On May 18, 9:06*am, keith > wrote:
> On May 17, 6:49*pm, "Bob F" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > keith wrote:
> > >>>>>> As I re-plumb my house, I have added a recirculation pump and
> > >>>>>> extra return line. If I'm going to want hot water, I push a
> > >>>>>> button, and 30 seconds later (or less) I can turn on the hot and
> > >>>>>> have it hot in 2 seconds.
>
> > >>>>> At the cost of twice as much wasted hot water. I understand how a
> > >>>>> recirculation pump works. How's this magic manifold work?
>
> > >>>> At the cost of no wasted hot water, in fact no wasted $.017/gallon
> > >>>> water. I don't have a clue what the "magic manifold" you speak of
> > >>>> is.
>
> > >>> When you turn off the hot water you now have twice as much "waste"
> > >>> hot water in the lines. Read the thread.
>
> > >> No, I don't. The pump turns off before the return pipe is filled.
> > >> And I haven't dumped the water in the pipe down the drain waiting
> > >> for it to get hot. Try thinking.
>
> > > Baloney. *The water won't be up to temperature that quickly. *Truy not
> > > to make crap up.
>
> > I only did it. That is the result. Where does your expert opinion come from?
>
> Experience and common sense. *Water doesn't change temperuature
> instantaneously. *To get hot water you have to recycle until it's
> hot. *There will be hot water in the return line.
>
> > It works just like running the water to get hot water, but the water goes back
> > to the heater instead of down the drain. It isn't rocket science.
>
> ...and that water in the return line never gets hot? *...or it never
> cools off? *You're FOS

Well, look at it this way:

The water in the return line is probably close to room temperature.
He only
has to heat it from room temperature to his target temperature. If
he was pulling in cold water from underground, his heater would have a
lot more work to do. Yes, there are losses when he's done using hot
water, but probably not as great as the usage from heating up all of
that
40 F water.

On May 18, 8:18*am, Cindy Hamilton >
wrote:
> On May 18, 9:06*am, keith > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 17, 6:49*pm, "Bob F" > wrote:
>
> > > keith wrote:
> > > >>>>>> As I re-plumb my house, I have added a recirculation pump and
> > > >>>>>> extra return line. If I'm going to want hot water, I push a
> > > >>>>>> button, and 30 seconds later (or less) I can turn on the hot and
> > > >>>>>> have it hot in 2 seconds.
>
> > > >>>>> At the cost of twice as much wasted hot water. I understand how a
> > > >>>>> recirculation pump works. How's this magic manifold work?
>
> > > >>>> At the cost of no wasted hot water, in fact no wasted $.017/gallon
> > > >>>> water. I don't have a clue what the "magic manifold" you speak of
> > > >>>> is.
>
> > > >>> When you turn off the hot water you now have twice as much "waste"
> > > >>> hot water in the lines. Read the thread.
>
> > > >> No, I don't. The pump turns off before the return pipe is filled.
> > > >> And I haven't dumped the water in the pipe down the drain waiting
> > > >> for it to get hot. Try thinking.
>
> > > > Baloney. *The water won't be up to temperature that quickly. *Truy not
> > > > to make crap up.
>
> > > I only did it. That is the result. Where does your expert opinion come from?
>
> > Experience and common sense. *Water doesn't change temperuature
> > instantaneously. *To get hot water you have to recycle until it's
> > hot. *There will be hot water in the return line.
>
> > > It works just like running the water to get hot water, but the water goes back
> > > to the heater instead of down the drain. It isn't rocket science.
>
> > ...and that water in the return line never gets hot? *...or it never
> > cools off? *You're FOS
>
> Well, look at it this way:
>
> The water in the return line is probably close to room temperature.
> He only
> has to heat it from room temperature to his target temperature. *If
> he was pulling in cold water from underground, his heater would have a
> lot more work to do. *Yes, there are losses when he's done using hot
> water, but probably not as great as the usage from heating up all of
> that
> 40 F water.

But it's the *same* loss as that in the supply line, i.e. twice the
loss.

keith wrote:
>>> ...and that water in the return line never gets hot? ...or it never
>>> cools off? You're FOS
>>
>> Well, look at it this way:
>>
>> The water in the return line is probably close to room temperature.
>> He only
>> has to heat it from room temperature to his target temperature. If
>> he was pulling in cold water from underground, his heater would have
>> a lot more work to do. Yes, there are losses when he's done using hot
>> water, but probably not as great as the usage from heating up all of
>> that
>> 40 F water.
>
> But it's the *same* loss as that in the supply line, i.e. twice the
> loss.

