http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Best debit card rewards? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/b10f1d5c39b674be?hl=en
* 2010$$$$wholesale True Religion shorts for women,paypal payment - 1 messages,
1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/88fb2c4cfe1688ea?hl=en
* Doctor getting kickbacks? - 2 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/faff268312f0b359?hl=en
* What was the point of Jesus riding an ass, looking like an ass? - 2 messages,
2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/f875873bd78921b8?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Best debit card rewards?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/b10f1d5c39b674be?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Apr 17 2010 10:23 pm
From: SMS
On 17/04/10 8:31 PM, laredotornado wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm done a little Googling, but wanted to get some opinions -- what
> kind of rewards do you get for using your bank debit card? At a
> couple of places I shop, they only accept cash or bank debit cards, so
> I'm looking to maximize my rewards by using a debit card.
>
> Thanks, - Dave
The best you can do it so buy prepaid Mastercard debit cards from USAA
with a USAA credit card. You get rewards on the credit card because the
reloading of the prepaid card is treated as a purchase, not a cash
advance (only if you use a USAA credit card to refill it, not any other
card from any other bank).
Since USAA charges no fees on their prepaid cards, and you can get cash
with the debit card at Cardtronics ATMs with no fees, you can earn a lot
of points if you want to go through the trouble, though they might shut
you down if you abuse this.
Unfortunately, USAA has been worsening their credit card offerings
lately. The card I have raised the number of points for a $500 r/t
flight from 25,000 to 30,000 on April 1. You can still get 1% cash
though. This card is no longer offered. The replacement cards are
essentially a 1% reward for airline tickets, and a 0.83% cash reward.
I'm hoping that Schwab continues with their 2% cash back Visa Signature
card, but I'm not confident that they'll keep that program going for
very long.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: 2010$$$$wholesale True Religion shorts for women,paypal payment
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/88fb2c4cfe1688ea?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Apr 17 2010 10:27 pm
From: huangrong
For more information,please contact Sophie,Yahoo:
globaltrader2009@yahoo.net.cn
Minimum order is one,factory price also!Paypal payment free
shipping,ship time will take 4-7 working days.
Jeans: www.shoesdisplay.net
Evisu,True Religion,bape,d&g,artful dodger,red monkey,LRG D&G
jeans,APE jean,BBC jeans,antik jean.RCOWER,ENYCEROCK Jean,Rock
Republic Jeans,DIESEL Jeans,ARMANI Jeans,RMC Jeans,RRTFUL DODGER
Jeans,ANTIK Jeans.
Short: www.shoesdisplay.net
bbc pants,bape pants,red monkey short,evisu short,sport
wear,Socks,BOSS shirt,JUICY short,aff short,a&f shorts,coogi short,ed
hardy short,rmc short,women short,men short,kids short,boss
short,christian audigier short,coach short,gucci short,polo
short,prada short,d&g short,
armani short,ecko short,louis vuitton short,fendi short,versace
short,fashion short.
Woman apparel: Bikini,Juicy T-shirt,ED T-shirt,Juicy Suit.
BAG: www.shoesdisplay.net
Ladies'Handbags shopping bag,louis vuitton,fendi,versace,GUCCI,fashion
bag,LOEUE,D&B,MIUMIU,
JUICY,GUESS,tous,SIMTH,HERMES,MARC,PRADA bag,paper bag,designer
handbags,designer bag,
mulberry bag,Backpacks Luggage,purse,Trolley Bags & Cases Travel Bags
Popular Handbag,
Laides'Fashion Designer Luxurious Leather Brand Name Handbag,coach
purses and coach wallet Authentic replica coach bag,tote bag,plastic
bag,gift bag,travel bag.
all the products listed on our website all are in stock!we have more
in stock Either you are large wholesaler,or small business owner,we
have customized programmers to suit your needs.
Hope sincerely to have glad and long term business relationship with
you.If you are interested in our products and have any problem,welnete
to contact us.we will be honest to answer your all problem.and welnete
to test our honesty Welnete to choose the goods on it.
δΈ‰.
For more information,please contact Sophie,Yahoo:
globaltrader2009@yahoo.net.cn
Minimum order is one,factory price also!Paypal payment free
shipping,ship time will take 4-7 working days.
