http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* death-dealing L. turn signal near Tampa, Fla - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/89b7d30c1a8bdb92?hl=en
* Low water toilets false frugality - 17 messages, 14 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/e5254ebab3c47538?hl=en
* DIY Reverse Mortgage? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/de91e4185c425fbf?hl=en
* what to do with old coffee? - 3 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/1dc7fc7675771054?hl=en
* LOOKING FOR WORK AT HOME INDIVIDUALS, LEGITIMATE, GOOGLE AUTHORIZED - 1
messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/fe4fbeb2c5f92722?hl=en
* Dried up Wite-Out - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/2bd851d668f9914f?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: death-dealing L. turn signal near Tampa, Fla
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/89b7d30c1a8bdb92?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 10:40 am
From: "misterfact@yahoo.com"
anyone ever seen an incomplete L. TURN signal?:
one with a green light; a yellow light- but no red light on the signal
after the
yellow because the red light is there, but DIS-CONNECTED !
43 serious injury (FlaDOT statistics)L. turn, head-on and side
collissions with oncomming traffic in Florida at this L. turn because
the Fla DOT disconnected the red light:
. Palmetto, Fla. southbound on US 41 (left turn about 200yds past
(west) of the Walmart)
On a L. turn signal, once the green light comes on- the signal MUST
complete its cycle.( green to yellow to RED). After the red, if an
unprotected , permisable left turn (L. turn when oncoming traffic
clears) is desired: the left turn signal should go to a blinking
yellow light. It should not go from the yellow , directly to a green
light on ANOTHER SIGNAL for the thru lanes to the right.
This combining of signals for the left turn lane causes accidents.
There is no other way to explain the number of accidents at the above
intersection.
ASK THE SCHOOL CROSSING GUARD ABOUT THE ACCIDENTS AND NEAR-ACCIDENTS
SHE HAS SEEN RIGHT NEXT TO HER GUARD POST!
The do nothing idiots, who are aware of, and responsible for this
murderous left-turn signal and the resulting: pain, injury, lost
wages and
good times for the auto body business are:
Ken Bass ph (863) 519-2495 (Bartow, Fl)
My suggestion: Call him and: Politely YELL BLOODY MURDER!
and
Cindy Clemmons Cindy.Clemmons-Adente@dot.state.fl.us
ALSO EMAIL DOT: fdot.pio@ dot.state.fl.us
Mike
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 1:16 pm
From: don@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein)
In <4a81cedf-dbd4-4826-be05-c2e495242dbf@q30g2000prq.googlegroups.com>,
misterfact@yahoo.com wrote:
>anyone ever seen an incomplete L. TURN signal?:
>
>one with a green light; a yellow light- but no red light on the signal
>after the
>yellow because the red light is there, but DIS-CONNECTED !
>43 serious injury (FlaDOT statistics)L. turn, head-on and side
>collissions with oncomming traffic in Florida at this L. turn because
>the Fla DOT disconnected the red light:
>. Palmetto, Fla. southbound on US 41 (left turn about 200yds past
>(west) of the Walmart)
>
> On a L. turn signal, once the green light comes on- the signal MUST
>complete its cycle.( green to yellow to RED). After the red, if an
>unprotected , permisable left turn (L. turn when oncoming traffic
>clears) is desired: the left turn signal should go to a blinking
>yellow light. It should not go from the yellow , directly to a green
>light on ANOTHER SIGNAL for the thru lanes to the right.
I would think that Florida and 48 other U.S. States are similar enough
to Pennsylvania in regard to traffic signals:
If the left arrow goes from green to yellow to blank, your protected
left turn has expired. One assumes that the red light has burned out.
Unless there is a green left arrow or yellow left arrow indicating
protedted left turn, you assume lack of protected left turn. That
requires left turners to yield to oncoming traffic. The left turners are
at fault if they collide with oncoming traffic when not protected by a
green left arrow and they are supposed to know that.
The only difference made by a red light for left turn signal is that a
red left turn signal requires left turners to not proceed whether or not
there is oncoming traffic to collide with.
