http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* The back lash begins - 3 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/23ad85f93e968a1d?hl=en
* does taking from recycling container = stealing? - 3 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/98b1eee3d4cad100?hl=en
* "Promote the general welfare" means what it says - 10 messages, 6 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3f1993b181e2faf4?hl=en
* Satellite Radio - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/499ddfb225813a35?hl=en
* Some silly liar - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/95f8edd5aecceca0?hl=en
* Opposition health care reform not about race. It's about stupidity - 3
messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/28531844efc1bbfe?hl=en
* Please do not buy a new car. - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/a8576659714369dc?hl=en
* fresh comfortable sneakers - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/47f3b42d85d5a089?hl=en
* Surprise price!!! 2009 Get low price brand fashion handbags(Gucci,Lv,Chloe,
Fendi.-..)at www.ebaychinaonline.com (paypal payment) - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3ad56969f7a54a8f?hl=en
* hot sell copy tous,DB,juicy,guess,burberry handbags - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/88bd607cc50e81a2?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: The back lash begins
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/23ad85f93e968a1d?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 1:01 pm
From: gheston@hiwaay.net (Gary Heston)
In article <1ec28$4b0f7949$ccb58416$22632@ispn.net>,
sr <solos42@uninets.net> wrote:
>http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100018003/climategate-five-aussie-mps-lead-the-way-by-resigning-in-disgust-over-carbon-tax/
Yes, the truth really is inconvenient, isn't it? Wonder what all the
lib media is going to do when they finally realize just how badly
they've been deceived by these frauds...
Gary
--
Gary Heston gheston@hiwaay.net http://www.thebreastcancersite.com/
"Where large, expensive pieces of exotic woods are converted to valueless,
hard to dispose of sawdust, chips and scraps." Charlie B.s' definition of
woodworking.
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 3:48 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Pity its a lie. Just because its in some shit rag doesnt make it gospel.
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 9:28 pm
From: "sr"
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7nb6q1F3ku1diU1@mid.individual.net...
> sr wrote:
>> http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100018003/climategate-five-aussie-mps-lead-the-way-by-resigning-in-disgust-over-carbon-tax/
>
> Pity its a lie. Just because its in some shit rag doesnt make it gospel.
----------
> Global Warming is often called a hoax. I disagree because a hoax has a
> humorous intent to puncture pomposity. In science, such as with the
> Piltdown Man hoax, it was done to expose those with fervent but blind
> belief. The argument that global warming is due to humans, known as the
> anthropogenic global warming theory (AGW) is a (deliberate
> fraud). I can now make that statement without fear of
> contradiction because of a remarkable hacking of files that provided not
> just a smoking gun, but an entire battery ofmachine guns.
Someone hacked in to the files of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) based at
the University of East Anglia. A very large file (61 mb) was downloaded and
posted to the web. Phil Jones Director of the CRU has acknowledged the files
are theirs.
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/17102
==============================================================================
TOPIC: does taking from recycling container = stealing?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/98b1eee3d4cad100?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 1:19 pm
From: Al
On Nov 27, 10:52 am, Ohioguy <n...@none.net> wrote:
> I was out banging on the exhaust pipe of our van, testing to make
> sure the pipe was in good shape, when I saw a guy stop by our trash cans
> and city recycling containers. He took an old blender out of our trash
> (I had already removed the copper wire windings), and also took some
> items from our recycling containers. I'm not worried about the trash -
> I've always felt that as long as people aren't taking any personal
> papers, they are welcome to anything else - especially since they have
> to brave loads of dirty diapers in our dumpsters.
>
> However, the recycling containers are a different story. My
> understanding is that the city gets some $$ from the aluminum, etc.,
> which are put in there, and that $$ helps keep our cost for waste
> collection from going up. If these guys are going around and taking the
> aluminum out of the recycling containers, doesn't that take $$ away from
> the city, and ultimately make us pay higher rates?
In my area you can get a scrap license from the city for a paltry few
bucks in which case anything at the curb is fair game. Another local
municipality has laws against touching anything in the recycle bins.
You answer is only a phone call away.
PS. The really big city nearby has tried recycling and they sent
everything to the same landfill anyway.
