http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* To juice or not. - 8 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/bb065ec0061ab7cd?hl=en
* Airport parking - 3 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/a3ffd0586c7477dd?hl=en
* Inflate yo tires? the Pledge - 6 messages, 5 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/3091ed9d02910976?hl=en
* http://www.myrevelle.com/1 MASSIVE RUSSIAN INVASION - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/e4d0a719af29a564?hl=en
* Quick Tips For Applying Eye Makeup - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/d566ff61644f97db?hl=en
* Inflation - 5 messages, 5 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/043c328b0526b9a5?hl=en
* Frugal ideas (on topic) - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/b0fb633415061f1d?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: To juice or not.
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/bb065ec0061ab7cd?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 8:06 am
From: blake murphy
On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 15:48:01 -0500, Gregory Morrow wrote:
> blake murphy wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 6 Aug 2008 15:09:09 -0500, Gregory Morrow wrote:
>>
>>> clams_casino wrote:
>>>
>>>> Pan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 5 Aug 2008 18:38:54 -0400, "cybercat" <cyberpurrs@yahoo.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>You mean, IKYABWAI. Dad.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Now then, I realize you're bitter because you're looking at EIGHT
> years
>>> of
>>>>>>Democratic administrations, but if we could take EIGHT years of the
>>> First
>>>>>>Chimp, you can take eight years of our guy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>And even if you can't, you have to.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>*cackle*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Don't cackle, until after the election, and if your right I will be
>>>>>bitter, and fight thru my state's rep's, to stop what I can.
>>>>>
>>>>>And again the hate Bush statement, "first chimp".
>>>>>Could you name a piece of legislation, that you man has initiated, and
>>>>>passed?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You go first. Can you name a positive Bush (GW) achievement ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Restoring *dignity* to the office of the Presidency after the *severe*
>>> damage that Clintoon did to the office...???
>>
>> <derisive snort>
>>
>> you mean english as a second (or third) language george? you gotta be
>> shittin' me.
>
>
> I'm not talkin' about "style" blake...
>
> Georgie Porgie has not "stained" the office of the presidency with personal
> scandal as Bill Clintoon did...no Monica, no "blue dress", no witchity
> Hillary throwin' stuff around the White House at all hours...no YEARS wasted
> parsing adolescent and self - destructive Billy Clintoon's behaviours...
>
just turning the constitution in a 'goddamn piece of paper' and the justice
department into a criminal enterprise. not to mention killing several
hundred thousand iraqis who had nothing to do with 9/11 and a deficit we'll
be years climbing out of. a proud legacy.
> I haven't seen ANY big moves to impeach our current President - have
> you...???
clinton never should have been impeached and bush certainly should have.
it's that simple.
i think it's pretty funny that you of all people should be incensed over a
measly blow job.
blake
== 2 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 8:09 am
From: blake murphy
On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 10:31:25 -0700, Pan wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Aug 2008 12:09:39 -0400, clams_casino
> <PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>Could you name a piece of legislation, that you man has initiated, and
>>>passed?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>You go first. Can you name a positive Bush (GW) achievement ?
>
> No further attacks on the U.S.A. since 9/11
...which happened on george 'ok., you've covered your ass now' bush's
watch. quite an achievement.
and don't bother to say 'but it started under clinton.' the clinton people
gave good advice that bush ignored because it came from clinton. too bad.
blake
== 3 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 8:11 am
From: blake murphy
On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 10:33:24 -0700, Pan wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 15:51:01 GMT, blake murphy
> <blakepmNOTTHIS@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
>>> You go first. Can you name a positive Bush (GW) achievement ?
>>
>>he managed to make richard nixon look pretty good in retrospect.
>>
>>your pal,
>>blake
>
>
> And he is way better then Carter and Clinton.
yep, bush certainly ended our long national nightmare of peace and
prosperity.
blake
== 4 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 8:13 am
From: blake murphy
On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 16:07:38 -0500, Gregory Morrow wrote:
> cybercat wrote:
>
>>
>> "Pan" <ohco@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:adcm949ucu80cmbho6hfc6s58vm8urlu3a@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 15:51:01 GMT, blake murphy
>>> <blakepmNOTTHIS@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> You go first. Can you name a positive Bush (GW) achievement ?
