http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Delivered unsafe item damaged me - 7 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3012e11d0875cc7d?hl=en
* walking boots-- which are good? - 2 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/52b4735386145e8e?hl=en
* Do you too see the connection b/ wasting energy and terrorism? - 4 messages,
4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/510b0bf3b79b779e?hl=en
* Jungle Wisdom to survive in a Christian Jungle - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3e519b849c24c341?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Delivered unsafe item damaged me
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3012e11d0875cc7d?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 2:20 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Ste wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>>> re: "The packaging being complained of is intended for
>>> opening by professional tradesmen. Not unskilled amateurs."
>>> Again, I beg to differ. Packaging isn't "intended" to be opened by
>>> people of a certain occupation. It's intended to protect an item
>>> during shipping/storage.
>>> If the item in question should never have been (to use your word)
>>> "handled" by the consumer, then it should have been a "controlled
>>> substance" and he shouldn't have been able to buy it without a
>>> license or proof of training.
>> Thats wrong too, most obviously with yorkshire fittings.
>> They arent legal to use by ordinary consumers who arent legally
>> allowed to do their own plumbing but are sold freely anyway.
> Are you joking sarcastically,
Nope.
> or are you just talking completely out of your arse?
Nope, talking about the situation in some jurisdictions.
== 2 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 5:11 pm
From: Ste
On 24 Feb, 19:21, Skippy <cobbl...@invalid.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 10:50:18 -0800 (PST), Ste <ste_ro...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On 24 Feb, 18:40, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > re: "The packaging being complained of is intended for
> >> > opening by professional tradesmen. Not unskilled amateurs."
> >> > Again, I beg to differ. Packaging isn't "intended" to be opened by
> >> > people of a certain occupation. It's intended to protect an item
> >> > during shipping/storage.
> >> > If the item in question should never have been (to use your word)
> >> > "handled" by the consumer, then it should have been a "controlled
> >> > substance" and he shouldn't have been able to buy it without a license
> >> > or proof of training.
>
> >> Thats wrong too, most obviously with yorkshire fittings.
>
> >> They arent legal to use by ordinary consumers who arent legally
> >> allowed to do their own plumbing but are sold freely anyway.
>
> >Are you joking sarcastically, or are you just talking completely out
> >of your arse?
>
> The fuckwit lives in australia where they are considered too stupid to
> do their own plumbing or electrics
Ah, my apologies to him then. Here in the UK, there are no
restrictions on gas fitting in one's own home, except that the work
must be performed "competently".
== 3 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 6:54 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Ste wrote
> Skippy <cobbl...@invalid.com> wrote
>> Ste <ste_ro...@hotmail.com> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>> re: "The packaging being complained of is intended for
>>>>> opening by professional tradesmen. Not unskilled amateurs."
>>>>> Again, I beg to differ. Packaging isn't "intended" to be opened by
>>>>> people of a certain occupation. It's intended to protect an item
>>>>> during shipping/storage.
>>>>> If the item in question should never have been (to use your word)
>>>>> "handled" by the consumer, then it should have been a "controlled
>>>>> substance" and he shouldn't have been able to buy it without a
>>>>> license or proof of training.
>>>> Thats wrong too, most obviously with yorkshire fittings.
>>>> They arent legal to use by ordinary consumers who arent legally
>>>> allowed to do their own plumbing but are sold freely anyway.
>>> Are you joking sarcastically, or are you just talking completely out of your arse?
>> The fuckwit lives in australia where they are considered
>> too stupid to do their own plumbing or electrics
> Ah, my apologies to him then. Here in the UK, there are
> no restrictions on gas fitting in one's own home, except
> that the work must be performed "competently".
We arent even allowed to change the tap washer in some
states, let alone install the plumbing or do the electrical wiring.
Corse everyone ignores the ban on changing the tap washer.