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 3:51 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Technically, yes.
Ohioguy wrote:
> I was out banging on the exhaust pipe of our van, testing to make
> sure the pipe was in good shape, when I saw a guy stop by our trash
> cans and city recycling containers. He took an old blender out of
> our trash (I had already removed the copper wire windings), and also
> took some items from our recycling containers. I'm not worried about
> the trash - I've always felt that as long as people aren't taking any
> personal papers, they are welcome to anything else - especially since they have to brave loads of dirty diapers in our
> dumpsters.
> However, the recycling containers are a different story. My
> understanding is that the city gets some $$ from the aluminum, etc.,
> which are put in there, and that $$ helps keep our cost for waste
> collection from going up. If these guys are going around and taking
> the aluminum out of the recycling containers, doesn't that take $$
> away from the city, and ultimately make us pay higher rates?
Just higher costs for the trash collection at most.
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 5:30 pm
From: David Harmon
On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 10:52:07 -0500 in misc.consumers.frugal-living,
Ohioguy <none@none.net> wrote,
> However, the recycling containers are a different story. My
>understanding is that the city gets some $$ from the aluminum, etc.,
Yes, it's stealing for exactly the reason you give. In addition, my
city for example is under orders to divert a percentage of the trash
stream to recycling - if they fall short, they will be penalized by the
State of California. Check your local ordinances, and then call the
cops if you feel like it.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: "Promote the general welfare" means what it says
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3f1993b181e2faf4?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 10 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 1:19 pm
From: clams_casino
Patriot Games wrote:
>On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 18:15:30 -0500, clams_casino
><PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:
>
>Liars are exposed:
>
>On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:29:48 -0500, clams_casino
><PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Patriot Games wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>The richest 1% paid 39% of the income taxes, up from 37% in 2000.
>>>>>The richest 5% paid 60% of the income taxes, up from 56% in 2000.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>and they were paid essentially 50% of the income.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Cite?
>>>
>>>
>>>>What's your point?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Its not my fault you're stupid.
>>>6% of the population paid 99% of the taxes (on 50% of the income,
>>>according to you).
>>>That's Socialism.
>>>
>>>
>>No, That's shear ignorance ON YOUR PART. The top 10% (>108k/yr) of the
>>population pay about 50% of all Federal income taxes, based on having
>>some 60% of all income.
>>
>>
>
>Its not my fault you'e stupid.
>
>Try to PAY ATTENTION:
>
>The richest 1% paid 39% of the income taxes, up from 37% in 2000.
>The richest 5% paid 60% of the income taxes, up from 56% in 2000.
>
>39%+60%=99%
>
>What part of "39%+60%=99%" don't you understand?
>
>
Amusing. You really need to retake that 4th-grade math class.
Hint - The richest 5% includes the richest 1%.
== 2 of 10 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 1:21 pm
From: Poetic Justice
Patriot Games wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:39:05 -0500, clams_casino
> <PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:
>> Patriot Games wrote:
>>> Do the rich get food stamps? No.
>> The first valid statement in all your claims. However, many do enjoy
>> extensive government subsidized meals & entertainment via "business"
>> expenses.
>
> Which has NOTHING to do with rich or poor. Legal buusiness expenses
> are legal and valid tax deductions FOR ANYONE claiming them.
Which is why people will be buying roof repairs and what ever, to keep
from having profits for Obama to tax away. Might as well waste it on
fixing things up as to letting the government waste it.
== 3 of 10 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 1:22 pm
From: clams_casino
Patriot Games wrote:
>On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:31:11 -0500, clams_casino
><PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Patriot Games wrote:
>>
>>
>>>And as YOU can see it works and the LIAR "clams_casino" was CAUGHT
>>>LYING, repeatedly...
>>>
>>>
>>Your ignorance is beyond belief.
>>
>>
>
>You LIED.
>
>Learned to love your LIES.
>
>They will follow you forever.
