
Original, vault copy of Certificate of Live Birth in the USA -- Not
Released
a Certificate of Live Birth -- Released – Proven Counterfeit
(www.ObamaFiles.com)
Obama/Dunham marriage license -- Not released
Soetoro/Dunham marriage license -- Not released
Soetoro adoption records -- Not released
Fransiskus Assisi School application -- Released
Punahou School records -- Not released
Selective Service Registration -- Released – Proven Counterfeit
Occidental College records -- Not released
Passport -- Not released
Columbia College records -- Not released
Columbia thesis -- Not released
Harvard College records -- Not released
Harvard Law Review articles -- None (maybe 1, Not Signed)
Baptism certificate -- None
Medical records -- Not released
Illinois State Senate records -- None (Locked up to prohibit public view)
Illinois State Senate schedule -- Lost (All other Illinois state
senators' records are intact)
Law practice client list -- Not released
University of Chicago scholarly articles -- None
===========================n:
My addition:
graduated from Zbigniew Brzezinski's Manchurian Candidate school --- no
records released
== 3 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 1:28 am
From: JonL
Dennis wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Dec 2008 19:09:46 -0500, Marsha <mas@xeb.net> wrote:
>
>> Dennis wrote:
>>> I do find it interesting that the Obama camp has so far spent almost a
>>> million dollars in legal fees to avoid simply releasing a piece of
>>> paper that would put this whole issue to bed. What could their
>>> reasoning possibly be?
>>>
>>> (And don't even try to suggest some mythical "right to privacy".
>>> Recent campaigns have proven that there is no such thing in the
>>> political area.)
>>>
>>> Dennis (evil)
>> True, but you would think Hillary's camp would have fought this to the
>> bitter end a long time ago. Then again, Obama has fought to keep a lot
>> of things under wraps.
>
> I agree -- I can't imagine that the brass at the DNC would field a
> presidential candidate with that kind of glaring fatal flaw in his
> resume. So why the big showdown over cooperation? I'd hate to think
> that it's the same old arrogance that we saw from Bill Clinton during
> the whole Monica mess. Great way to start an administration that ran
> on a platform of change...
> :-(
>
I can see change already. He went from:
Change you can believe in
to
Change you won't OD on
to
Change......? I changed my mind
== 4 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 3:24 am
From: "Daniel T."
JonL <JonL@Mayday.com> wrote:
> Jeff wrote:
> > AllEmailDeletedImmediately wrote:
> >> it's all over the blogs.
> >
> > Doubtless the same bloggers that think George W Bush has been a good
> > president. You guys will believe anything that a fellow wingnut spews.
> >
> > http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
> >
>
> "factcheck", brought to you by Annenberg Foundation (Obama sat on their
> board in Chicago)
>
> Inquiring Mindz want to know:
>
> When he was in Hawaii not long ago, he could have produced/released the
> vault copy of his birth certificate, if one exists....why didn't he??,
No, he can't. He isn't authorized to do so. Even if he could, who should
he release it to? How many certified copies does he need to buy? One for
each person who didn't vote for him, or just one for each person who
voted for McCain?
> All we've seen was this Certificate of Live Birth, which only proves
> that a live birth occurred....somewhere, not necessarily in Hawaii.
> (Israeli experts pronounced it a crude forgery)
Since when are israeli's experts on Hawaiian birth certificates? When
did they examine it? Did they also examine the birth announcement in
news paper?
> Notice, no hospital in Hawaii is celebrating or putting up a plaque:
> "birthplace of President Barack Obama".
Where was Regan born? What hospital specifically? Any plaque? What about
either Bush? What about Clinton and Carter? What about any other
president? Why are you making such unreasonable demands?
> He could still qualify as natural born if Stanley moved back to the US
> for 5 yrs.
Really? What exactly is required to be a "natural born citizen"?
> I guess "factcheck" forgot he was adopted (new name Barry Soerto) and
> became a naturalized citizen of Indonesia.