Must be nice to know it all.

But you are wrong. Enough said.

Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>> ...and that water in the return line never gets hot? ...or it never
>> cools off? You're FOS
>
> Well, look at it this way:
>
> The water in the return line is probably close to room temperature.
> He only
> has to heat it from room temperature to his target temperature. If
> he was pulling in cold water from underground, his heater would have a
> lot more work to do. Yes, there are losses when he's done using hot
> water, but probably not as great as the usage from heating up all of
> that
> 40 F water.

Very good point. I hadn't even thought of that aspect. It probably doubles the
savings I get.

It is nice to see others here that can really think.

Bob F wrote:
> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>> ...and that water in the return line never gets hot? ...or it never
>>> cools off? You're FOS
>>
>> Well, look at it this way:
>>
>> The water in the return line is probably close to room temperature.
>> He only
>> has to heat it from room temperature to his target temperature. If
>> he was pulling in cold water from underground, his heater would have
>> a lot more work to do. Yes, there are losses when he's done using
>> hot water, but probably not as great as the usage from heating up
>> all of that
>> 40 F water.
>
> Very good point. I hadn't even thought of that aspect. It probably
> doubles the savings I get.
>
> It is nice to see others here that can really think.

I guess we can always add that during the heating season, those losses heat the
house, cutting down furnace usage. Since I don't have A/C, no losses there.

On May 18, 10:13*am, "Bob F" > wrote:
> keith wrote:
> >>> ...and that water in the return line never gets hot? ...or it never
> >>> cools off? You're FOS
>
> >> Well, look at it this way:
>
> >> The water in the return line is probably close to room temperature.
> >> He only
> >> has to heat it from room temperature to his target temperature. If
> >> he was pulling in cold water from underground, his heater would have
> >> a lot more work to do. Yes, there are losses when he's done using hot
> >> water, but probably not as great as the usage from heating up all of
> >> that
> >> 40 F water.
>
> > But it's the *same* loss as that in the supply line, i.e. twice the
> > loss.
>
> Must be nice to know it all.
>
> But you are wrong. Enough said.

If you believe this you're amazingly stupid.

On May 18, 10:30*am, "Bob F" > wrote:
> Bob F wrote:
> > Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> >>> ...and that water in the return line never gets hot? ...or it never
> >>> cools off? You're FOS
>
> >> Well, look at it this way:
>
> >> The water in the return line is probably close to room temperature.
> >> He only
> >> has to heat it from room temperature to his target temperature. *If
> >> he was pulling in cold water from underground, his heater would have
> >> a lot more work to do. *Yes, there are losses when he's done using
> >> hot water, but probably not as great as the usage from heating up
> >> all of that
> >> 40 F water.
>
> > Very good point. I hadn't even thought of that aspect. It probably
> > doubles the savings I get.
>
> > It is nice to see others here that can really think.
>
> I guess we can always add that during the heating season, those losses heat the
> house, cutting down furnace usage. Since I don't have A/C, no losses there.

You're losing the heat and heating the house.

On May 18, 12:24*pm, keith > wrote:
> On May 18, 10:30*am, "Bob F" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Bob F wrote:
> > > Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> > >>> ...and that water in the return line never gets hot? ...or it never
> > >>> cools off? You're FOS
>
> > >> Well, look at it this way:
>
> > >> The water in the return line is probably close to room temperature.
> > >> He only
> > >> has to heat it from room temperature to his target temperature. *If
> > >> he was pulling in cold water from underground, his heater would have
> > >> a lot more work to do. *Yes, there are losses when he's done using
> > >> hot water, but probably not as great as the usage from heating up
> > >> all of that
> > >> 40 F water.
>
> > > Very good point. I hadn't even thought of that aspect. It probably
> > > doubles the savings I get.
>
> > > It is nice to see others here that can really think.
>
> > I guess we can always add that during the heating season, those losses heat the
> > house, cutting down furnace usage. Since I don't have A/C, no losses there.
>
> You're losing the heat and heating the house.