>
>On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:29:48 -0500, clams_casino
><PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Since you are obviously too challenged to do a simple search (as opposed
>>to listening to Rush, Beck, etc), I'll try to keep this very simple:
>>http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/22287.html
>>"While the media spotlight shines on federal income taxes each April,
>>many Americans may be surprised to learn that federal income taxes make
>>up only 26 percent of the nation's total tax bill. The remaining 74
>>percent—nearly three-fourths of the U.S. economy's total tax burden—is
>>comprised of the other federal, state and local taxes paid by American
>>households every year."
>>
>>
>
>YOU SAID: [The bottom 50% paid 3% of income taxes...] "and essentially
>all the payroll tax with a significantly higher share of property,
>sales & excise taxes."
>
>Your CITE SHOWS: The highest income group paid 23-cents per tax dollar
>to Federal Payroll taxes and the lowest income group paid 21-cents per
>tax dollar to Federal Payroll taxes.
>
>
>
You really need to retake that 4th-grade math class. Hint - Without
knowing the average earnings for each group, it's impossible to know was
percentage of their income was paid in income taxes.
>YOU LIED.
>
>YOU SAID: [The bottom 50% paid 3% of income taxes...] "and essentially
>all the payroll tax with a significantly higher share of property,
>sales & excise taxes."
>
>Your CITE SHOWS: The Total State and Local Taxes Averaged is $9,400
>per taxpayer, with the LOWEST FOUR income groups paying $28,666
>COMBINED and the SINGLE highest income groupo paying $24,421.
>
>YOU LIED.
>
>
>
>
Are really that stupid?
== 4 of 10 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 1:26 pm
From: clams_casino
Patriot Games wrote:
>On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:39:05 -0500, clams_casino
><PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Patriot Games wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Do the rich get food stamps? No.
>>>
>>>
>>The first valid statement in all your claims. However, many do enjoy
>>extensive government subsidized meals & entertainment via "business"
>>expenses.
>>
>>
>
>Which has NOTHING to do with rich or poor. Legal buusiness expenses
>are legal and valid tax deductions FOR ANYONE claiming them.
>
>
I hope you are just making a feeble attempt at trolling. I can't
believe any one could be this dense.
>>How do you think places like Mortons of Chicago, The Pal,
>>etc exist? Do you really believe the wealthy are buying $5k - $50k
>>(and up) seats at sporting events out of their own pocket?
>>
>>
>
>Feel free to prove they don't.
>
>
>
>>>Do the rich get Medicaid? No.
>>>
>>>
>>Actually, many get upwards of $20k+ in tax free medical benefits.
>>
>>
>
>No cite = Probable LIE.
>
>
>
>
>>>Do the rich get Welfare? No.
>>>
>>>
>>What do you call the vast housing subsidies they enjoy with respect to
>>subsidized mortgage interest and property taxes?
>>
>>
>
>No cite = Probable LIE.
>
>Here's a hint: COMPOUNDING your LIES only ADDS TO the Google Archive
>that I will post and report FOREVER thus destroying your credibility
>in this Newsgroup FOREVER.
>
>
Considering you have zero credibility....................
== 5 of 10 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 1:28 pm
From: clams_casino
Patriot Games wrote:
>On 25 Nov 2009 17:31:53 GMT, Michael Coburn <mikcob@verizon.net>
>wrote:
>
>
>>On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 11:16:04 -0500, Patriot Games wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On 23 Nov 2009 20:08:53 GMT, Michael Coburn <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>Liars are exposed:
>>>On 13 Oct 2009 00:01:41 GMT, Michael Coburn <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>About 80% work and the rest mooch. And of the 20% that mooch, the idle
>>>>rich are only slightly less of a drain than are the idle poor.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Oops! Caught LYING, again:
>>>The richest 1% paid 39% of the income taxes, up from 37% in 2000. The
>>>richest 5% paid 60% of the income taxes, up from 56% in 2000. The bottom
>>>50% paid 3% of income taxes.
>>>http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071217112125AAvUc6r
>>>For Tax Year 2006
>>>(AGI, Adjusted Gross Income)
>>>Top 1% AGI - 39.89% of all taxes.
>>>Top 5% AGI - 60.14% of all taxes.
>>>Top 10% AGI - 70.79% of all taxes.
>>>Top 25% AGI - 86.27% of all taxes.
>>>Top 50% AGI - 97.01% of all taxes.