43 left turners needed tickets for failure to yield to oncoming traffic
when turning left. Aren't there cops in Palmetto, FL?
- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Low water toilets false frugality
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/e5254ebab3c47538?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 17 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 10:44 am
From: lisajoe@privacy.net
On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 08:52:27 -0800, in misc.consumers.frugal-living "Annie
Woughman" <anniewoughman@hotmail.com> wrote:
>We did a little remodeling last year and replaced both our older toilets
>(ugly colored ones from the 60's) with new Kohlrabi "5-star flush system"
>toilets. These toilets are supposed to be good for the environment because
>they use less water for each flush. The problem being--over 75% of the time
>the toilet has to be flushed at least twice to get everything to go down.
>Ours are even worse because they have the elongated bowl, so toilet paper
>usually lands in the front of the bowl and then it never gets washed down
>with the first flush and even sometimes on the second flush. Also, the
>consumer isn't given a choice, because the older style toilets using more
>water per flush are not available for purchase. You would think that at
>some point they would have tested the newer toilets to make sure they were
>in fact actually using less water in everyday household use.
>
my last dwelling had the low flow toilets i always felt like flushing them twice
but it was partly psychological. now i sam in an older dwelling with normal
toilets and they do work a bit better, maybe they even add value to the house
since you can't get them anymore.
== 2 of 17 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 11:33 am
From: "Rod Speed"
Annie Woughman <anniewoughman@hotmail.com> wrote:
> We did a little remodeling last year and replaced both our older
> toilets (ugly colored ones from the 60's) with new Kohler "5-star
> flush system" toilets. These toilets are supposed to be good for the
> environment because they use less water for each flush. The problem
> being--over 75% of the time the toilet has to be flushed at least
> twice to get everything to go down.
Thats because you are very shitty 'people'
> Ours are even worse because they have the elongated bowl, so toilet paper usually lands in the front of the bowl and
> then it never gets washed down with the first flush and even sometines on the second flush. Also, the consumer isn't
> given a choice, because the older style toilets using more water per flush are not available for purchase.
They do have ones that work properly tho.
> You would think that at some point they would have tested the newer toilets to make sure they were in fact actually
> using less water in everyday household use.
Corse they did, and they do.
== 3 of 17 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 11:44 am
From: Siskuwihane
On Nov 10, 2:33 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Annie Woughman <anniewough...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > We did a little remodeling last year and replaced both our older
> > toilets (ugly colored ones from the 60's) with new Kohler "5-star
> > flush system" toilets. These toilets are supposed to be good for the
> > environment because they use less water for each flush. The problem
> > being--over 75% of the time the toilet has to be flushed at least
> > twice to get everything to go down.
>
> Thats because you are very shitty 'people'
>
> > Ours are even worse because they have the elongated bowl, so toilet paper usually lands in the front of the bowl and
> > then it never gets washed down with the first flush and even sometines on the second flush. Also, the consumer isn't
> > given a choice, because the older style toilets using more water per flush are not available for purchase.
>
> They do have ones that work properly tho.
>
> > You would think that at some point they would have tested the newer toilets to make sure they were in fact actually
> > using less water in everyday household use.
>
> Corse they did, and they do.
Rod knows a lot about flushing since he spends hours flushing "reams
of puerile shit where it belongs".
== 4 of 17 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 12:13 pm
From: N8N
On Nov 10, 2:44 pm, Siskuwihane <Siskuwiha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 10, 2:33 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Annie Woughman <anniewough...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > We did a little remodeling last year and replaced both our older
> > > toilets (ugly colored ones from the 60's) with new Kohler "5-star
> > > flush system" toilets. These toilets are supposed to be good for the
> > > environment because they use less water for each flush. The problem
> > > being--over 75% of the time the toilet has to be flushed at least
> > > twice to get everything to go down.