== 4 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 7:32 pm
From: DerbyDad03
On Feb 24, 1:40 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> DerbyDad03 wrote:
> > On Feb 23, 11:58 am, "michael adams" <mjadam...@onetel.net.uk> wrote:
> >> "DerbyDad03" <teamarr...@eznet.net> wrote in message
>
> >>news:626fc5ae-49be-43b9-9b3c-cbbf04e39566@n5g2000vbq.googlegroups.com...
> >> On Feb 23, 7:22 am, "michael adams" <mjadam...@onetel.net.uk> wrote:
>
> >>> "Toom Tabard" <t...@tabard.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
>
> >>>news:6bda30bf-3abb-4c76-8dac-7adf26c628ce@g19g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
>
> >>>> Total nonsense - in an item supplied to a consumer,
>
> >>> Regardless of who its supplied to, consumers don't ever get to
> >>> handle gas hobs because. they normally give the job to a fitter
> >>> or similar professional.
>
> >>> An experienced fitter wouldn't have cut his hand in this way.
> >>> But then an experienced fitter would have cost money.
>
> >>> The OP can't have it both ways. Either he's a consumer in which
> >>> case he gives the job to someone who can handle it, or he's a
> >>> fitter in which case he wouldn't have cut his hand.
>
> >>> Had this been a saucepan being talked about then that would
> >>> be an entirely different thing.
>
> >>> michael adams
>
> >>> ...
> >>> re: Either he's a consumer in which case he gives the job to someone
> >>> who can handle it, or he's a fitter in which case he wouldn't have
> >>> cut his hand."
> >>> What?
>
> >> ...
>
> >> In the UK at least a "fitter" is a name given to professional
> >> installers
> >> of all sorts of things. Kitchen fitter, motor fitter, electrical
> >> fitter
> >> etc etc.
>
> >> Not just simply to someone who "fits" things.
>
> >> A professional fitter might reasonably be expected to have the
> >> experience to forstall such problems.
>
> >> The packaging being complained of is intended for opening by
> >> professional tradesmen. Not unskilled amateurs.
>
> >> "Unskilled" if only in the sense that when they cut their little
> >> "handies" as a result of not using a box-cutter, the correct tool
> >> for the job, they then start to blub like little children. And start
> >> demanding that the "naughty man" should be made to pay money to
> >> Charity "cos they hurted demselves"
>
> >> Yeah right! Like that's gonna happen !
>
> >> HTH
>
> >> michael adams
>
> >> posting on uk.people.consumers
>
> >> ....
>
> >>> You don't truly believe that a "consumer" can't be a "fitter" do
> >>> you? I guess I shouldn't have put in my own windows or doors or bath
> >>> fixtures or water heater or stove or deck or any of the other things
> >>> I've "fitted" into my house.
> >>> After all, I'm just a consumer and "can't handle it".
> >>> I'm not defending the OP...I'm not even talking about the OP. I'm
> >>> only responding to your claim that a consumer can't also be the
> >>> fitter.
>
> > re: "In the UK at least a "fitter" is a name given to professional
> > installers of all sorts of things."
>
> > I know what you meant by a "fitter".
>
> > However, I still don't agree with your point that a consumer should
> > never handle a gas hob.
>
> > Using US terminology, I'm not a "contractor" but I bought all of my
> > windows and doors from a "contractor's supply house".
>
> > They weren't packaged any differently than the windows and doors you'd
> > buy from a "consumer's supply house"
>
> Plenty of other stuff is tho, most obviously with yorkshire fittings for copper plumbing etc.
Is that just a casual observation or were you trying to make a point?
>
> > I'm not a plumber, but I bought my fixtures at a plumbing
> > supply house. They weren't packaged any differently than
> > the fixtures at the big box stores, where "consumer's" shop.
>
> Bet the yorkshire fittings were. Mine are loose in bins etc.
>
> Same with taps etc too.
Again...Your point?
>
> > re: "The packaging being complained of is intended for
> > opening by professional tradesmen. Not unskilled amateurs."