>>>Bottom 50% AGI - 2.99% of all taxes.
>>>http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=6
>>>
>>>
>
>You said "the idle rich are only slightly less of a drain than are the
>idle poor."
>
>YOU LIED.
>
>
Hey bozo - You are the one who claimed the above.
Hint - the bottom 50% pay significantly more than 3% of all taxes.
You really need to retake that 4th-grade remedial math class.
== 6 of 10 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 3:53 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Patriot Games wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 18:15:30 -0500, clams_casino
> <PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:
> Liars are exposed:
Your lies repeated, actually.
> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:29:48 -0500, clams_casino
> <PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:
>> Patriot Games wrote:
>>>>> The richest 1% paid 39% of the income taxes, up from 37% in 2000.
>>>>> The richest 5% paid 60% of the income taxes, up from 56% in 2000.
>>>> and they were paid essentially 50% of the income.
>>> Cite?
>>>> What's your point?
>>> Its not my fault you're stupid.
>>> 6% of the population paid 99% of the taxes (on 50% of the income,
>>> according to you).
>>> That's Socialism.
>> No, That's shear ignorance ON YOUR PART. The top 10% (>108k/yr) of
>> the population pay about 50% of all Federal income taxes, based on
>> having some 60% of all income.
>
> Its not my fault you'e stupid.
>
> Try to PAY ATTENTION:
>
> The richest 1% paid 39% of the income taxes, up from 37% in 2000.
> The richest 5% paid 60% of the income taxes, up from 56% in 2000.
>
> 39%+60%=99%
>
> What part of "39%+60%=99%" don't you understand?
>
> Its not my fault you'e stupid.
>
> Try to PAY ATTENTION:
>
> The richest 1% paid 39% of the income taxes, up from 37% in 2000.
> he richest 5% paid 60% of the income taxes, up from 56% in 2000.
>
> 1%+5%=6%
>
> What part of "1%+5%=6%" don't you understand?
>
> YOU SAID "they were paid essentially 50% of the income."
>
> Therefore "6% of the population paid 99% of the taxes (on 50% of the
> income, according to you)."
>
>> What part of Federal income tax is only about 1/4 of the total taxes
>> do you not understand?
>
> See below.
>
>> Since you are obviously too challenged to do a simple search (as
>> opposed to listening to Rush, Beck, etc), I'll try to keep this very
>> simple: http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/22287.html
>> "While the media spotlight shines on federal income taxes each April,
>> many Americans may be surprised to learn that federal income taxes
>> make up only 26 percent of the nation's total tax bill. The
>> remaining 74 percent-nearly three-fourths of the U.S. economy's
>> total tax burden-is comprised of the other federal, state and local
>> taxes paid by American households every year."
>
> YOU SAID: [The bottom 50% paid 3% of income taxes...] "and essentially
> all the payroll tax with a significantly higher share of
> property, sales & excise taxes."
>
> Your CITE SHOWS: The highest income group paid 23-cents per tax dollar
> to Federal Payroll taxes and the lowest income group paid 21-cents per
> tax dollar to Federal Payroll taxes.
>
> YOU LIED.
>
> YOU SAID: [The bottom 50% paid 3% of income taxes...] "and essentially
> all the payroll tax with a significantly higher share of
> property, sales & excise taxes."
>
> Your CITE SHOWS: The Total State and Local Taxes Averaged is $9,400
> per taxpayer, with the LOWEST FOUR income groups paying $28,666
> COMBINED and the SINGLE highest income groupo paying $24,421.
>
> YOU LIED.
== 7 of 10 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 4:42 pm
From: no_one@void.nul
On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 15:11:33 -0500, Patriot Games
<Patriot@America.Com> wrote:
>On 25 Nov 2009 19:55:22 GMT, Michael Coburn <mikcob@verizon.net>
>wrote:
>>On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 10:20:34 -0500, Patriot Games wrote:
>>> On 24 Nov 2009 22:31:09 GMT, Michael Coburn <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 11:16:41 -0500, Patriot Games wrote:
>>>>> On 23 Nov 2009 20:08:53 GMT, Michael Coburn <mikcob@verizon.net>
>>>>> wrote: Liars are exposed:
>>>>> On 8 Nov 2009 21:15:59 GMT, Michael Coburn <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>>>Yet wages have stayed flat or diminished since the mid 70's.