>
> > Thats because you are very shitty 'people'
>
> > > Ours are even worse because they have the elongated bowl, so toilet paper usually lands in the front of the bowl and
> > > then it never gets washed down with the first flush and even sometines on the second flush. Also, the consumer isn't
> > > given a choice, because the older style toilets using more water per flush are not available for purchase.
>
> > They do have ones that work properly tho.
>
> > > You would think that at some point they would have tested the newer toilets to make sure they were in fact actually
> > > using less water in everyday household use.
>
> > Corse they did, and they do.
>
> Rod knows a lot about flushing since he spends hours flushing "reams
> of puerile shit where it belongs".
You mean Usenet?
nate
== 5 of 17 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 12:15 pm
From: Dennis
On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 08:52:27 -0800, "Annie Woughman"
<anniewoughman@hotmail.com> wrote:
>We did a little remodeling last year and replaced both our older toilets
>(ugly colored ones from the 60's) with new Kohler "5-star flush system"
>toilets. These toilets are supposed to be good for the environment because
>they use less water for each flush. The problem being--over 75% of the time
>the toilet has to be flushed at least twice to get everything to go down.
>Ours are even worse because they have the elongated bowl, so toilet paper
>usually lands in the front of the bowl and then it never gets washed down
>with the first flush and even sometines on the second flush. Also, the
>consumer isn't given a choice, because the older style toilets using more
>water per flush are not available for purchase. You would think that at
>some point they would have tested the newer toilets to make sure they were
>in fact actually using less water in everyday household use.
>
I installed Gerber power flush toilets in my house and they have never
failed to clear the bowl on the first flush. That's over 10 years,
with 3 children in the house. They were top-rated by Consumer Reports
at the time.
Now there are also conventional flush toilets that are as highly
rated. Look at the Toto line.
Dennis (evil)
--
The honest man is the one who realizes that he cannot
consume more, in his lifetime, than he produces.
== 6 of 17 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 12:38 pm
From: clams_casino
Dennis wrote:
>On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 08:52:27 -0800, "Annie Woughman"
><anniewoughman@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>We did a little remodeling last year and replaced both our older toilets
>>(ugly colored ones from the 60's) with new Kohler "5-star flush system"
>>toilets. These toilets are supposed to be good for the environment because
>>they use less water for each flush. The problem being--over 75% of the time
>>the toilet has to be flushed at least twice to get everything to go down.
>>Ours are even worse because they have the elongated bowl, so toilet paper
>>usually lands in the front of the bowl and then it never gets washed down
>>with the first flush and even sometines on the second flush. Also, the
>>consumer isn't given a choice, because the older style toilets using more
>>water per flush are not available for purchase. You would think that at
>>some point they would have tested the newer toilets to make sure they were
>>in fact actually using less water in everyday household use.
>>
>>
>>
>
>I installed Gerber power flush toilets in my house and they have never
>failed to clear the bowl on the first flush. That's over 10 years,
>with 3 children in the house. They were top-rated by Consumer Reports
>at the time.
>
>Now there are also conventional flush toilets that are as highly
>rated. Look at the Toto line.
>
>Dennis (evil)
>
>
We have a Kohler low flush that has always worked fine - over eight
years now. Could be the model. Could the tank possibly need an
adjustment?
== 7 of 17 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 12:47 pm
From: Siskuwihane
On Nov 10, 3:13 pm, N8N <njna...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 10, 2:44 pm, Siskuwihane <Siskuwiha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 10, 2:33 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Annie Woughman <anniewough...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > We did a little remodeling last year and replaced both our older
> > > > toilets (ugly colored ones from the 60's) with new Kohler "5-star
> > > > flush system" toilets. These toilets are supposed to be good for the
> > > > environment because they use less water for each flush. The problem
> > > > being--over 75% of the time the toilet has to be flushed at least
> > > > twice to get everything to go down.
>
> > > Thats because you are very shitty 'people'
>
> > > > Ours are even worse because they have the elongated bowl, so toilet paper usually lands in the front of the bowl and
> > > > then it never gets washed down with the first flush and even sometines on the second flush. Also, the consumer isn't
> > > > given a choice, because the older style toilets using more water per flush are not available for purchase.