Discount LV bikini supplier,paypal payment
wholesale Gucci bikini,paypal payment www.shoesdisplay.net
wholesale Dior bikini,paypal payment www.shoesdisplay.net
Discount D&G bikini,paypal payment www.shoesdisplay.net
supply Coach bikini,paypal payment www.shoesdisplay.net
Discount ED Hardy bikini,paypal payment www.shoesdisplay.net
Discount CA bikini wholesaler,paypal payment www.shoesdisplay.net
wholesale Juicy bikini,paypal payment www.shoesdisplay.net
cheap Polo bikini,paypal payment www.shoesdisplay.net
Discount Prada bikini,paypal payment www.shoesdisplay.net
Discount Burberry bikini,paypal payment www.shoesdisplay.net
Discount Roxy bikini,paypal payment www.shoesdisplay.net
supply Billabong bikini,paypal payment www.shoesdisplay.net
Discount AF bikini,paypal payment www.shoesdisplay.net
Discount AF men shorts,paypal payment www.shoesdisplay.net
wholesale af shorts for women,paypal payment www.shoesdisplay.net
Discount ed shorts for women,paypal payment www.shoesdisplay.net
wholesale True Religion shorts for women,paypal payment
Discount Polo shorts for women,paypal payment www.shoesdisplay.net
wholesale ed hardy beach shorts for men,paypal payment
Discount ed hardy swim boxers for men,paypal payment www.shoesdisplay.net
wholesale af beach shorts for women,paypal payment www.shoesdisplay.net
Discount christan audigier beach shorts for women,paypal payment
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Doctor getting kickbacks?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/faff268312f0b359?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Apr 17 2010 10:35 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Gordon Burditt wrote:
>>> It's disgraceful and really not understandable why the courts won't
>>> intervene and stop these practices. If you ask for your car to be
>>> repaired and the garage gives you a quote that's the maximum
>>> they can collect. Why should the human/doctor be any different?
>> Oh, my doc could absolutely give fixed quotes for cash prices for office visits and procedures.
> I doubt it.
Its true anyway.
> There are at least three sets of prices:
And you forgot the most important one in that particular situation.
> 1. The amount the doctor bills the insurance company. This cost is
> pretty much irrelevant to the insured. It could hurt the uninsured a lot.
> 2. The contract amount for the procedure. An in-network doctor can't
> charge more than this amount. This amount gets paid by the insurance
> company and the patient, divided somehow.
> 3. The amount paid by the patient. This can be affected by things
> like how much deductible he hasn't used yet.
4. The amount of cash he will accept for a particular office visit
and proceedure when he has no involvement what so ever with any
insurance company at all, because he is paid in cash by the patient.
> *ALL THREE* of those prices are highly variable depending on your insurance company.
And FOUR involves no insurance company whatever as far as the doctor is concerned.
>> It's what the patient ends up paying after
>> insurance is no guarantee. And I doubt that your local mechanic ever
>> has to tell you what you will end up paying after your insurance
>> company pays. Not only that, but a car has a finite and constantly
>> decreasing value. Can you see some insurance company saying, "I'm
>> sorry, you have maxed out your lifetime benefits for health care and
>> we are 'totalling' you. We will settle your case for $$ and you
>> will have to take care of any further medical costs out of your
>> pocket for the rest of your life; alternatively, if you present to
>> the local euthanasia center for disposal and provide proof, you can
>> get a higher figure for being totalled and disposed of." That
>> sounds pretty immoral and intolerable to me.
> I expect government health care to do just this sort of thing,
It doesnt, most obviously when you end up with
a serious infection as a result of the surgery etc
or when its discovered that you have cancer when
they open you up and it makes sense to remove
the cancer when it has been discovered etc.
> and I expect that it's already being done in some situations,
Yes, when there are no unexpected complications.
> like not giving a 93-year-old man a heart transplant.
That happens with the insurance system too when there
are no suitable donor hearts available and that individual
is well down the queue and gets to die without getting one.
The cost of the medical services that they need before
they end up dead tho cannot be predicted in advance.
No govt operation just decides that an individual is too old to ever
end up with a transplant and so they just yawn and dont provide
any further treatment because the individual will die sometime.
>> And that is why health insurance is so different than medical insurance.
> Would you care to define "health insurance", "medical insurance",
> and state the difference between the two?
>> Now, if health insurance worked like car insurance, then the patient would
>> have to pay the bill and then be reimbursed by the insurance company,
> Some medical services work exactly like that: for example,
> flu shots. You pay for the flu shot, and they give you a
> receipt and YOU file a claim with your insurance company.
Even those dont work like that if you end up with a bad result from the flu shot.
> I've also seen the same thing happen with more expensive procedures
> like a non-routine root canal requiring a specialist. These guys *can*
> give you a (large) price and stick to it. You can talk to your insurance
> company to see how much they will pay.
But that still doesnt cover the situation where you end up with a serious infection.
>> or the insurance company would have a fixed amount they would pay
>> and they could pay it to the insurance company no questions asked.