> > Again, I beg to differ. Packaging isn't "intended" to be opened by
> > people of a certain occupation. It's intended to protect an item
> > during shipping/storage.
> > If the item in question should never have been (to use your word)
> > "handled" by the consumer, then it should have been a "controlled
> > substance" and he shouldn't have been able to buy it without a license
> > or proof of training.
>
> Thats wrong too, most obviously with yorkshire fittings.
The word "too" implies that what I said earlier was wrong. It wasn't.
The products I mentioned earlier were not packed any differently at
the contractor/plumbing supply houses than at the borgs.
>
> They arent legal to use by ordinary consumers who arent legally
> allowed to do their own plumbing but are sold freely anyway.
I do believe the word I (and Toom) used was "handled". Is there a
legal restriction against "handling" the products in question?
>
> Same with GPOs etc too, they arent legally usable by the consumer either.
*handled* my friend, *handled*.
>
> > Absent those restrictions, anyone, consumer or
> > professional, is allowed to "handle" the product and it's their
> > responsibility to take the proper precautions when doing so.
== 5 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 7:55 pm
From: krw
On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 13:54:32 +1100, "Rod Speed"
<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>Ste wrote
>> Skippy <cobbl...@invalid.com> wrote
>>> Ste <ste_ro...@hotmail.com> wrote
>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>
>>>>>> re: "The packaging being complained of is intended for
>>>>>> opening by professional tradesmen. Not unskilled amateurs."
>>>>>> Again, I beg to differ. Packaging isn't "intended" to be opened by
>>>>>> people of a certain occupation. It's intended to protect an item
>>>>>> during shipping/storage.
>>>>>> If the item in question should never have been (to use your word)
>>>>>> "handled" by the consumer, then it should have been a "controlled
>>>>>> substance" and he shouldn't have been able to buy it without a
>>>>>> license or proof of training.
>
>>>>> Thats wrong too, most obviously with yorkshire fittings.
>
>>>>> They arent legal to use by ordinary consumers who arent legally
>>>>> allowed to do their own plumbing but are sold freely anyway.
>
>>>> Are you joking sarcastically, or are you just talking completely out of your arse?
>
>>> The fuckwit lives in australia where they are considered
>>> too stupid to do their own plumbing or electrics
>
>> Ah, my apologies to him then. Here in the UK, there are
>> no restrictions on gas fitting in one's own home, except
>> that the work must be performed "competently".
>
>We arent even allowed to change the tap washer in some
>states, let alone install the plumbing or do the electrical wiring.
Bullshit.
>Corse everyone ignores the ban on changing the tap washer.
Course everyone should ignore Ronnie Reaugh.
== 6 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 10:18 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
DerbyDad03 wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>> DerbyDad03 wrote
>>> michael adams <mjadam...@onetel.net.uk> wrote
>>>> DerbyDad03 <teamarr...@eznet.net> wrote
>>>> michael adams <mjadam...@onetel.net.uk> wrote
>>>>> Toom Tabard <t...@tabard.freeserve.co.uk> wrote
>>>>>> Total nonsense - in an item supplied to a consumer,
>>>>> Regardless of who its supplied to, consumers don't ever get to
>>>>> handle gas hobs because. they normally give the job to a fitter
>>>>> or similar professional.
>>>>> An experienced fitter wouldn't have cut his hand in this way.
>>>>> But then an experienced fitter would have cost money.
>>>>> The OP can't have it both ways. Either he's a consumer in which
>>>>> case he gives the job to someone who can handle it, or he's a
>>>>> fitter in which case he wouldn't have cut his hand.
>>>>> Had this been a saucepan being talked about then that would
>>>>> be an entirely different thing.
>>>>> re: Either he's a consumer in which case he gives the job to
>>>>> someone who can handle it, or he's a fitter in which case he
>>>>> wouldn't have cut his hand."
>>>>> What?
>>>> In the UK at least a "fitter" is a name given to professional installers
>>>> of all sorts of things. Kitchen fitter, motor fitter, electrical fitter etc etc.