>>>>
>>>>he managed to make richard nixon look pretty good in retrospect.
>>>>
>>>>your pal,
>>>>blake
>>>
>>>
>>> And he is way better then Carter and Clinton.
>>
>> Yes indeed, you can tell by how much better shape the nation is in than
> when
>> Clinton was president. Jesus. What a moron you are.
>
>
> What was this "better shape" that we were in during the Clinton years? Be
> *specific*...
nation at peace, federal surplus, market in good shape...you are too stupid
to live.
blake
== 5 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 8:15 am
From: blake murphy
On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 10:36:00 -0700, Pan wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Aug 2008 16:04:36 GMT, blake murphy
> <blakepmNOTTHIS@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>but mccain is a foreign-policy ace because he speaks fluent gibberish!
>>well, sometimes it's fluent.
>>
>>your pal,
>>barry
>
> And yet McCain is rated much higher on foreign policy, that Obama
really? what's mccain's foreign policy this week? it's sure to be
different from last month's.
blake
== 6 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 8:33 am
From: "Gregory Morrow"
blake murphy wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 10:33:24 -0700, Pan wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 15:51:01 GMT, blake murphy
> > <blakepmNOTTHIS@verizon.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>> You go first. Can you name a positive Bush (GW) achievement ?
> >>
> >>he managed to make richard nixon look pretty good in retrospect.
> >>
> >>your pal,
> >>blake
> >
> >
> > And he is way better then Carter and Clinton.
>
> yep, bush certainly ended our long national nightmare of peace and
> prosperity.
We WON the Iraq war *years* ago...or don't you read the noozepapers...???
"Prosperity goes up...prosperity goes down...". If a President could snap
his fingers and affect the economy then they WOULD...but since the economy
is a complicated thing affected by *many* factors a President CAN'T do
that...
And howzabout that DO - NOTHING Democrat Congress...aren't they doing just a
*great* job, blake...??? I'd suggest you call a complain to them, but they
seemed to have gone on this long *vacation* instead of attending to the
important business at hand...doesn't that just piss you off...???
I wonder where you get your nutty and outmoded leftist "ideas",
blake...sometimes I think I should pray for you.
--
Best
Greg
== 7 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 8:38 am
From: "cybercat"
"blake murphy" <blakepmNOTTHIS@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:1xu69vqr0obr5.1tmmc1y5puk4g$.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 16:07:38 -0500, Gregory Morrow wrote:
>
>> cybercat wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Pan" <ohco@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:adcm949ucu80cmbho6hfc6s58vm8urlu3a@4ax.com...
>>>> On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 15:51:01 GMT, blake murphy
>>>> <blakepmNOTTHIS@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> You go first. Can you name a positive Bush (GW) achievement ?
>>>>>
>>>>>he managed to make richard nixon look pretty good in retrospect.
>>>>>
>>>>>your pal,
>>>>>blake
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And he is way better then Carter and Clinton.
>>>
>>> Yes indeed, you can tell by how much better shape the nation is in than
>> when
>>> Clinton was president. Jesus. What a moron you are.
>>
>>
>> What was this "better shape" that we were in during the Clinton years?
>> Be
>> *specific*...
>
> nation at peace, federal surplus, market in good shape...you are too
> stupid
> to live.
>
And yet the fetid SOB lives. One of Life's Great Mysteries.
== 8 of 8 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 8:51 am
From: clams_casino
blake murphy wrote:
>
>i think it's pretty funny that you of all people should be incensed over a
>measly blow job.
>
>blake
>
>
and it's better than getting it up the ass ......... as GW has done
to everyone.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Airport parking
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/a3ffd0586c7477dd?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 8:28 am
From: George Grapman
AllEmailDeletedImmediately wrote:
> "George Grapman" <sfgeorge@paccbell.net> wrote in message
> news:%HYmk.6580$np7.5418@flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com...