I don't think Bob F ever said what his setup is like, but if his
plumbing runs
through the basement, the heating is negligible in practical terms.
Yes,
from a purely physics standpoint it's there, but it's like cooking a
pot of
soup with a candle.

Cindy Hamilton

On May 18, 12:27*pm, Cindy Hamilton >
wrote:
> On May 18, 12:24*pm, keith > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 18, 10:30*am, "Bob F" > wrote:
>
> > > Bob F wrote:
> > > > Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> > > >>> ...and that water in the return line never gets hot? ...or it never
> > > >>> cools off? You're FOS
>
> > > >> Well, look at it this way:
>
> > > >> The water in the return line is probably close to room temperature..
> > > >> He only
> > > >> has to heat it from room temperature to his target temperature. *If
> > > >> he was pulling in cold water from underground, his heater would have
> > > >> a lot more work to do. *Yes, there are losses when he's done using
> > > >> hot water, but probably not as great as the usage from heating up
> > > >> all of that
> > > >> 40 F water.
>
> > > > Very good point. I hadn't even thought of that aspect. It probably
> > > > doubles the savings I get.
>
> > > > It is nice to see others here that can really think.
>
> > > I guess we can always add that during the heating season, those losses heat the
> > > house, cutting down furnace usage. Since I don't have A/C, no losses there.
>
> > You're losing the heat and heating the house.
>
> I don't think Bob F ever said what his setup is like, but if his
> plumbing runs
> through the basement, the heating is negligible in practical terms.
> Yes,
> from a purely physics standpoint it's there, but it's like cooking a
> pot of
> soup with a candle.

He was claiming that the waste heat helped in the Winter. ...can't
have it both ways.

Someone in the thread was pointing out heat loss in pipes. Well, it's
doubled, at minimum, if the hot water is recirculated back to the
water heater. ...can't have it both ways.

Yes, the losses may be insignificant (where "insignificant" is up to
the bill payer), but it *is* there. I won't buy CFLs because any
savings is insignificant.

"keith" > wrote
>> The water in the return line is probably close to room temperature.
>> He only
>> has to heat it from room temperature to his target temperature. If
>> he was pulling in cold water from underground, his heater would have a
>> lot more work to do. Yes, there are losses when he's done using hot
>> water, but probably not as great as the usage from heating up all of
>> that
>> 40 F water.
>
> But it's the *same* loss as that in the supply line, i.e. twice the
> loss.

If it is heating season, there is no loss as you'd be adding heat to the air
in some form.

> What are currently your best saving tips you recommend

Save electrons by not cross-posting to half the feckin'
groups on usenet !

keith wrote:
> On May 18, 10:13 am, "Bob F" > wrote:
>> keith wrote:
>>>>> ...and that water in the return line never gets hot? ...or it
>>>>> never cools off? You're FOS
>>
>>>> Well, look at it this way:
>>
>>>> The water in the return line is probably close to room temperature.
>>>> He only
>>>> has to heat it from room temperature to his target temperature. If
>>>> he was pulling in cold water from underground, his heater would
>>>> have a lot more work to do. Yes, there are losses when he's done
>>>> using hot water, but probably not as great as the usage from
>>>> heating up all of that
>>>> 40 F water.
>>
>>> But it's the *same* loss as that in the supply line, i.e. twice the
>>> loss.
>>
>> Must be nice to know it all.
>>
>> But you are wrong. Enough said.
>
> If you believe this you're amazingly stupid.

LOL!

keith wrote:
> He was claiming that the waste heat helped in the Winter. ...can't
> have it both ways.
>
> Someone in the thread was pointing out heat loss in pipes. Well, it's
> doubled, at minimum, if the hot water is recirculated back to the
> water heater. ...can't have it both ways.

The hot water doesn't get back to the heater. The pump turns off before that.
The hot water gets to the faucet.

In article >, "Bob F" > wrote:
>Bob F wrote:
>> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>>> ...and that water in the return line never gets hot? ...or it never
>>>> cools off? You're FOS
>>>
>>> Well, look at it this way:
>>>
>>> The water in the return line is probably close to room temperature.
>>> He only
>>> has to heat it from room temperature to his target temperature. If
>>> he was pulling in cold water from underground, his heater would have
>>> a lot more work to do. Yes, there are losses when he's done using
>>> hot water, but probably not as great as the usage from heating up
>>> all of that
>>> 40 F water.
>>
>> Very good point. I hadn't even thought of that aspect. It probably
>> doubles the savings I get.
>>
>> It is nice to see others here that can really think.
>
>I guess we can always add that during the heating season, those losses heat the
>
>house, cutting down furnace usage. Since I don't have A/C, no losses there.