>>>> Not just simply to someone who "fits" things.
>>>> A professional fitter might reasonably be expected to have the
>>>> experience to forstall such problems.
>>>> The packaging being complained of is intended for opening by
>>>> professional tradesmen. Not unskilled amateurs.
>>>> "Unskilled" if only in the sense that when they cut their little
>>>> "handies" as a result of not using a box-cutter, the correct tool
>>>> for the job, they then start to blub like little children. And
>>>> start demanding that the "naughty man" should be made to pay money
>>>> to Charity "cos they hurted demselves"
>>>> Yeah right! Like that's gonna happen !
>>>>> You don't truly believe that a "consumer" can't be a "fitter" do
>>>>> you? I guess I shouldn't have put in my own windows or doors or
>>>>> bath fixtures or water heater or stove or deck or any of the
>>>>> other things I've "fitted" into my house.
>>>>> After all, I'm just a consumer and "can't handle it".
>>>>> I'm not defending the OP...I'm not even talking about the OP. I'm
>>>>> only responding to your claim that a consumer can't also be the fitter.
>>> re: "In the UK at least a "fitter" is a name given to professional
>>> installers of all sorts of things."
>>> I know what you meant by a "fitter".
>>> However, I still don't agree with your point that a consumer should
>>> never handle a gas hob.
>>> Using US terminology, I'm not a "contractor" but I bought all
>>> of my windows and doors from a "contractor's supply house".
>>> They weren't packaged any differently than the windows
>>> and doors you'd buy from a "consumer's supply house"
>> Plenty of other stuff is tho, most obviously with yorkshire fittings for copper plumbing etc.
> Is that just a casual observation
Nope.
> or were you trying to make a point?
I succeeded in making a point, even if you are too stupid to have noticed.
The point is that the packaging with stuff from contractors
supply houses can be very different to the packaging for retail.
>>> I'm not a plumber, but I bought my fixtures at a plumbing
>>> supply house. They weren't packaged any differently than
>>> the fixtures at the big box stores, where "consumer's" shop.
>> Bet the yorkshire fittings were. Mine are loose in bins etc.
>> Same with taps etc too.
> Again...Your point?
See above.
>>> re: "The packaging being complained of is intended for
>>> opening by professional tradesmen. Not unskilled amateurs."
>>> Again, I beg to differ. Packaging isn't "intended" to be opened by
>>> people of a certain occupation. It's intended to protect an item
>>> during shipping/storage.
>>> If the item in question should never have been (to use your word)
>>> "handled" by the consumer, then it should have been a "controlled
>>> substance" and he shouldn't have been able to buy it without a
>>> license or proof of training.
>> Thats wrong too, most obviously with yorkshire fittings.
> The word "too" implies that what I said earlier was wrong. It wasn't.
It was.
> The products I mentioned earlier were not packed any differently
> at the contractor/plumbing supply houses than at the borgs.
Pity about other stuff that is.
>> They arent legal to use by ordinary consumers who arent legally
>> allowed to do their own plumbing but are sold freely anyway.
> I do believe the word I (and Toom) used was "handled".
Irrelevant to your stupid claim about packaging.
> Is there a legal restriction against "handling" the products in question?
Irrelevant to whether its legal for the consumer to use.
>> Same with GPOs etc too, they arent legally usable by the consumer either.
> *handled* my friend, *handled*.
Use, no friend of mine, use.
>>> Absent those restrictions, anyone, consumer or
>>> professional, is allowed to "handle" the product and it's their
>>> responsibility to take the proper precautions when doing so.
== 7 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 10:19 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
krw wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 13:54:32 +1100, "Rod Speed"
> <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Ste wrote
>>> Skippy <cobbl...@invalid.com> wrote
>>>> Ste <ste_ro...@hotmail.com> wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>>
>>>>>>> re: "The packaging being complained of is intended for
>>>>>>> opening by professional tradesmen. Not unskilled amateurs."