How would that affect his "natural born citizen" status in the USA? Even
if he renounced his citizenship and then took it up again?
> How'd he manage to get into Pakistan when it was on the State
> Department's Forbidden list, or whatever it's called (Pak was under
> martial law)
> My guess is, he had an Indonesian passport.
When did he go to Pakistan as a private citizen? (Obviously a member of
the senate could go.)
> I also suspect he registered at Columbia and Harvard as a foreign student.
What proof do you have?
== 5 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 3:37 am
From: max
In article <49379E15.80607@Mayday.com>, JonL <JonL@Mayday.com> wrote:
> Notice, no hospital in Hawaii is celebrating or putting up a plaque:
> "birthplace of President Barack Obama".
HOLY CRAP!!!!
IM CALLING FOR A SECOND AMERICAN REVOLUTION!!!!!!
I AM SOOOOO CONVINCED!!11!!1!11!!!11
dipshit.
--
This signature can be appended to your outgoing mesages. Many people include in
their signatures contact information, and perhaps a joke or quotation.
== 6 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 3:37 am
From: max
In article <4937A1C8.2000502@Mayday.com>, JonL <JonL@Mayday.com> wrote:
> Marsha wrote:
> > Dennis wrote:
> >> I do find it interesting that the Obama camp has so far spent almost a
> >> million dollars in legal fees to avoid simply releasing a piece of
> >> paper that would put this whole issue to bed. What could their
> >> reasoning possibly be?
> >> (And don't even try to suggest some mythical "right to privacy".
> >> Recent campaigns have proven that there is no such thing in the
> >> political area.)
> >>
> >> Dennis (evil)
> >
> > True, but you would think Hillary's camp would have fought this to the
> > bitter end a long time ago. Then again, Obama has fought to keep a lot
> > of things under wraps.
> >
> > Marsha
>
> Just a few things under wraps:
>
>
> Original, vault copy of Certificate of Live Birth in the USA -- Not
> Released
>
> a Certificate of Live Birth -- Released Proven Counterfeit
> (www.ObamaFiles.com)
>
> Obama/Dunham marriage license -- Not released
>
> Soetoro/Dunham marriage license -- Not released
>
> Soetoro adoption records -- Not released
>
> Fransiskus Assisi School application -- Released
>
> Punahou School records -- Not released
>
> Selective Service Registration -- Released Proven Counterfeit
>
> Occidental College records -- Not released
>
> Passport -- Not released
>
> Columbia College records -- Not released
>
> Columbia thesis -- Not released
>
> Harvard College records -- Not released
>
> Harvard Law Review articles -- None (maybe 1, Not Signed)
>
> Baptism certificate -- None
>
> Medical records -- Not released
>
> Illinois State Senate records -- None (Locked up to prohibit public view)
>
> Illinois State Senate schedule -- Lost (All other Illinois state
> senators' records are intact)
>
> Law practice client list -- Not released
>
> University of Chicago scholarly articles -- None
>
>
> ===========================n:
>
> My addition:
>
> graduated from Zbigniew Brzezinski's Manchurian Candidate school --- no
> records released
dipshit
--
This signature can be appended to your outgoing mesages. Many people include in
their signatures contact information, and perhaps a joke or quotation.
== 7 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 4:06 am
From: Vic Smith
On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 05:37:27 -0600, max <betatron@gmail.com> wrote:
>In article <49379E15.80607@Mayday.com>, JonL <JonL@Mayday.com> wrote:
>
>> Notice, no hospital in Hawaii is celebrating or putting up a plaque:
>> "birthplace of President Barack Obama".
>
>HOLY CRAP!!!!
>
>IM CALLING FOR A SECOND AMERICAN REVOLUTION!!!!!!
>
>
>I AM SOOOOO CONVINCED!!11!!1!11!!!11
>
>
>
>
>dipshit.
I second that.