>> terryc wrote:
>>> On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 00:02:36 -0700, jees85 wrote:
>>>
>>>> Booking airport parking with Journey Extras guarantees a car parking
>>>> space on arrival at the airport at an unbeatable price due to their
>>>> best price guarantee
>>> Train service is cheaper, quicker and more relaxng.
>>
>> I am going to NYC in a few weeks. Amtrak costs more and takes several
>> days instead of several hours.
>>
> expect cheap airfare to end soon. worldwide, airlines are planning to cut
> seats by 60 million by the end of the yr.
>
>
It will have go up quite a bit to have me spend multiple days of a
vacation traveling.
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 8:49 am
From: clams_casino
George Grapman wrote:
> AllEmailDeletedImmediately wrote:
>
>> "George Grapman" <sfgeorge@paccbell.net> wrote in message
>> news:%HYmk.6580$np7.5418@flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com...
>>
>>> terryc wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 00:02:36 -0700, jees85 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Booking airport parking with Journey Extras guarantees a car parking
>>>>> space on arrival at the airport at an unbeatable price due to their
>>>>> best price guarantee
>>>>
>>>> Train service is cheaper, quicker and more relaxng.
>>>
>>>
>>> I am going to NYC in a few weeks. Amtrak costs more and takes
>>> several days instead of several hours.
>>>
>> expect cheap airfare to end soon. worldwide, airlines are planning
>> to cut seats by 60 million by the end of the yr.
>>
>
> It will have go up quite a bit to have me spend multiple days of a
> vacation traveling.
As long as there is a Southwest, I'll still consider flying.
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 8:54 am
From: George Grapman
clams_casino wrote:
> George Grapman wrote:
>
>> AllEmailDeletedImmediately wrote:
>>
>>> "George Grapman" <sfgeorge@paccbell.net> wrote in message
>>> news:%HYmk.6580$np7.5418@flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com...
>>>
>>>> terryc wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 00:02:36 -0700, jees85 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Booking airport parking with Journey Extras guarantees a car parking
>>>>>> space on arrival at the airport at an unbeatable price due to their
>>>>>> best price guarantee
>>>>>
>>>>> Train service is cheaper, quicker and more relaxng.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am going to NYC in a few weeks. Amtrak costs more and takes
>>>> several days instead of several hours.
>>>>
>>> expect cheap airfare to end soon. worldwide, airlines are planning
>>> to cut seats by 60 million by the end of the yr.
>>>
>>
>> It will have go up quite a bit to have me spend multiple days of a
>> vacation traveling.
>
>
> As long as there is a Southwest, I'll still consider flying.
I wish they flew from SF to Newark. Last time I took Jet Blue,great
trip but needed 4 trains to get to NJ.
This trip I spent too much time trying to save a few dollars. Finally
realized it was not worth hours to save $25.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Inflate yo tires? the Pledge
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/3091ed9d02910976?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 9:17 am
From: A Veteran
http://act.truemajorityaction.org/p/7002/tirepressure?petition_KEY=76
do something today!
Your tires may last longer too.
--
If guns are out-lawed. Only the Out-laws & politicians will have guns.
== 2 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 9:51 am
From: clams_casino
A Veteran wrote:
>
>do something today!
>Your tires may last longer too.
>
>
Checked them this am. They were 26-29 psi - filled them to 34 psi.
Of course, McBush thinks that's a silly way to save gas.
== 3 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 11:12 am
From: Goomba
clams_casino wrote:
> A Veteran wrote:
>
>>
>> do something today!
>> Your tires may last longer too.
>>
>>
>
> Checked them this am. They were 26-29 psi - filled them to 34 psi.
>
> Of course, McBush thinks that's a silly way to save gas.
Actually, I thought it more stupid the way Obama assumed everyone's were
improperly filled.
It still is small potatoes to the BIGGER problem of oil, don't you think?
== 4 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 11:35 am
From: clams_casino
Goomba wrote:
> clams_casino wrote:
>
>> A Veteran wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> do something today!