>
> > > They do have ones that work properly tho.
>
> > > > You would think that at some point they would have tested the newer toilets to make sure they were in fact actually
> > > > using less water in everyday household use.
>
> > > Corse they did, and they do.
>
> > Rod knows a lot about flushing since he spends hours flushing "reams
> > of puerile shit where it belongs".
>
> You mean Usenet?
>
No, GM stock.
== 8 of 17 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 12:52 pm
From: Siskuwihane
On Nov 10, 3:38 pm, clams_casino <PeterGrif...@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:
> Dennis wrote:
> >On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 08:52:27 -0800, "Annie Woughman"
> ><anniewough...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>We did a little remodeling last year and replaced both our older toilets
> >>(ugly colored ones from the 60's) with new Kohler "5-star flush system"
> >>toilets. These toilets are supposed to be good for the environment because
> >>they use less water for each flush. The problem being--over 75% of the time
> >>the toilet has to be flushed at least twice to get everything to go down.
> >>Ours are even worse because they have the elongated bowl, so toilet paper
> >>usually lands in the front of the bowl and then it never gets washed down
> >>with the first flush and even sometines on the second flush. Also, the
> >>consumer isn't given a choice, because the older style toilets using more
> >>water per flush are not available for purchase. You would think that at
> >>some point they would have tested the newer toilets to make sure they were
> >>in fact actually using less water in everyday household use.
>
> >I installed Gerber power flush toilets in my house and they have never
> >failed to clear the bowl on the first flush. That's over 10 years,
> >with 3 children in the house. They were top-rated by Consumer Reports
> >at the time.
>
> >Now there are also conventional flush toilets that are as highly
> >rated. Look at the Toto line.
>
> >Dennis (evil)
>
> We have a Kohler low flush that has always worked fine - over eight
> years now. Could be the model. Could the tank possibly need an
> adjustment?- Hide quoted text -
We do too, but ours are 1.6 GPF where as some of these newer models
are .8 GPF.
Don't know what the OP's is, I believe they also meant "Class 5"
instead of "5 Star" flushing system which is anywhere from 1.28 GPF to
1.4 GPF.
== 9 of 17 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 1:01 pm
From: Al Bundy
Annie Woughman wrote:
> We did a little remodeling last year and replaced both our older toilets
> (ugly colored ones from the 60's) with new Kohler "5-star flush system"
> toilets. These toilets are supposed to be good for the environment because
> they use less water for each flush. The problem being--over 75% of the time
> the toilet has to be flushed at least twice to get everything to go down.
> Ours are even worse because they have the elongated bowl, so toilet paper
> usually lands in the front of the bowl and then it never gets washed down
> with the first flush and even sometines on the second flush. Also, the
> consumer isn't given a choice, because the older style toilets using more
> water per flush are not available for purchase. You would think that at
> some point they would have tested the newer toilets to make sure they were
> in fact actually using less water in everyday household use.
Some (most) of the early designs were terrible. There have been
several generations in design since and now they work very well. I
just worked on a Mansfield 1.3gpf. Only half the tank emptied out at a
flush. That's the way it was designed with that flush valve. It works
very well and never needs extra flushes. This one is about eight years
old too.
Still, there is nothing to compare to a Furgeson.
== 10 of 17 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 1:06 pm
From: "John Weiss"
"Dennis" <dgw80@hotmail.com> wrote...
>
> I installed Gerber power flush toilets in my house and they have never
> failed to clear the bowl on the first flush. That's over 10 years,
> with 3 children in the house. They were top-rated by Consumer Reports
> at the time.
>
> Now there are also conventional flush toilets that are as highly
> rated. Look at the Toto line.
Indeed! I bought a Toto Drake (long bowl, ADA height) several years ago. It
worked so well that I replaced all the toilets in my house with them. We've
NEVER required a double-flush, and they are quiet.