>>>>> Wrong. YOU HAVE BEEN CAUGHT LYING, again: National average wage
>>>>> indexing series 1980 12,513.46 1981 13,773.10
>>>>> 1982 14,531.34
>>>>> 1983 15,239.24
>>>>> 1984 16,135.07
>>>>> 1985 16,822.51
>>>>> 1986 17,321.82
>>>>> 1987 18,426.51
>>>>> 1988 19,334.04
>>>>> 1989 20,099.55
>>>>> 1990 21,027.98
>>>>> 1991 21,811.60
>>>>> 1992 22,935.42
>>>>> 1993 23,132.67
>>>>> 1994 23,753.53
>>>>> 1995 24,705.66
>>>>> 1996 25,913.90
>>>>> 1997 27,426.00
>>>>> 1998 28,861.44
>>>>> 1999 30,469.84
>>>>> 2000 32,154.82
>>>>> 2001 32,921.92
>>>>> 2002 33,252.09
>>>>> 2003 34,064.95
>>>>> 2004 35,648.55
>>>>> 2005 36,952.94
>>>>> 2006 38,651.41
>>>>> 2007 40,405.48
>>>>> 2008 41,334.97
>>>>> http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/AWI.html
>>>>I give you the nice graph of actual wages as adjusted...
>>> Adjusted?
>>> Your attempt to Change the Subject has FAILED.
>>>>I give you the nice graph of actual wages as adjusted by the CPI found
>>>>at
>>>>http://illusionofprosperity.blogspot.com/2007/12/historical-real-hourly-
>>>>wages.html
>>>>The data source for the graph is the Fed cited right there on the page.
>>> Wrong. We already covered this.
>>> The "source" is an INVALID comparison of "Average Hourly Earnings: Total
>>> Private Industries" AND "Consumer Price Index For All Urban Consumers:
>>> All Items."
>>> YOU SAID: "Yet wages have stayed flat or diminished since the mid 70's."
>>> YOU LIED.
>>> Case closed.
>>The actual SOURCE of the _wage_ numbers is the BLS.
>>HOWEVER!!
>>Using _NOMINAL_ _SALARIES_ _IS_ a lie. It has always been a lie and
>>always will be a lie.
>
>Your attempt to change the subject has FAILED.
>
>YOU SAID: "wages have stayed flat or diminished since the mid 70's."
>
>YOU LIED.
>
>>A _SALARY_ of $16,822 in 1985 would be a _SALARY_
>>of $33,660 in 2008 money adjusted to inflation.
>
>You FAILED to CITE your Source.
>
>The COMMON Source is the CPI Inflation Calculator at:
>http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm
>
>$16,822 in 1985 would have the SAME buying power as $33,660 in 2008.
>
>Yet the 2008 number is $41,334.97 representing a 22.80% INCREASE.
>
>YOU SAID: "wages have stayed flat or diminished since the mid 70's."
>
>YOU LIED.
>
>>A yearly gain of less than 1% per year
>
>Wrong.
>
>$16,822 compounded 1% over 22 years is just over $20,000 but the
>ACTUAL average wage is $33,660.
>
>YOU SAID: "wages have stayed flat or diminished since the mid 70's."
>
>YOU LIED.
In 1964 I bought a 12 oz brand name beer for $.75. What does a brand
name beer cost today. I don't know as I quite beer long ago!
Inflation took hold in this Country in 1966 or 67.
== 8 of 10 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 6:41 pm
From: Vic Smith
On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 14:43:40 -0500, Patriot Games
<Patriot@America.Com> wrote:
>YOU LIED.
This is rich.
One political junkie calling another a liar.
Just what the pols like.
Get all the sheep baa-ing so loud that nobody can hear common sense.
--Vic
== 9 of 10 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 7:43 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Vic Smith wrote
> Patriot Games <Patriot@America.Com> wrote
>> YOU LIED.
> This is rich.
> One political junkie calling another a liar.
> Just what the pols like.