--Vic
== 8 of 8 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 4:06 am
From: Vic Smith
On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 05:37:44 -0600, max <betatron@gmail.com> wrote:
>In article <4937A1C8.2000502@Mayday.com>, JonL <JonL@Mayday.com> wrote:
>
>> Marsha wrote:
>> > Dennis wrote:
>
>dipshit
I second that.
--Vic
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Profession Wholesale world famous brand bag(handbags) 25$-30$
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/55a620b6e94b87b1?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 1:54 am
From: cicitrade
Replica Balenciaga Giant Part Time Bag with leather studs, Gucci
babouska Studded Boston Bag G-207299, Replica Chloe Milton Hobo Bag
Handbags Copys, Chloe Boudior chain Bag Purses Gucci Pelham Shoulder
Bag G-203624 knockoff bag www.cicigogo.cn
Chanel Bags www.cicigogo.cn
Chanel New Bags
Chanel Handbags
Chanel Wallets
Hermes
Hermes Birkin Bags
Hermes Kelly Bags
Hermes Replica Bag
Louis Vuitton www.cicigogo.cn
LV New Arrivals
Monogram Shimmer
Monogram Suede
LV Paris Souple 08
LV Damier Lune 08
08 Winter New Bag
LV Handbags
LV Mahina Bag www.cicigogo.cn
LV Damier Graphite
Monogram Canvas
Monogram Watercolor
Monogram Pulp
LV Monogram Jokes
LV Monogram Tisse
Damier Canvas
Monogram Mini Lin
Epi leather
Suhali Leather
Monogram Multicolore
Monogram Vernis
Monogram Denim
Monogramouflage
LV Tahitiennes
Nomade Leather
Monogram Dentelle
LV Motard Bag
Monogram Perfor
LV Men's Bags
LV Other Series
Clutches & Pouches
Gucci www.cicigogo.cn
2008 New Bags
Gucci Handbags
Gucci Irina Bag
Gucci Sukey Bag
Gucci Babouska Bags
Gucci Hysteria Bag
Gucci Indy Bags
Gucci Positano Bags
Gucci Pelham Bags
Gucci Aviatrix Bag
Gucci Joy Bags www.cicigogo.cn
Gucci Canvas Bags
Gucci Replica Bags
Gucci Clutch Bags
Prada
2008 New Bags
Prada Fairy Bag
Prada Replica Bags
Mulberry
Mulberry Bags
Chloe
2008 New Bags
Chloe Replica Bags
Balenciaga
2008 New Bags
Balenciaga Bags
MiuMiu www.cicigogo.cn
2008 New Bags
Miu Miu Bags
Versace
Versace Bags
Fendi
Fendi SPY Bags
Fendi Replica Bags
Other Bags
Christian Dior Bags
Jimmy Choo Bags
Marc Jacobs Bags
Burberry Bags
Dolce & Gabbana
Coach Bags
Yves Saint Laurent
Bottega Veneta
Bally Bags
Juicy Couture Bags
Isabella Fiore Bags
Tod's Bags www.cicigogo.cn
Loewe Bags
Goyard Bags
Anya Hindmarch
Thomaswylde Bags
Valentino Bags
Cartier Bags
Chanal Bags
Kooba Handbags
Other Designers
Crystal Bags
Wallet www.cicigogo.cn
Hermes Wallets
Replica Gucci Wallet
Replica LV Wallets
Mulberry Wallets
Prada Wallets
Fendi Wallets
Chloe Wallets
Replica BV Wallets
Balenciaga Wallets www.cicigogo.cn
Burberry Wallets www.cicigogo.cn
Other Brand Wallet
Replica Dior Wallet
Marc Jacobs Wallets
Replica Bally Wallet
Jimmy Choo Wallet www.cicigogo.cn
Tiffany Jewelry www.cicigogo.cn
Tiffany Necklaces
Tiffany Bracelets
Tiffany Bangles
Tiffany Earrings
Tiffany Ring
Gucci Jewelry www.cicigogo.cn
Gucci Necklaces
Gucci Bracelets
Gucci Earrings
Gucci Replica Ring
Swarovski Jewelry www.cicigogo.cn
Swarovski Necklace
Swarovski Bracelet
Replica Balenciaga Giant Part Time Bag with leather studs, Gucci
babouska Studded Boston Bag G-207299, Replica Chloe Milton Hobo Bag
Handbags Copys, Chloe Boudior chain Bag Purses Gucci Pelham Shoulder
Bag G-203624 knockoff bag www.cicigogo.cn
==============================================================================
TOPIC: useing a curved pot with an induction heater?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/8510c23808cd8a87?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 3:54 am
From: robtma@hotmail.com
On Dec 3, 12:32 pm, "john zeiss" <blues...@mail.invalid> wrote:
> We are thinking of buying one of those table 'induction' heaters to cook a
> Japanese type of vegetable meal actually on the dining table.