>>> Your tires may last longer too.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Checked them this am. They were 26-29 psi - filled them to 34 psi.
>>
>> Of course, McBush thinks that's a silly way to save gas.
>
>
> Actually, I thought it more stupid the way Obama assumed everyone's
> were improperly filled.
> It still is small potatoes to the BIGGER problem of oil, don't you think?
There is no single solution. Drilling for oil will bring on no more
gasoline if the refineries are at capacity. I'm sure that if everyone
properly filled their tires on a regular basis, a significant savings
in gasoline can be realized, amongst other easy-to-do practices. Buying
higher mileage cars, driving less, driving slower, etc can all be
effective practices where no single one will solve all the energy problems.
I'm in agreement with drilling, primarily to determine what reserves are
available. I've always felt filling salt mines in Texas has been a
really dumb idea, except to remove surplus oil from the market (keep
pricing high). Seems to me the same result (building reserves) could be
accomplished by finding new supplies & capping them (or wells in TX)
rather than moving oil from one hole in the ground in Texas to another
hole in the ground....in Texas.
McBush & Hillary's push to omit the federal tax on gas was probably the
second most dumb approach. If anything, as the price drops, taxes
should be increased (and offsetting other taxes, such as the business
obligations to FICA taxes) to push demand down. Another approach could
be to use the increased taxes to pay for military expenses.
== 5 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 2:06 pm
From: Al Bundy
clams_casino wrote:
> Goomba wrote:
>
> > clams_casino wrote:
> >
> >> A Veteran wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> do something today!
> >>> Your tires may last longer too.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> Checked them this am. They were 26-29 psi - filled them to 34 psi.
> >>
> >> Of course, McBush thinks that's a silly way to save gas.
> >
> >
> > Actually, I thought it more stupid the way Obama assumed everyone's
> > were improperly filled.
> > It still is small potatoes to the BIGGER problem of oil, don't you think?
>
>
> There is no single solution. Drilling for oil will bring on no more
> gasoline if the refineries are at capacity. I'm sure that if everyone
> properly filled their tires on a regular basis, a significant savings
> in gasoline can be realized, amongst other easy-to-do practices. Buying
> higher mileage cars, driving less, driving slower, etc can all be
> effective practices where no single one will solve all the energy problems.
>
> I'm in agreement with drilling, primarily to determine what reserves are
> available. I've always felt filling salt mines in Texas has been a
> really dumb idea, except to remove surplus oil from the market (keep
> pricing high). Seems to me the same result (building reserves) could be
> accomplished by finding new supplies & capping them (or wells in TX)
> rather than moving oil from one hole in the ground in Texas to another
> hole in the ground....in Texas.
>
I like the concept of drilling and capping, but there are problems
with that approach as well. I always have an expiration date on my
leases where the rights revert to me. I suppose others do likewise.
The lease can be kept in place if a well is drilled AND PRODUCED.
Admittedly, the production required to keep a lease active is quite
small. That's not efficient for the operator either. When you cap a
well it doesn't just sit there waiting for you to tap it. It
deteriorates in various ways. Also, you can only estimate what
production might be from a well after some production begins. A
producing formation can quickly become "watered in" and the hole lost
to production. So the best way is to drill it and produce at a
conservative rate that will prolong the production on that well. Some
last three months. Others last 30 years.
== 6 of 6 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 4:03 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
clams_casino <PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote
> Goomba wrote
>> clams_casino wrote
>>> A Veteran wrote
>>>> do something today!
>>>> Your tires may last longer too.
Nope, they'll actually wear out quicker.
>>> Checked them this am. They were 26-29 psi - filled them to 34 psi.
>>> Of course, McBush thinks that's a silly way to save gas.
>> Actually, I thought it more stupid the way Obama assumed everyone's were improperly filled. It still is small
>> potatoes to the BIGGER problem of oil, don't you think?
> There is no single solution.
Corse there is. If everyone killed themselves, there would be no need for oil.