> Get all the sheep baa-ing so loud that nobody can hear common sense.
No pol gives a flying red fuck about usenet.
== 10 of 10 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 7:55 pm
From: Day Brown
Patriot Games wrote:
> The richest 1% paid 39% of the income taxes, up from 37% in 2000.
> The richest 5% paid 60% of the income taxes, up from 56% in 2000.
>
> 39%+60%=99%
Take accounting. The richest 5% includes the richest 1%. The 37%
is included in the 56%.
But more to the point, is that it only makes sense to tax the people who
actually HAVE THE FUCKING MONEY! and that's the rich. Tax the lower
classes and you drive down consumer demand even further, and move the
economy even closer to a crash.
Now, if the rich had taken their tax reduction and invested it in
creating jobs in the USA, the unemployment rate would be lower, lower
and middle class people would have more spending money, and profits in
retail would increase. But they invested in making foreign jobs instead
that put even more Americans on the welfare dole.
Which I gather you do not like.
But if we raise taxes on the rich, the government would be able to lower
the deficit, the value of the dollar would stabilize, and if the
bureacrats spent the money, it would be spent in the USA, which creates
profits for corporations in the USA. Is there a problem with creating
more profits for American corporations?
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Satellite Radio
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/499ddfb225813a35?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 2:29 pm
From: clams_casino
Anyone familiar with satellite radio. I've been reading Sirius has a
50 channel a la carte subscription for $7/mo. They appear to have
two units (Starmate - 5 @ $130 and Stratus 6 @ $70) that can be used
both at home and in the car with this a la carte subscription.
Are they easy to hook up? Is the reception acceptable while driving
(do trees, buildings, etc significantly interrupt the reception)? How
difficult are they to switch between home and the car? Is an extra,
special outdoor antenna needed for home use? Any feel for why one unit
is twice the price of the other (what are the useful options)?
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Some silly liar
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/95f8edd5aecceca0?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 3:47 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
sr wrote:
> Climategate: five Aussie MPs lead the way by resigning in disgust over carbon tax
No they didnt, you pig ignorant clown.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Opposition health care reform not about race. It's about stupidity
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/28531844efc1bbfe?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 4:35 pm
From: no_one@void.nul
On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 11:40:58 -0800 (PST), freeisbest
<demeter547opine@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Nov 27, 4:12 am, Michael Coburn <mik...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:50:34 +0800, Dave C. wrote:
> > >> I have _NO_ doubt that the members of the Senate understand
>> >> what is in the Senate bill. That is their job. That is what they
> > >> were elected to do. Putting the actual bill on line is
>ridiculous
> > >> in that the vast majority of the people who access to it are
> > >> incapable of understanding it.
>>
> > > It is that kind of arrogance that makes the average citizen
>fuming mad,
>>
> > NO!
>> It's the sort of reality that makes ignorant asswipes angry in that they
> > want to live in the 19th century and drive buggies and ride horses.
>>
> > > and why the tea parties are gaining in popularity.
>>
> > Oh please keep it up. Please, please, please......
>>
> > > Not only does the average citizen understand it, the average
> > > citizen is MIGHTY PISSED OFF BY IT. They wouldn't be
> > > so fucking angry if they were just scratching
>> > their heads thinking, "What does that mean?" -Dave
>>
> > The only people that are upset are a bunch of semi-literate screech
>> monkeys. The "average citizens" find summaries like the ones I posted
>> before from sources that are not right wing noise machines. The
>> summaries are easily understood and truthful. That have to be. If they
>> are not then major shit will hit the fan. Republicans spent YEARS
>> undermining government and lying to everyone and they expect to "cash in"
>> on the lack of faith they worked so hard to engender. Maybe you lying
> > pigs will get away with it with some of the people.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Excellent summary. These professional liars are contemptible,
>they know it, and they spend a lot of time explaining away why they've
>chosen to be scum. Luckily the incoherent stupidity of the Repub base
>is not typical of the American majority... including the many, many
>folks who used to vote Repub but who wised up during the Bush
>Disaster.
> Repubs have spent so many years working to undermine our
>government that they're starting to fantasize that the job is done.