The biggest problem is old heaters that constantly suck air out the
house through the one way exaust. A constant pilot produces constant
flow. Every day, all the time. A closed system is the most efficient.
I don't guess there is one that closes the pipe when there is no flame.

greg

On May 18, 9:56*pm, "Bob F" > wrote:
> keith wrote:
> > He was claiming that the waste heat helped in the Winter. *...can't
> > have it both ways.
>
> > Someone in the thread was pointing out heat loss in pipes. *Well, it's
> > doubled, at minimum, if the hot water is recirculated back to the
> > water heater. *...can't have it both ways.
>
> The hot water doesn't get back to the heater. The pump turns off before that.
> The hot water gets to the faucet.

Then it accomplishes nothing. That is, you're lying.

On May 18, 9:54*pm, "Bob F" > wrote:
> keith wrote:
> > On May 18, 10:13 am, "Bob F" > wrote:
> >> keith wrote:
> >>>>> ...and that water in the return line never gets hot? ...or it
> >>>>> never cools off? You're FOS
>
> >>>> Well, look at it this way:
>
> >>>> The water in the return line is probably close to room temperature.
> >>>> He only
> >>>> has to heat it from room temperature to his target temperature. If
> >>>> he was pulling in cold water from underground, his heater would
> >>>> have a lot more work to do. Yes, there are losses when he's done
> >>>> using hot water, but probably not as great as the usage from
> >>>> heating up all of that
> >>>> 40 F water.
>
> >>> But it's the *same* loss as that in the supply line, i.e. twice the
> >>> loss.
>
> >> Must be nice to know it all.
>
> >> But you are wrong. Enough said.
>
> > If you believe this you're amazingly stupid.
>
> LOL!

Your ignorance isn't that funny.

On May 18, 4:23*pm, "Ed Pawlowski" > wrote:
> "keith" > wrote
>
> >> The water in the return line is probably close to room temperature.
> >> He only
> >> has to heat it from room temperature to his target temperature. *If
> >> he was pulling in cold water from underground, his heater would have a
> >> lot more work to do. *Yes, there are losses when he's done using hot
> >> water, but probably not as great as the usage from heating up all of
> >> that
> >> 40 F water.
>
> > But it's the *same* loss as that in the supply line, i.e. twice the
> > loss.
>
> If it is heating season, there is no loss as you'd be adding heat to the air
> in some form.

I addressed that issue too; you forget summer. There is no such thing
as a free lunch.

keith wrote:
> On May 18, 9:54 pm, "Bob F" > wrote:
>> keith wrote:
>>> On May 18, 10:13 am, "Bob F" > wrote:
>>>> keith wrote:
>>>>>>> ...and that water in the return line never gets hot? ...or it
>>>>>>> never cools off? You're FOS
>>
>>>>>> Well, look at it this way:
>>
>>>>>> The water in the return line is probably close to room
>>>>>> temperature. He only
>>>>>> has to heat it from room temperature to his target temperature.
>>>>>> If he was pulling in cold water from underground, his heater
>>>>>> would have a lot more work to do. Yes, there are losses when
>>>>>> he's done using hot water, but probably not as great as the
>>>>>> usage from heating up all of that
>>>>>> 40 F water.
>>
>>>>> But it's the *same* loss as that in the supply line, i.e. twice
>>>>> the loss.
>>
>>>> Must be nice to know it all.
>>
>>>> But you are wrong. Enough said.
>>
>>> If you believe this you're amazingly stupid.
>>
>> LOL!
>
> Your ignorance isn't that funny.

My ignorance is smarter than your brilliance.

keith wrote:
> On May 18, 9:56 pm, "Bob F" > wrote:
>> keith wrote:
>>> He was claiming that the waste heat helped in the Winter. ...can't
>>> have it both ways.
>>
>>> Someone in the thread was pointing out heat loss in pipes. Well,
>>> it's doubled, at minimum, if the hot water is recirculated back to
>>> the water heater. ...can't have it both ways.
>>
>> The hot water doesn't get back to the heater. The pump turns off
>> before that. The hot water gets to the faucet.
>
> Then it accomplishes nothing. That is, you're lying.