Lots of info at http://www.terrylove.com/crtoilet.htm
== 11 of 17 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 2:23 pm
From: Jeff
Dennis wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 08:52:27 -0800, "Annie Woughman"
> <anniewoughman@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> We did a little remodeling last year and replaced both our older toilets
>> (ugly colored ones from the 60's) with new Kohler "5-star flush system"
>> toilets. These toilets are supposed to be good for the environment because
>> they use less water for each flush. The problem being--over 75% of the time
>> the toilet has to be flushed at least twice to get everything to go down.
>> Ours are even worse because they have the elongated bowl, so toilet paper
>> usually lands in the front of the bowl and then it never gets washed down
>> with the first flush and even sometines on the second flush. Also, the
>> consumer isn't given a choice, because the older style toilets using more
>> water per flush are not available for purchase. You would think that at
>> some point they would have tested the newer toilets to make sure they were
>> in fact actually using less water in everyday household use.
>>
>
> I installed Gerber power flush toilets in my house and they have never
> failed to clear the bowl on the first flush. That's over 10 years,
> with 3 children in the house. They were top-rated by Consumer Reports
> at the time.
>
> Now there are also conventional flush toilets that are as highly
> rated. Look at the Toto line.
I have friend that worked for Toto, spoke fluent Japanese. They have
toilets that do more than you'd expect or perhaps want from a toilet.
Just don't lose the remote!
Jeff
>
> Dennis (evil)
== 12 of 17 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 3:59 pm
From: hchickpea@hotmail.com
On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 20:15:41 +0000 (UTC), Dennis <dgw80@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 08:52:27 -0800, "Annie Woughman"
><anniewoughman@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>We did a little remodeling last year and replaced both our older toilets
>>(ugly colored ones from the 60's) with new Kohler "5-star flush system"
>>toilets. These toilets are supposed to be good for the environment because
>>they use less water for each flush. The problem being--over 75% of the time
>>the toilet has to be flushed at least twice to get everything to go down.
>>Ours are even worse because they have the elongated bowl, so toilet paper
>>usually lands in the front of the bowl and then it never gets washed down
>>with the first flush and even sometines on the second flush. Also, the
>>consumer isn't given a choice, because the older style toilets using more
>>water per flush are not available for purchase. You would think that at
>>some point they would have tested the newer toilets to make sure they were
>>in fact actually using less water in everyday household use.
>>
>
>I installed Gerber power flush toilets in my house and they have never
>failed to clear the bowl on the first flush. That's over 10 years,
>with 3 children in the house. They were top-rated by Consumer Reports
>at the time.
I guess if it makes the food coming into the kids, the company knows
how to dispose of the waste.
>Now there are also conventional flush toilets that are as highly
>rated. Look at the Toto line.
Composting toilets mean never having to flush.
FWIW, our low head heads seem to work more or less OK. I won't go
into details.
== 13 of 17 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 2:58 pm
From: Al Bundy
On Nov 10, 5:23 pm, Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote:
>
> I have friend that worked for Toto, spoke fluent Japanese. They have
> toilets that do more than you'd expect or perhaps want from a toilet.
> Just don't lose the remote!
>
> Jeff
Yes, it could be uncomfortable if you were in there and the kid was
playing with the remote in another room.
== 14 of 17 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 3:22 pm
From: Seerialmom
On Nov 10, 12:52 pm, Siskuwihane <Siskuwiha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 10, 3:38 pm, clams_casino <PeterGrif...@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Dennis wrote:
> > >On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 08:52:27 -0800, "Annie Woughman"
> > ><anniewough...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >>We did a little remodeling last year and replaced both our older toilets
> > >>(ugly colored ones from the 60's) with new Kohler "5-star flush system"
> > >>toilets. These toilets are supposed to be good for the environment because
> > >>they use less water for each flush. The problem being--over 75% of the time
> > >>the toilet has to be flushed at least twice to get everything to go down.