>Right now their meme is that all they can grab power away from our
>elected government by issuing orders to their Mickey Mouse brigade of
>teapartiers.
>
>
Both Parties are guilty as sin! There is no Party that is for America.
They only care about the Party!
> > "Those are my opinions and you can't have em" -- Bart Simpson
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 5:09 pm
From: Michael Coburn
On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 19:35:53 -0500, no_one wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 11:40:58 -0800 (PST), freeisbest
> <demeter547opine@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>On Nov 27, 4:12 am, Michael Coburn <mik...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:50:34 +0800, Dave C. wrote:
>> > >> I have _NO_ doubt that the members of the Senate understand
>>> >> what is in the Senate bill. That is their job. That is what they
>> > >> were elected to do. Putting the actual bill on line is
>>ridiculous
>> > >> in that the vast majority of the people who access to it are
>> > >> incapable of understanding it.
>>>
>> > > It is that kind of arrogance that makes the average citizen
>>fuming mad,
>>>
>> > NO!
>>> It's the sort of reality that makes ignorant asswipes angry in that
>>> they
>> > want to live in the 19th century and drive buggies and ride horses.
>>>
>> > > and why the tea parties are gaining in popularity.
>>>
>> > Oh please keep it up. Please, please, please......
>>>
>> > > Not only does the average citizen understand it, the average
>> > > citizen is MIGHTY PISSED OFF BY IT. They wouldn't be so fucking
>> > > angry if they were just scratching
>>> > their heads thinking, "What does that mean?" -Dave
>>>
>> > The only people that are upset are a bunch of semi-literate screech
>>> monkeys. The "average citizens" find summaries like the ones I posted
>>> before from sources that are not right wing noise machines. The
>>> summaries are easily understood and truthful. That have to be. If
>>> they are not then major shit will hit the fan. Republicans spent YEARS
>>> undermining government and lying to everyone and they expect to "cash
>>> in" on the lack of faith they worked so hard to engender. Maybe you
>>> lying
>> > pigs will get away with it with some of the people.
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Excellent summary. These professional liars are contemptible,
>>they know it, and they spend a lot of time explaining away why they've
>>chosen to be scum. Luckily the incoherent stupidity of the Repub base
>>is not typical of the American majority... including the many, many
>>folks who used to vote Repub but who wised up during the Bush Disaster.
>> Repubs have spent so many years working to undermine our
>>government that they're starting to fantasize that the job is done.
>>Right now their meme is that all they can grab power away from our
>>elected government by issuing orders to their Mickey Mouse brigade of
>>teapartiers.
>>
>>
>>
> Both Parties are guilty as sin! There is no Party that is for America.
> They only care about the Party!
The Democrats care much more about their own selves than they do about
"The Party" or some ridiculous "principle". Now if their constituents
had a away to hold them accountable that would actually work pretty
well. It ain't pretty. But it would work. The present system is based
on mutually beneficial partisan gerrymandering and demonization of the
opposite party. If you attempt to remove a sitting representative you
will get Satan incarnate from the other bipolar party. It really is so
very simple when you back away and really look at it.
The parties decide how to shape the representative districts. And they
do what is most cost effective in campaign funding. The objective is to
get it down to as few "in play" districts as possible so that all of the
money can be focused on those districts. The inner party of course
controls much of that money. The potential representative is much more
accountable to the dispensers of that money than they are to the people
of the district.
The secret to decent representation is much smaller and regularly shaped
electoral districts in which the representative is more accountable to
the people and much less dependent on the party money dispensers.
--
"Those are my opinions and you can't have em" -- Bart Simpson
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 5:18 pm
From: freeisbest
On Nov 27, 8:09 pm, Michael Coburn <mik...@verizon.net> wrote:
-snip-
> The secret to decent representation is much smaller and
> regularly shaped electoral districts in which the representative
> is more accountable to the people and much less dependent
> on the party money dispensers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That seems quite plausible. Ok, we see the promised land, or at
least one version of it. Any idea how to get there from here?
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Please do not buy a new car.
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/a8576659714369dc?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 5:03 pm
From: imascot
VFW <georgeswk@toast.net> wrote in news:georgeswk-569885.16501020112009@news.toast.net:
> Dealers give you
> nothing for it. they don't want your trade-in.