> Drilling for oil will bring on no more gasoline if the refineries are at capacity.
You build more or increase the capacity of the current ones, stupid.
> I'm sure that if everyone properly filled their tires on a regular basis, a significant savings in gasoline can be
> realized,
Nope, an insignificant saving, actually.
And doing it irregularly works just as well too.
> amongst other easy-to-do practices.
Bet you cant list even a single one of those.
> Buying higher mileage cars, driving less, driving slower, etc can all be effective practices
You quite sure you aint one of those rocket scientist wankers ?
> where no single one will solve all the energy problems.
Corse there is. If everyone killed themselves, there would be no need for energy and so no energy problem.
> I'm in agreement with drilling, primarily to determine what reserves are available.
Whats the point if you arent going to use what you find ?
> I've always felt filling salt mines in Texas has been a really dumb idea, except to remove surplus oil from the market
> (keep pricing high).
More fool you.
> Seems to me the same result (building reserves) could be accomplished by finding new supplies & capping them (or wells
> in TX) rather than moving oil from one hole in the ground in Texas to another hole in the ground....in Texas.
More fool you.
> McBush & Hillary's push to omit the federal tax on gas was probably
> the second most dumb approach. If anything, as the price drops, taxes should be increased (and offsetting other
> taxes, such as the business obligations to FICA taxes) to push demand down.
Mindlessly silly.
> Another approach could be to use the increased taxes to pay for military expenses.
Dont give up the day 'job'
==============================================================================
TOPIC: http://www.myrevelle.com/1 MASSIVE RUSSIAN INVASION
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/e4d0a719af29a564?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 10:46 am
From: mothersterasa@gmail.com
http://www.myrevelle.com/1 MASSIVE RUSSIAN INVASION
WORLD WAR THREE IS STARTING
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Quick Tips For Applying Eye Makeup
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/d566ff61644f97db?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 2:05 pm
From: gaintion
Ever since Queen Nefertiti first lined her eyes with black coal, women
have been using makeup to emphasize the beauty of their eyes. If you
are looking for eye makeup tips or eye makeup ideas for a dramatic eye
make up look for an evening out, or simply some free eye makeup tips
to put on your "morning face", you can start out by learning basic eye
makeup application.
How to Apply Eye Makeup
Before applying eye makeup, it's always a good idea to use a concealer
to hide dark circles and wrinkles around the eyes. Choose a shade of
concealer that's slightly lighter than your natural skin tone. Don't
use too much and blend it in well.
Apply the eye shadow color in several thin layers, blend well. Put the
sheer color on the center of your lid with a sponge applicator or
pencil.
Next, brush up and out toward your brow, then nose. Use an eye brush
if possible. Apply a deeper
http://rota6566.110mb.com/html/Bothsexes/20061002/47562.html
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Inflation
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/043c328b0526b9a5?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 2:48 pm
From: Patricia Martin Steward
On Sun, 03 Aug 2008 02:00:15 GMT, "AllEmailDeletedImmediately"
<derjda@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>i just read something that inflation is more like 12-14% using pre clinton
>methodology. so, those of the clinton era did something to change how we
>calculate inflation so it's now something like 5%. of course, figures lie
>and liars figure.
Here's what I know: we had it GOOD in the Clinton era -- great
economy, low unemployment, and he left a surplus behind.
What do we have now?
--
Face your fears.
Live your dreams.
== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 3:35 pm
From: "Nicik Name"
"Siskuwihane" <Siskuwihane1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:435038d0-72b3-46f4-98e2-8c7a0384a099@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 2, 8:13 pm, Gene S. Berkowitz <first.l...@verizon.net> wrote:
> In article <SN3lk.8152$KZ.4...@newsfe03.iad>,
> PeterGrif...@DrunkinClam.com says...
>
> > Bought some suet today for 79 cents that was 67 cents last year
> > (3/$2). In another store, their suet was $1.25 per package vs. $1 last
> > year (more visible seeds / berries).
>
> > 50 lbs of sunflower seeds that cost me $15 two years ago and $22 last
> > fall was $25 yesterday.