> > >>Ours are even worse because they have the elongated bowl, so toilet paper
> > >>usually lands in the front of the bowl and then it never gets washed down
> > >>with the first flush and even sometines on the second flush. Also, the
> > >>consumer isn't given a choice, because the older style toilets using more
> > >>water per flush are not available for purchase. You would think that at
> > >>some point they would have tested the newer toilets to make sure they were
> > >>in fact actually using less water in everyday household use.
>
> > >I installed Gerber power flush toilets in my house and they have never
> > >failed to clear the bowl on the first flush. That's over 10 years,
> > >with 3 children in the house. They were top-rated by Consumer Reports
> > >at the time.
>
> > >Now there are also conventional flush toilets that are as highly
> > >rated. Look at the Toto line.
>
> > >Dennis (evil)
>
> > We have a Kohler low flush that has always worked fine - over eight
> > years now. Could be the model. Could the tank possibly need an
> > adjustment?- Hide quoted text -
>
> We do too, but ours are 1.6 GPF where as some of these newer models
> are .8 GPF.
>
> Don't know what the OP's is, I believe they also meant "Class 5"
> instead of "5 Star" flushing system which is anywhere from 1.28 GPF to
> 1.4 GPF.
No, they meant 5 Star; that's how they're advertised at the big home
improvement stores. I've been considering some lately and that's
where I've seen the ratings. BTW I like this one toilet that has a
dual flush system; 2 buttons on the top, one for #1 and one for #2
(decides how much flushing power is needed).
== 15 of 17 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 5:20 pm
From: don@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein)
In <gFZRk.5895$wn7.2921@newsfe25.iad> ann*@(provider).com wrote:
> We did a little remodeling last year and replaced both our older toilets
> (ugly colored ones from the 60's) with new Kohler "5-star flush system"
> toilets. These toilets are supposed to be good for the environment because
> they use less water for each flush. The problem being--over 75% of
> the time the toilet has to be flushed at least twice to get everything
> to go down.
1. Most loads to be flushed by toilets are #1 loads. Even a lousy
stool specimen of a low flush toilet only needs 1 flush to flush those.
2. Those getting low flush toilets should do their homework. I now see
low flush toilets that flush #2 loads as well as I ever saw a toilet of
any kind flush a #2 load. Do your homework and you can get a decent low
flush toilet rather than a stool specimen so lousy that some would think
it was sabotaged to protest mandates for low flush toilets.
- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
== 16 of 17 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 5:36 pm
From: tweeny90655@mypacks.net
On Nov 10, 11:52 am, "Annie Woughman" <anniewough...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> We did a little remodeling last year and replaced both our older toilets
> (ugly colored ones from the 60's) with new Kohler "5-star flush system"
> toilets. These toilets are supposed to be good for the environment because
> they use less water for each flush. The problem being--over 75% of the time
> the toilet has to be flushed at least twice to get everything to go down.
> Ours are even worse because they have the elongated bowl, so toilet paper
> usually lands in the front of the bowl and then it never gets washed down
> with the first flush and even sometines on the second flush. Also, the
> consumer isn't given a choice, because the older style toilets using more
> water per flush are not available for purchase. You would think that at
> some point they would have tested the newer toilets to make sure they were
> in fact actually using less water in everyday household use.
Maybe you have the kind which gives a heavy flush and a light one?
Are ppl in your house aware of this and flushing accordingly. I am
very pleased with my low usage bathroom "applicances".
You might talk with your family about mellow and brown, if you get my
drift.
== 17 of 17 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 5:54 pm
From: E Z Peaces
Annie Woughman wrote:
> We did a little remodeling last year and replaced both our older toilets
> (ugly colored ones from the 60's) with new Kohler "5-star flush system"
> toilets. These toilets are supposed to be good for the environment
> because they use less water for each flush. The problem being--over 75%
> of the time the toilet has to be flushed at least twice to get
> everything to go down. Ours are even worse because they have the
> elongated bowl, so toilet paper usually lands in the front of the bowl
> and then it never gets washed down with the first flush and even
> sometines on the second flush. Also, the consumer isn't given a choice,
> because the older style toilets using more water per flush are not
> available for purchase. You would think that at some point they would
> have tested the newer toilets to make sure they were in fact actually
> using less water in everyday household use.