>
> The cast iron pot traditionally used for this is one that we already have.
> It is though designed for use over a *gas* burner and it does not have a
> *flat* bottom. So the surface area in contact with the induction heater
> would be much reduced.
>
> The pot looks like a miniature witches cauldron with a curved bottom and
> three tiny little stumpy legs to rest on. The fact that the pot surface
> area in contact with the induction heater surface is reduced to three little
> legs, would that mean that electricity is actually being wasted in heating
> such a pot or is it that it just would not heat up very much using an
> induction heater ? Thanks for any advice.
I own a induction cook top & would venture to guess it won't work. If
your vessel doesn't have enought contact, it will simple not reconize
it! I'm less familar with the stand alone models though. I would
suggest bring it in to the store and ask for it to be check...Good
luck..
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Firewood prices
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3484c3a01685a9fe?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 5:47 am
From: "Evelyn"
"SQ" <onestatusquo@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6c904b6d-30ca-4f85-8743-cd264f9b902b@h5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
>I am finding out that firewood prices at over $220/cord as seems to be
> the case in most large metro areas, it's not cost-effective vs.
> electric heat.
We just paid $225 for a generous cord, and it is essentially too green to
burn this year. We are in upstate NY. We have a lot of wood we cut
ourselves from various down hardwood trees locally, but again, all is still
too green to burn.
--
--
Best Regards,
Evelyn
Rest in a sky-like mind.
Sit like a mountain floating on the earth.
Breathe like the wind circling the world
==============================================================================
TOPIC: The Constitution of the Kingdom of God, effective as of 08.08.08 (www.
grishenkoff.com)
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/fe2bd7bda3dfe136?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 5:48 am
From: Prime Minister of the Kingdom of God Serge Grishenkoff
The Constitution of the Kingdom of God, effective as of 08.08.08
(www.grishenkoff.com)
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Shrinking Canned Tuna. Smaller, more Expensive
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/993839ff415de549?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 4 2008 5:50 am
From: "Evelyn"
Buy the tuna in the foil bags.
Lots less liquid so more truth to the amount you get compared to what is on
the pkg.
--
--
Best Regards,
Evelyn
Rest in a sky-like mind.
Sit like a mountain floating on the earth.
Breathe like the wind circling the world
"Cheapo Groovo" <ccsj@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.239c7b90184531d69899fe@news.wowway.com...
> In article <e5c858bd-4811-4a60-b6dd-b6322c28f026
> @i18g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Noveau67@aol.com says...
>> Thankyou WallStreet criminals who are ignored and/or praised by our
>> congress co-conspirators, for causing inflation with all the printing
>> of money going to the corrupt scumbags.
>>
>> Canned tuna was 67 cents a can for 6.5 ounces a month or two ago.
>> Now the cheaperst stuff is 75 cents a can and the scumbags have put it
>> in a smaller, 5 ounce can !!!
>>
>> We neeed a French Revolutiuon here. The idiots in congress are just
>> standing by, watching, saying "Oh, gee, that's too bad. Oh well...."
>>
> Everything is like that
> http://cheapogroovo.vox.com/library/post/same-price-smaller-package.html
==============================================================================
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