>
> > Granted, it's still cheap entertainment, but 14-25% annual inflation?
>
> How do you think those 50 lbs of seed got to the store?
>
> Some trucker had to burn $4/gallon diesel fuel to haul it there,
> when last year he only had to pay $3/gallon.
Please let me know where I can get some diesel for $4.00 a gallon.
Around here it's $4.75
When Bush said the word DRILL a few weeks back the speculator bubble
burst.........
Your $4.00 a gallon will be arriving shortly............
== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 3:58 pm
From: George
Patricia Martin Steward wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Aug 2008 02:00:15 GMT, "AllEmailDeletedImmediately"
> <derjda@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> i just read something that inflation is more like 12-14% using pre clinton
>> methodology. so, those of the clinton era did something to change how we
>> calculate inflation so it's now something like 5%. of course, figures lie
>> and liars figure.
>
> Here's what I know: we had it GOOD in the Clinton era -- great
> economy, low unemployment, and he left a surplus behind.
>
> What do we have now?
>
> --
> Face your fears.
> Live your dreams.
You overlooked a lot of the details. You forgot the spectacular dot com
crash and the reason for it. The Clintons' SEC conveniently looked the
other way as pirates such As enron, MCI etc were doing their thing with
the result that the taxes poured in from all of the stock trading
building a surplus. Remember even various state governments telling us
that they may even drop various taxes because they had so much tax
revenue money on hand?
You may also remember that one of the Clintons main agendas was NAFTA
and other treaties designed to lower the US down to the level of other
countries. It took a couple years but it worked.
== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 4:33 pm
From: clams_casino
George wrote:
>
> You overlooked a lot of the details. You forgot the spectacular dot
> com crash and the reason for it. The Clintons' SEC conveniently looked
> the other way as pirates such As enron, MCI etc were doing their thing
> with the result that the taxes poured in from all of the stock trading
> building a surplus.
There was some contribution due to over valued stocks, but most shares
of those companies never produced taxable gains. The primary reason
taxes poured in was because employment was so good for so long (longest
business expansion on record) through good wages / plenty of overtime /
good employment rates, etc. Jobs lost under GW have been replaced
primarily with very low paying (primarily retail) jobs where the number
of replacement jobs have not been reflecting the reduced paychecks /
reduced taxes under GW.
> Remember even various state governments telling us that they may even
> drop various taxes because they had so much tax revenue money on hand?
>
That was GW's first push for his tax rebates. When the economy began
tanking upon his election (investors immediately flocked to CDs & bonds
while business significantly curtailed expansion plans), GW did his
typical spin & reversed his logic claiming providing tax relief for the
wealthy would create jobs & build much needed demand.
So which was it? Tax rebates for the wealthy because they would not be
inflationary (would not create surplus demand) or tax rebates for the
wealthy because they would create much need jobs through a stronger
economy (improved demand)? Obviously, his first logic was the valid
logic, but he did it all through borrowed money.
== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 4:57 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
George <george@nospam.invalid> wrote
> Patricia Martin Steward wrote
>> AllEmailDeletedImmediately <derjda@hotmail.com> wrote
>>> i just read something that inflation is more like 12-14% using pre clinton methodology. so, those of the clinton
>>> era did something to change how we calculate inflation so it's now something like 5%. of course, figures lie and
>>> liars figure.
>> Here's what I know: we had it GOOD in the Clinton era --
>> great economy, low unemployment, and he left a surplus behind.
>> What do we have now?
> You overlooked a lot of the details.
Yep.
> You forgot the spectacular dot com crash and the reason for it.
Nothing any Prez ever gets to do anything about.
> The Clintons' SEC conveniently looked the other way as pirates such As enron, MCI etc were doing their thing with the
> result that the taxes poured in from all of the stock trading building a surplus.
That wasnt the reason for the surplus.
> Remember even various state governments telling us that they may even drop various taxes because they had so much tax
> revenue money on hand?
Nothing to do with the Prez either.
> You may also remember that one of the Clintons main agendas was NAFTA
Yep.