>
>
Ninety-nine percent of North American bowel movements are less than 350
grams. Several gravity-fed Kohler low-flush elongated-bowl models, such
the Wellworth Class 5 EL, will dispose of 1000 grams in a flush, so you
would need to flush only after every third or fourth sitting. On the
other hand, the Wellworth EL will dispose of only 250 grams.
Here are test results for 700 toilets:
http://www.cuwcc.org/assets/0/28/1264/1292/1370/1C037608-E64F-4AAC-AFC0-901DB9DD168D.pdf
==============================================================================
TOPIC: DIY Reverse Mortgage?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/de91e4185c425fbf?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 1:15 pm
From: Al Bundy
On Nov 10, 10:58 am, "viet nam vet." <georgewks...@humboldt1.com>
wrote:
> Since our homestead does not fit a traditional R.M. formulae we are
> seeking a private investor , but the learning curve is steep.
> Any suggestions?
> --
> When the Power of Love,replaces the Love of Power.
> that's Evolution.
Yea. I suggest you give people enough information to figure out where
you are going. Why doesn't your property fit the traditional formula?
If it's not worth anything, that would be one reason. Remember, the
reverse mortgage is just a gimmick to loan money. They are not giving
you money. They are loaning it one payment at a time until they get it
all back plus interest at the end. The risk is much greater and they
demand a higher reward for taking it. Investors try to spread the risk
around over many investments. Therefore, a private investor is less
likely to help you unless this is what they do regularly. At this time
it's even hard to get a car loan. You may have to wait until the
economic situation improves. The reality is that it will get worse
first.
When you want to borrow money and can't find a company willing to take
your risk, sometimes a family member will take that risk because they
know the situation and trust you more than a stranger. Sometimes grown
children will take on a reverse mortgage for a parent, for example.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: what to do with old coffee?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/1dc7fc7675771054?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 1:22 pm
From: Al Bundy
chilisinca...@gmail.com wrote:
> I got a dozen vacuum packed ground coffee packs that had best before
> date a month ago.
> What should I do with them? They are premium quality coffees.
>
> The best before date was about a year after packing date. Maybe they
> are still perfectly drinkable? Or should I use them for something
> else? Maybe cooking or making coffee drinks or sumthing? Any clever
> ideas?
By the way, it's OK to remove those tags from your pillows too.
The "best by" dates don't mean as much for coffee as they do for meat
or milk. I think the coffee would be good for years. It may not be
quite as good as new though.
Just because items are sealed does not mean there are no leaks. A well
sealed ink cart can dry up in a couple of years. You can open it and
the ink is dried. The volatile elements have escaped. Herbs and ground
coffee release volatile gasses that can escape as well.
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 2:42 pm
From: barbie gee
On Mon, 10 Nov 2008, Al Bundy wrote:
>
>
> chilisinca...@gmail.com wrote:
>> I got a dozen vacuum packed ground coffee packs that had best before
>> date a month ago.
>> What should I do with them? They are premium quality coffees.
>>
>> The best before date was about a year after packing date. Maybe they
>> are still perfectly drinkable? Or should I use them for something
>> else? Maybe cooking or making coffee drinks or sumthing? Any clever
>> ideas?
>
> By the way, it's OK to remove those tags from your pillows too.
>
> The "best by" dates don't mean as much for coffee as they do for meat
> or milk. I think the coffee would be good for years. It may not be
> quite as good as new though.
>
> Just because items are sealed does not mean there are no leaks. A well
> sealed ink cart can dry up in a couple of years. You can open it and
> the ink is dried. The volatile elements have escaped. Herbs and ground
> coffee release volatile gasses that can escape as well.
>
The worst you'll find, if the packages were not sealed is that they've
gone rancid. But I think they'd need to be open like for 5 years or
something. I wouldn't worry about it, I'd just use it and see. Won't
kill ya.