>> Unfortunately, the doc's office is not allowed to bill the patient
>> until he has first billed the primary insurance, then after the
>> primary insurance has paid he has to bill any secondary insurance
>> (and if the patient messed up on giving the doc's office the proper
>> insurance, that gets all messed up)
> Some medical services decidedly do *NOT* work that way.
> The doctor doesn't communicate with the insurance company.
>> I think that if the insurance companies dealt directly with the
>> patients and just reimbursed the patients for allowable costs
>> instead of the doctors having to fight with them about getting paid,
>> then it wouldn't be quite such a tangled mess for anybody.
> Yes, it would be a tangled mess, with the patient having to pass
> messages between the insurance company and the doctor.
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Apr 17 2010 10:42 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Gordon Burditt wrote:
>>> You're probably correct and this is one of the things the recent
>>> health care reform should have corrected but probably didn't. It's
>>> disgraceful and really not understandable why the courts won't
>>> intervene and stop these practices. If you ask for your car to be
>>> repaired and the garage gives you a quote that's the maximum
>>> they can collect. Why should the human/doctor be any different?
>> Essentially because its nowhere near as easy to predict
>> what total services the individual needs with a serious
>> medical problem, like for example when the individual
>> ends up with a very serious infection that costs a hell
>> of a lot to fix. You dont get anything like that with cars.
> You can get something like that with cars.
Nope, nothing like it. With a car where it turns out that when
the part is removed, its clear that the engine is completely
fucked beyond any possibility of economic repair, they can
always ring you and ask you what you want to do about that,
whether you want to pay for a new engine as well etc.
> For example, you bring in the car, badly overheating, and they
> diagnose it as a cracked radiator, and quote you a (large) price.
> (Up to this point, this really happened. Yes, the crack was real;
> I pointed it out to them.) *LATER*, after they've fixed the radiator,
> they try to test the engine and discover that the block is cracked
> from severe overheating due to the cracked radiator. (What really
> happened here was they tested the engine and decided it wasn't
> harmed by the overheating. Apparently repeatedly stopping and
> refilling the radiator with water helped prevent damage while limping
> home.) They'll stick to their quote on fixing the radiator, but they won't
> include a free replacement engine block in the deal.
And so its not the same thing as when you develope a serious
infection as a RESULT of the surgery and they certainly dont
have the option to just let the individual die when it got infected.
> It isn't that unusual to discover that one part failing
> takes out another part also (on both cars and humans).
Sure, but with the car, you are welcome to decide that the
car is not economic to repair and should be scrapped when
that is discovered. Not too many patients are too keen on
being told that it was discovered that they had cancer when
they were opened up and since that was not included in the
original quote, they didnt bother to do anything about the
cancer they discovered or just yawned and decided that
the individual had passed its useby date and did the
hernia anyway, since the patient had agreed to pay for that.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: What was the point of Jesus riding an ass, looking like an ass?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/f875873bd78921b8?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Apr 17 2010 10:49 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Don Klipstein wrote:
> In article <82vemhFu49U1@mid.individual.net>, 454@1.com wrote:
>> Don Klipstein wrote:
>>> In article <hq9gdq$l0k$2@news.eternal-september.org>, Tom Sherman
>>> °_° wrote:
>>>> On 4/14/2010 12:18 AM, Don Klipstein wrote:
>>>
>>> <In short, expressing strong skepticism of dinosaurs existing and
>>> being alive much more recently than 63-65 million years ago>
>>>
>>>> Some dinosaurs with feathers survived, and their descendants are
>>>> still with us.
>>>
>>> Can you cite what dinosaurs survived to be still with us, along
>>> with citing that such animals are considered dinosaurs as opposed
>>> to some sort of birds or a subclass/super-order/order of mammals
>>> (monotremes)?
>>>
>>> (It appears to me that dinosaurs were either a bird-ish-like
>>> subclass of reptiles, or otherwise achieving a "class" of its own in
>>> the chordate phylum of the animal kingdom.)
>>>
>>> (Wikipedia does mention that there is one "clade" of animals that
>>> evolved directly from dinosaurs, from specifically "theropod"
>>> dinosaurs, and that is the "class" of birds.)
>>> (It does appear to me that mammals evolved from birds,
>>> due to existence of somewhat-birdlike mammals in Australia
>>
>> Which mammals would those be ?
>
> The monotremes. The most widely known example is the duck-billed
> platypus, a monotreme in the "prototheria" subclass of mammals.
They are nothing like a bird. They just evolved a beak, in
the same way that some fish did, like a swordfish etc.
> The other 4 living examples are the three long-beaked
> echidnas and the short-beaked echidna.
They are nothing like birds either. There is no evidence that they evolved from birds.
And other australian mammals did not evolve from them either.