Not true. They very much want your trade-in. They won't give you much for it, but they will charge
top dollar when they sell it. If it's ratty, they'll wholesale it to get it off the lot. Dealers typically make
more profit off each used vehicle than they do off new ones. That's why you'll never see a new car
dealer that does not sell used cars, although some only sell their own brand.
J.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: fresh comfortable sneakers
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/47f3b42d85d5a089?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 5:17 pm
From: kukuzone 1
My dear clients,
This is www.kukuzone.com
thank you for your great support for us all the time.
we have a promotion activity,you will get the following discounts:
Please take advantage of this opportunity, we hope you can find a nice
gift for you and your family.Your visit and suggestion to our website
will be appreciated!
Best regards,
Tina
www.kukuzone.com
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Surprise price!!! 2009 Get low price brand fashion handbags(Gucci,Lv,
Chloe,Fendi.-..)at www.ebaychinaonline.com (paypal payment)
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3ad56969f7a54a8f?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 5:59 pm
From: globaltrader
For more information,please contact Sophie,Yahoo:
globaltrader2009@yahoo.com.cn
Minimum order is one,factory price also!Paypal payment free
shipping,ship time will take 4-7 working days.
coach handbags,discount coach handbags,replica coach handbags,fake
coach handbags,cheap coach handbags,coach handbags outlet stores,coach
replica handbags,coach signature knockoff handbags,coach handbags in
china,discounted coach handbags,cheap replica coach handbags,coach op
art handbags,coach handbags on sale,coach poppy patent
handbags,wholesale cheap coach handbags,coach handbags fakes,coach
handbags white,coach handbags wholesale with free shipping,replica
coach,wholesale coach replica handbags,authentic coach handbags,coach
handbags madison op art ikat wristlet,coach handbags sale,coach python
handbags,wholesale coach handbags,blue coach handbags,coach handbags
on sale,cheap replica patchwork coach handbags,cheapest coach
handbags,coach replica handbags,coach handbagscoach handbags for
sale,coach imposter handbags,coach leah handbags,pink coach hobo
handbags,retired coach handbags,westof,coach handbags,wholesale cheap
coach handbags,aaa replica coach handbags,
authentic coach discount handbags,carly coach handbags,coach discount
handbags,coach handbags factory outlet,coach handbags latest
styles,coach handbags that are quilted,coach handbags
wholesale,discount coach ergo style large leather handbags,discounted
authentic coach handbags,fake designer coach handbags,faux coach
handbags,history of coach handbags,leather hampton coach handbags,navy
coach handbags,real coach handbags,suppliers for coach handbags,
coach handbag replicas. www.ebaychinaonline.com
gucci handbags,wholesale gucci handbags,authentic gucci
handbags,discount gucci handbags,
replica gucci handbags,fake gucci handbags,gucci hysteria
handbags,gucci handbags and ugg boots,replica gucci fendi
handbags,louis vuitton & gucci handbags,replica of gucci handbags,
gucci handbags outlet,gucci replica handbags,vintage gucci
handbags,designer handbags gucci,discounted gucci handbags,knock off
gucci handbags,red gucci handbags. www.ebaychinaonline.com
==============================================================================
TOPIC: hot sell copy tous,DB,juicy,guess,burberry handbags
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/88bd607cc50e81a2?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Nov 27 2009 7:36 pm
From: lijie777777
Replica handbags, fruit of designer,match perfect
accessories.Everyday,you can
purchase them as you like,which made in China,without any notification
from
anyone except you and www.bagalibaba. com. You have to acknowledge
that in
China,there is highly skill of imitation.You can inspect your replica
sunglasses
with a magnifirer,you probably find out that we rarely miss every
detail with
artisan's eagle-eyed passion.The key point of our motivation is not
for the
quantity,but the quality.To my happiness,meet our client's
satisfaction is the
best repayment.We aim to offer the popular fashion current and
unbeatable
price,the most important is,the best quality,subsequently,you would
like to
purchase replica sunglasses from us,there seems to be a great
business
relationship. come on guys,welcome to www.bagalibaba.com everything
will be easy.
==============================================================================
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