>>>>>>> Again, I beg to differ. Packaging isn't "intended" to be opened
>>>>>>> by people of a certain occupation. It's intended to protect an
>>>>>>> item during shipping/storage.
>>>>>>> If the item in question should never have been (to use your
>>>>>>> word) "handled" by the consumer, then it should have been a
>>>>>>> "controlled substance" and he shouldn't have been able to buy
>>>>>>> it without a license or proof of training.
>>
>>>>>> Thats wrong too, most obviously with yorkshire fittings.
>>
>>>>>> They arent legal to use by ordinary consumers who arent legally
>>>>>> allowed to do their own plumbing but are sold freely anyway.
>>
>>>>> Are you joking sarcastically, or are you just talking completely
>>>>> out of your arse?
>>
>>>> The fuckwit lives in australia where they are considered
>>>> too stupid to do their own plumbing or electrics
>>
>>> Ah, my apologies to him then. Here in the UK, there are
>>> no restrictions on gas fitting in one's own home, except
>>> that the work must be performed "competently".
>> We arent even allowed to change the tap washer in some
>> states, let alone install the plumbing or do the electrical wiring.
> Bullshit.
Fact.
>> Corse everyone ignores the ban on changing the tap washer.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: walking boots-- which are good?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/52b4735386145e8e?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 2:27 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
SMS wrote:
> Phil Cook wrote:
>
>> What everybody agrees upon, experts and laymen alike, is that boots
>> or shoes that start uncomfortable will never become comfortable.
>> Fit, fit and fit are the important things, all else is supplementary.
> If the boots are full-grain leather then there can be a break-in period where they become more comfortable.
There can indeed and that does in fact happen routinely.
And it doesnt have to be 'full-grain' leather either.
> But for cheaper boots of nubuck, suede, or fabric, they probably won't become more comfortable than they are at the
> time of purchase.
Suede does too, its leather with the best of them.
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 2:44 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Michael Black wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>>> What everybody agrees upon, experts and laymen alike, is that boots
>>> or shoes that start uncomfortable will never become comfortable.
>> That is just plain wrong. One pair I got was a bit tight across
>> the top of the foot with one foot, and the wore in fine.
>> The reason I persisted with them was because I got that pair
>> for free as a warranty claim when the soles split and I got the
>> exchange by mail in and I didnt get to try them on.
> But that's a different case.
No its not with his silly claim that they will never become comfortable.
> A shoe or boot, you don't have the option of taking back once you've actually used them.
That varys, some do allow a return if you arent completely happy with them.
But I wasnt even talking about using them, I tried them on,
found they were a bit tight across the top of the foot, decided
that given how much effort it had taking to get them replaced
the first time around, it wasnt worth the hassle to get them
replaced again, and so decided to see how they would
wear in and found that they did wear in fine.
The original exchange was quite complicated. I had originally
bought them and then found that the soles were too deeply
patterned and that too deep pattern ended up with mud in
the patterning and was a pain to use for that reason.
I just didnt wear them, use different boots with a better sole
that did not have that problem. When those wore out, I then
went back to the originals and discovered that the soles had
split and come apart etc. That was something like 30 years
after I had bought them and I couldnt even remember where
I had bought them from so I couldnt return them to where I
had bought them from. So I returned them to the manufacturer.
They tried to fob me off because they had not made
them for a considerable time by the time I returned them.
Since I had never worn them for more than a few days,
I wasnt happy with that and they were stupid enough to
have their MD named on their web site, so I rang him up
and chewed his ear about them. He initially just ran the
same line, but I wasnt going to accept that and kept
telling him that other boots from that time from other
manufacturers had not had that sole decomposition
and that since I had not worn them in that time because
of the mud problem, that he should replace them.
He did eventually agree with me, likely to just get rid of me.