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 5:57 pm
From: "aineecumi@gmail.com"
i agree with john idea..
use it as fertilizer at your garden..
definitely!!
xoxo,
aineecumi
neway, my secret to release tension is playing this game <a
href=http://www.gamestotal.com> http://www.gamestotal.com </a> <a
href=http://uc.gamestotal.com> http://uc.gamestotal.com </a> <a
href=http://gc.gamestotal.com> http://gc.gamestotal.com </a> <a
href=http://3700ad.gamestotal.com> http://3700ad.gamestotal.com </a>
<a href=http://manga.gamestotal.com> http://manga.gamestotal.com </a>
==============================================================================
TOPIC: LOOKING FOR WORK AT HOME INDIVIDUALS, LEGITIMATE, GOOGLE AUTHORIZED
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/fe4fbeb2c5f92722?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 2:29 pm
From: FrontPage
ARE YOU AFFECTED BY DOWNSIZING OR LAYOFFS OR SIMPLY NEED MORE INCOME?
WE ARE LOOKING FOR SALES SAVY MINDED INDIVIDUALS TO HELP US GROW AND
PROVIDE YOU AN ALTERNATIVE INCOME SOURCE.
WE ASSIST BUSINESSESS BY PROVIDING THEM AN OPPORTUNITY FOR 1ST PAGE
PLACEMENT ON GOOGLE. WE ARE CITY AND AREA SPECIFIC. WE ARE AUTHORIZED
BY GOOGLE.
YOU'LL BE MAKING A SHORT FRONT CALL WITH OUR SCRIPT AND WE CLOSE FOR
YOU. THIS REQUIRES A COMMITMENT OF 4 HOURS DAILY WITH 25 CALLS PER
HOUR. SCRIPTS AND LEADS PROVIDED. YOU WILL RECEIVE $70.00 FOR EACH
ONE WE CLOSE!
IF YOU ARE UP FOR THE CHALLENGE AND ARE MOTIVATED AND NEED MORE
INCOME, WE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOU. PLEASE CALL. (714) 366-6747. WE
ARE IN CALIFORNIA.
LOOKING FORWARD TO SPEAKING TO YOU!
BEST REGARDS,
DARYLMARIE
ALAN LOYD
GOOGLE PLACEMENT SPECIALIST
(714) 366-6747 Direct
www.firstpageone@gmail.com
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Dried up Wite-Out
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/2bd851d668f9914f?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Nov 10 2008 5:32 pm
From: tweeny90655@mypacks.net
On Nov 10, 1:20 am, "DemoDisk" <pack...@nospam.com> wrote:
> <tweeny90...@mypacks.net> wrote in message
>
> news:26eddf74-db22-4972-ba8f-c6cac0baebaf@a29g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Nov 8, 11:50 pm, "DemoDisk" <pack...@nospam.com> wrote:
> > > Is there anything you can add to a bottle of thickened wite-out to
> > > restore it? I know the stuff is cheap, but then so am I, and I'm
> > > thinking it would be nice to use up the product instead of throwing
> the
> > > damn stuff out one bottle after another.
>
> > > and, yes, I really really try to put the cap on tightly every single
> > > time.
>
> > I gave up on the stuff and use that Bic Wite-out correction Pen which
> > dispenses a fine of the white stuff from a ball tip. No fiddling with
> > that little brush or stuck together bottle and cap. The Bic covers
> > really well, too.
>
> I tried one of those "pens" that applies wite out from a ribbon and
> thought I was in heaven! It only cost ohh, three times as much.
>
> Then the ribbon *broke*, and I wasted over an hour trying to *splice*
> the thing! Gave up and fished my old Wite Out out of the wastebasket.
The one I'm tawkin about is not a ribbon. It's just like a fine
point Sharpie pen. Yeah, the white ink takes a bit of time to dry,
but it covers nicely. I haven't had one dry out on me yet and '"ve
been using the same one for well over a year. Just be sure the cap is
on.
==============================================================================
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