> and other treaties designed to lower the US down to the level of other countries.
Nope.
> It took a couple years but it worked.
Nope, it wasnt what produced the current result.
Slick didnt do anything useful about bin Laden and that did produce 9/11.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Frugal ideas (on topic)
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/b0fb633415061f1d?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Aug 8 2008 2:49 pm
From: Gordon
ranck@vt.edu wrote in news:g7hl9l$5c5$1@solaris.cc.vt.edu:
> Gordon <gonzo@alltomyself.com> wrote:
>
Perhaps I should have said YMMV.
The OP asked for our personal experiences. THese are
mine, and they work for me. As you have pointed out,
they are not necessarily universal and therefore may
not work as well for everyone else.
>> - Owning one car.
>> - A used car, paid with cash.
>> - Using Public transportion.
>
> Not practical or available everywhere, but good for
> places it is available.
>
>> - Walking to destinations up to 1 mile away.
>> - Sticking to the basics at the Grocery store.
>> - Shopping the Grocery Outlet and Bread Outlet.
>
> Not sure, but for me the bread outlet store is a good bit
> farther away, so the local grocery may cost more for the
> bread but save on gas.
We usually drive by one or the other about once a week,
So we pop in at that time.
Which brings up another savings:
- Trip planning. We don't just jump in the car
and go because we percieve a need to. We make
a list. At some point when we have to go out,
we gather up the lists and plan a route to hit
as many stops as possible.
>
>> - No Cable TV.
>
> No cable would mean no TV except DVD or tape. I live
> where an antenna just doesn't work.
So it won't work for you. A DTV converter and rabbit ears
is all I need to get good reception and a decent picture.
There is a new technology called TVoIP (TV over Internet).
You just need a reasonable computer and a good internet
connection.
>
>> - Make my own Coffee
>
> Who doesn't make their own, except maybe some folks
> who don't drink coffee?
People who spend too much for Coffee at Starbucks.
> I personally
> make a full pot every morning and fill my thermos. This
> lasts me all day and there is enough coffee in the pot
> for my wife and I to have a cup or two before leaving
> the house. Not buying coffee after leaving the house
> is the frugal part.
Right. But I only drink one cup a day. So I just make
the single cup and drink it. If I work the night shift
I will make up larger cup and put it in a thermal mug.
>
>> - Freeware Programs on the computer.
>> - Watch Priemium TV programing on the computer.
>> - Don't use VCR anymore to time shift programs,
>> All the network programs are available on line.
>
> I don't see how not using a VCR is frugal. I already
> have a VCR, purchased for $35 more than 5 years ago.
> Not using it would really not save me anything except
> a few pennies worth of electricity.
Minor frugality I guess. I was thinking of the cost of
replacing the tapes when they wear out or get broken.
With small kids in the house they used to get broken
a lot.
> It's also hard
> to share watching with my wife or friends on a computer.
>
Dual monitor set up. TV is the 2nd monitor.
>> - Reduce the amount of trash going to the curb and
>> get a smaller garbage tip cart (Garbage fee is
>> lower for the smaller cart).
>
> Not true everywhere. Same fee for large or small
> garbage can here.
>
>> - Use cell phone for LD.
>> - USe M to M for LD since it is free.
>
> Depends on your specific cell phone plan. Certainly
> worth analyzing your usage and picking a plan that
> is best suited to that usage pattern.
Absolutly agree. Our original justification for the
cell phone was that it would reduce our land line
phone bill by more than the monthly cost of the cell.
Latest analisis shows that it's still true.
M to M within the network is free and doesn't use
minutes from the plan. So double savings when we
call friends with in the same network.
We are currently looking for a way to get a 2nd
phone for the few times that we are both out, but
not together. Lots of options. As is typical,
I'm crunching the numbers to find the best value.
>
>> - Use passive solar for heat in the winter (just open
>> the shades and let the sun shine in.
>> - Share baby clothes with other moms.
>
> Bill Ranck
> Blacksburg, Va.
>
==============================================================================
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