So when the replacements were a bit tight on one foot,
I decided that it wasnt worth the hassle and expense
of returning the replacements, so decided to see how
they went since they were free anyway, and they turned
out fine and in fact are by far the most comfortable boots
I have ever had once they wore in.
These are elastic sided leather boots that I wear all
the time except in summer when I wear what we call
thongs and you barbarians call flip flops as I recall.
> So the best you can do is take them home, wear them inside to get a feel for them, and then take them back if they
> don't fit.
Thats what I basically did, but it wasnt practical to return them.
> Once you wear them outside, they are actually used and I doubt many companies will take them back.
A few do and state that explicitly. Corse they are the most expensive too.
> If you have nothing to lose, you might as well persist.
Yes, thats what I did, and proved that he is just plain wrong.
> But if you have doubts, then the time to deal with it is before you irreversibly wear them outside. They may improve
> with time, but if they don't, you are stuck with boots that you can't take back.
Sure, but with that particular imperfect fit, with
real leather, they likely will fit fine over time.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Do you too see the connection b/ wasting energy and terrorism?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/510b0bf3b79b779e?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 3:55 pm
From: TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
On Feb 24, 2:00 pm, Peter Franks <n...@none.com> wrote:
> TheTibetanMonkey wrote:
> > On Feb 24, 1:16 pm, Jack <furgfurgf...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On Feb 24, 3:48 pm, TheTibetanMonkey > > > > Are you a terrorist?
>
> >>>>> ARE YOU A TERRORIST?
>
> >>> I neither play with bombs nor do I drive an SUV, so the answer in "NO!"-
>
> >> whatever that means-
>
> > It means they are both terrorists. SUVs terrorize me on my bicycle,
>
> Yes, that is right. The evil white man and his SUV carbon machine of
> destruction is part of a huge conspiracy against you and your precious
> bicycle.
According to you... Me and my bike are a conspiracy against the raging
machine.
>
> > thus I remain in my cage.
>
> That probably best for everyone. Thanks.
So I can share my enlightenment in the Internet.
== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 5:49 pm
From: Ron Wallenfang
Do I see a connection between wasting energy and terrorism?
Not really. Today's terrorism is mainly a function of radical Islam's
drive to dominate the entire world.
== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 7:55 pm
From: TheTibetanMonkey
On Feb 24, 5:49 pm, Ron Wallenfang <rwallenf...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
> Do I see a connection between wasting energy and terrorism?
>
> Not really. Today's terrorism is mainly a function of radical Islam's
> drive to dominate the entire world.
Vs. the American will to control its resources.
== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 9:03 pm
From: Tom Sherman °_°
Ron Wallenfang wrote:
> Do I see a connection between wasting energy and terrorism?
>
> Not really. Today's terrorism is mainly a function of radical Islam's
> drive to dominate the entire world.
Today's terrorism is mainly performed by government forces and
government backed paramilitaries to back multi-national corporate
neo-colonialism. The NGO terrorists are mainly those fighting back.
--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
"After all, people in the Middle East already know how
Palestinians have been mistreated for decades; how Washington
has propped up Arab dictatorships; how Muslims have been locked
away at Guantanamo without charges; how the U.S. military has
killed civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere; how U.S.
mercenaries have escaped punishment for slaughtering innocents."
- Retired CIA Intelligence Officer Ray McGovern
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Jungle Wisdom to survive in a Christian Jungle
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3e519b849c24c341?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Feb 24 2010 4:54 pm
From: TheTibetanMonkey
Where water is recklessly polluted and then they sell you bottled
water, you must seek answers among the free stuff in life... THE SUN &
THE MOON.
The air is free too, but it's also polluted.
I say we must go to the sources of energy, and go out to the great
outdoors whenever possible. Of course, bring your own peanuts and
water.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE WISE TIBETAN MONKEY FROM THE JUNGLE SAYS:
"Try not to be part of the part of the BIG FOOD CHAIN without going
hungry"
http://webspawner.com/users/BANANAREVOLUTION
==============================================================================
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