Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
General Cooking (rec.food.cooking) For general food and cooking discussion. Foods of all kinds, food procurement, cooking methods and techniques, eating, etc. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Omelet" > wrote in message news ![]() > In article >, > Lou Decruss > wrote: > >> On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 22:08:08 GMT, Blair P. Houghton > wrote: >> >> >> >>True dat. One of the questions I get asked every year when renewing my >> >>home owners insurance is whether or not I have a fire place. >> > >> >I haven't talked to my homeowners' underwriter in 15 years. >> >> You should at least talk to the agent. You might be under insured by >> now if your house has appreciated. >> >> Lou > > We discuss it each year as property value (and property taxes) go up. > -- > Peace, Om We have three fireplaces in our house -- we closed them up. Then each assessment we had another consultation about the pool; they had to tax us more on the fence around it -- we finally took the pool out last summer-fall, which cost more than the pool itself, I believe. What a horrendous job. We took down the pool fence; now we will have to go back (no doubt) and consult about the fence. We've only had one amount come off for all these consultations. It's a good thing we didn't have to pay a lawyer to consult. We appealed one or two times, but it didn't work. One biggie about a fireplace where we live is that we're in the country; the fire department is volunteer and water is not available; when we said that they could pump it from the pool, that was dismissed. So the tax assessment and insurance assessment is considerable even for those who live rural. Can't get away from taxes. Dee Dee |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article >,
Blair P. Houghton > wrote: > Lou Decruss > wrote: > >On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 22:08:08 GMT, Blair P. Houghton > wrote: > >>I haven't talked to my homeowners' underwriter in 15 years. > > > >You should at least talk to the agent. You might be under insured by > >now if your house has appreciated. > > The escrow handles it. Probably got revised when I refinanced > a few years ago. If the escrow account is handled by the institution that holds your mortgage, all they care about is whether the insurance covers what you owe, which probably is even less than what was refinanced. |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jul 28, 6:09 pm, Omelet > wrote:
> In article >, > Blair P. Houghton > wrote: > > > > > Omelet > wrote: > > > Blair P. Houghton > wrote: > > >> If you don't want to taste those little ribbons of > > >> fat, don't waste money buying them and then cooking > > >> them out. > > > >Ooh, but them melting all over the beef spreads the flavor around!!! > > >Acts as internal basting. ;-d The flavor does not go away just 'cause > > >the fat melts. > > > I was kind of under the impression that beef was > > beef-flavored all the way through in the first place... > > > That much fat is overkill for spreading flavor. The cool > > ribbons provide a texture and a flavor pattern. Melted fat > > just coats your tongue and keeps it off the meat. > > > --Blair > > Fat can be cooked without melting it out of the ribbons. > > I cannot stand cold raw beef fat. It's just gross. I don't think it's gross, just unappealing in large slabs. > > Those rib eyes I did the other day were cool pink in the middle but the > fat was crispy on the outside and soft on the inside. Perfect! > I think that you both make good points. I like ribeyes significantly more done than loin cuts. I love crispy fat, and like to trim steaks to get crispy fat while avoiding big slabs of fat. Loin gets Pittsburghed. Rib gets cooked med rare, and I cut away the fat on the plate. I seldom buy rib, but that's a personal preference. > -- > Peace, Om --Bryan |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article .com>,
Bobo Bonobo(R) > wrote: > On Jul 28, 6:09 pm, Omelet > wrote: > > In article >, > > Blair P. Houghton > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Omelet > wrote: > > > > Blair P. Houghton > wrote: > > > >> If you don't want to taste those little ribbons of > > > >> fat, don't waste money buying them and then cooking > > > >> them out. > > > > > >Ooh, but them melting all over the beef spreads the flavor around!!! > > > >Acts as internal basting. ;-d The flavor does not go away just 'cause > > > >the fat melts. > > > > > I was kind of under the impression that beef was > > > beef-flavored all the way through in the first place... > > > > > That much fat is overkill for spreading flavor. The cool > > > ribbons provide a texture and a flavor pattern. Melted fat > > > just coats your tongue and keeps it off the meat. > > > > > --Blair > > > > Fat can be cooked without melting it out of the ribbons. > > > > I cannot stand cold raw beef fat. It's just gross. > > I don't think it's gross, just unappealing in large slabs. > > > > Those rib eyes I did the other day were cool pink in the middle but the > > fat was crispy on the outside and soft on the inside. Perfect! > > > I think that you both make good points. I like ribeyes significantly > more done than loin cuts. I love crispy fat, and like to trim steaks > to get crispy fat while avoiding big slabs of fat. Loin gets > Pittsburghed. Rib gets cooked med rare, and I cut away the fat on the > plate. I seldom buy rib, but that's a personal preference. > > > -- > > Peace, Om > > --Bryan So do you ever eat raw beef? -- Peace, Om Remove _ to validate e-mails. "My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 19:26:26 -0700, Dan Abel > wrote:
>In article >, > Blair P. Houghton > wrote: > >> Lou Decruss > wrote: >> >On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 22:08:08 GMT, Blair P. Houghton > wrote: >> >>I haven't talked to my homeowners' underwriter in 15 years. >> > >> >You should at least talk to the agent. You might be under insured by >> >now if your house has appreciated. >> >> The escrow handles it. Probably got revised when I refinanced >> a few years ago. > > >If the escrow account is handled by the institution that holds your >mortgage, all they care about is whether the insurance covers what you >owe, which probably is even less than what was refinanced. They also don't care about contents. Most people in the age range this group seems to be, have far more than they did 15 years ago. I was a few years out of a nasty divorce and I didn't have much. My kitchen could have been replaced for a few hundred dollars. It would be a minimum of 5 grand now. A meager wardrobe is 5 grand. I'm not going to go count pots, pans, knives and my clothes, but my initial insurance after my divorce wouldn't even be 10% of what I'd need to replace what I have now. Lou |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Lou Decruss > wrote:
>On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 19:26:26 -0700, Dan Abel > wrote: >>If the escrow account is handled by the institution that holds your >>mortgage, all they care about is whether the insurance covers what you >>owe, which probably is even less than what was refinanced. > >They also don't care about contents. Most people in the age range >this group seems to be, have far more than they did 15 years ago. I >was a few years out of a nasty divorce and I didn't have much. My >kitchen could have been replaced for a few hundred dollars. It would >be a minimum of 5 grand now. A meager wardrobe is 5 grand. I'm not >going to go count pots, pans, knives and my clothes, but my initial >insurance after my divorce wouldn't even be 10% of what I'd need to >replace what I have now. My current personal attitude towards excess insurance is that actuarially it's cheaper for me to "self-insure" than to give profits to the insurance companies. I.e., I'm betting that I won't need it, rather than guaranteeing that I'll pay more than that over time. And if I do need it, I'll have the cash I saved from not paying premiums to pay for it. --Blair |
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Blair P. Houghton" > wrote > My current personal attitude towards excess insurance > is that actuarially it's cheaper for me to "self-insure" > than to give profits to the insurance companies. > > I.e., I'm betting that I won't need it, rather than > guaranteeing that I'll pay more than that over time. > And if I do need it, I'll have the cash I saved from > not paying premiums to pay for it. Absolutely. You can save a ton of money if you think of insurance as for catastrophes. If you can, save up enough cash to cover a high deductible, and hope you never need to use it. If you want a payout every time you visit a doctor or a tree topples over in your yard, you're going to pay big. nancy |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Rare Cooking | General Cooking | |||
Redigaffi 2000 100Rp RARE..RARE wine | Wine | |||
Rare Day Off | General Cooking |