>>> where evolution appears to
>>> me to have often progressed more slowly while Australia was an
>>> "island" isolated from other continents that Australia longer-ago
>>> was connected to with land routes.)
>>
>> That lack of a connection happened long before any of that level of
>> evolution.
>
> Australia separated from the southern supercontinent Gondwana about
> 96 million years ago.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_(continent)
Have fun explaining the humans there.
> Marsupial mammals were in existence in the early Cretaceous period
> (as in closer to 145.5 million years ago than to 65.5 million years
> ago).
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous
>
> It is currently thought that marsupial and placental mammals resulted
> from a branching in mammal evolution later than one that resulted in
> modern monotremes including the duck-billed platypus and long-beaked
> echidnas.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotremata
>
> That same article says that even placental mammals were in existence
> in the late Cretaceous period. However, eutherian mammals (includes
> placentals and extinct mammals more like placentals than marsupials)
> were noted to exist as long as 125 million years ago. Placental
> mammals came into existence more than 105 million years ago and had
> divided into 3 divisions of some sort by 100 million years ago.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placentals
>
> The oldest known momotreme specimen was dated to 123 million years
> ago, though there is thought that they first came into existence in
> the early Cretaceous period (more recently than 145.5 million years
> ago) or even the late Jurassic period (longer ago than 145.5 million
> years).
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotremata
>
> - Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Apr 17 2010 11:22 pm
From: "454" <454@1.com>
Don Klipstein wrote:
> In article <82vemhFu49U1@mid.individual.net>, 454@1.com wrote:
>> Don Klipstein wrote:
>>> In article <hq9gdq$l0k$2@news.eternal-september.org>, Tom Sherman
>>> °_° wrote:
>>>> On 4/14/2010 12:18 AM, Don Klipstein wrote:
>>>
>>> <In short, expressing strong skepticism of dinosaurs existing and
>>> being alive much more recently than 63-65 million years ago>
>>>
>>>> Some dinosaurs with feathers survived, and their descendants are
>>>> still with us.
>>>
>>> Can you cite what dinosaurs survived to be still with us, along
>>> with citing that such animals are considered dinosaurs as opposed
>>> to some sort of birds or a subclass/super-order/order of mammals
>>> (monotremes)?
>>>
>>> (It appears to me that dinosaurs were either a bird-ish-like
>>> subclass of reptiles, or otherwise achieving a "class" of its own in
>>> the chordate phylum of the animal kingdom.)
>>>
>>> (Wikipedia does mention that there is one "clade" of animals that
>>> evolved directly from dinosaurs, from specifically "theropod"
>>> dinosaurs, and that is the "class" of birds.)
>>> (It does appear to me that mammals evolved from birds,
>>> due to existence of somewhat-birdlike mammals in Australia
>>
>> Which mammals would those be ?
>
> The monotremes. The most widely known example is the duck-billed
> platypus, a monotreme in the "prototheria" subclass of mammals.
They are nothing like a bird. They just evolved a beak,
in the same way that some fish did, like a swordfish etc.
And plenty of reptiles have eggs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platypus#Evolution
does not say that they evolved from birds.
> The other 4 living examples are the three long-beaked
> echidnas and the short-beaked echidna.
They are nothing like birds either. There is no evidence that they evolved from birds.
And other australian mammals did not evolve from them either.
>>> where evolution appears to
>>> me to have often progressed more slowly while Australia was an
>>> "island" isolated from other continents that Australia longer-ago
>>> was connected to with land routes.)
>>
>> That lack of a connection happened long before any of that level of
>> evolution.
>
> Australia separated from the southern supercontinent Gondwana about
> 96 million years ago.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_(continent)
Have fun explaining the humans there.
> Marsupial mammals were in existence in the early Cretaceous period
> (as in closer to 145.5 million years ago than to 65.5 million years
> ago).
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous
>
> It is currently thought that marsupial and placental mammals resulted
> from a branching in mammal evolution later than one that resulted in
> modern monotremes including the duck-billed platypus and long-beaked
> echidnas.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotremata
>
> That same article says that even placental mammals were in existence
> in the late Cretaceous period. However, eutherian mammals (includes
> placentals and extinct mammals more like placentals than marsupials)
> were noted to exist as long as 125 million years ago. Placental
> mammals came into existence more than 105 million years ago and had
> divided into 3 divisions of some sort by 100 million years ago.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placentals
>
> The oldest known momotreme specimen was dated to 123 million years
> ago, though there is thought that they first came into existence in
> the early Cretaceous period (more recently than 145.5 million years
> ago) or even the late Jurassic period (longer ago than 145.5 million
> years).
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotremata
>
> - Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
==============================================================================
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