Are you really this clueless?

Run the water down the drain until it gets hot at the tap, bringing in cold
water into the heater.

or

Run the same amount of water back to the heater till it is hot at the tap,
bringing in no cold water to the heater.

Which one wastes the most water?
Whick one wastes the most heat?

GregS wrote:
> In article >, "Bob F"
> > wrote:
>> Bob F wrote:
>>> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>>>> ...and that water in the return line never gets hot? ...or it
>>>>> never cools off? You're FOS
>>>>
>>>> Well, look at it this way:
>>>>
>>>> The water in the return line is probably close to room temperature.
>>>> He only
>>>> has to heat it from room temperature to his target temperature. If
>>>> he was pulling in cold water from underground, his heater would
>>>> have a lot more work to do. Yes, there are losses when he's done
>>>> using hot water, but probably not as great as the usage from
>>>> heating up all of that
>>>> 40 F water.
>>>
>>> Very good point. I hadn't even thought of that aspect. It probably
>>> doubles the savings I get.
>>>
>>> It is nice to see others here that can really think.
>>
>> I guess we can always add that during the heating season, those
>> losses heat the
>>
>> house, cutting down furnace usage. Since I don't have A/C, no losses
>> there.
>
>
> The biggest problem is old heaters that constantly suck air out the
> house through the one way exaust. A constant pilot produces constant
> flow. Every day, all the time. A closed system is the most efficient.
> I don't guess there is one that closes the pipe when there is no
> flame.

I think the power vent heaters would approximate that catagory.

On May 14, 9:44*am, Eric > wrote:
> What are currently your best saving tips you recommend and also
> practice, relating
> to how you make your money go much further than it used to, whether
> it's for
> food - weekly living expenses, home and financial investment, etc.

Spend less than your income. Find alternatives. Live life moderately.

On May 27, 2:35*am, Zee > wrote:
> On May 14, 9:44*am, Eric > wrote:
>
> > What are currently your best saving tips you recommend and also
> > practice, relating
> > to how you make your money go much further than it used to, whether
> > it's for
> > food - weekly living expenses, home and financial investment, etc.
>
> Spend less than your income. Find alternatives. Live life moderately.

Make more than you spend. Live life.

On Thu, 27 May 2010 00:35:08 -0700 (PDT), Zee >
wrote:

>On May 14, 9:44*am, Eric > wrote:
>> What are currently your best saving tips you recommend and also
>> practice, relating
>> to how you make your money go much further than it used to, whether
>> it's for
>> food - weekly living expenses, home and financial investment, etc.
>
>Spend less than your income.

If only the last government had heeded that maxim...

--
Frank Erskine

On May 27, 8:57�am, keith > wrote:
> On May 27, 2:35�am, Zee > wrote:
>
> > On May 14, 9:44�am, Eric > wrote:
>
> > > What are currently your best saving tips you recommend and also
> > > practice, relating
> > > to how you make your money go much further than it used to, whether
> > > it's for
> > > food - weekly living expenses, home and financial investment, etc.
>
> > Spend less than your income. Find alternatives. Live life moderately.
>
> Make more than you spend. �Live life.

learn the difference between needs and wants. you NEED food to
live!! But you may WANT to eat out at fancy restaurants nightly, but
you dont need to do that to live.

Its far easier to make your wants a little less than your income.

Trying to make enough to buy all your wants just becomes impossible.
the more you make the more you want, into a spiral of unlimited
spending maxed out credit cards etc

On May 27, 9:56*am, " > wrote:
> On May 27, 8:57 am, keith > wrote:
>
> > On May 27, 2:35 am, Zee > wrote:
>
> > > On May 14, 9:44 am, Eric > wrote:
>
> > > > What are currently your best saving tips you recommend and also
> > > > practice, relating
> > > > to how you make your money go much further than it used to, whether
> > > > it's for
> > > > food - weekly living expenses, home and financial investment, etc.
>
> > > Spend less than your income. Find alternatives. Live life moderately.
>
> > Make more than you spend. Live life.
>
> learn the difference between needs and wants. you NEED food to
> live!! But you may WANT to eat out at fancy restaurants nightly, but
> you dont need to do that to live.

Wants are part of living life. Needs are boring.

> Its far easier to make your wants a little less than your income.

It's much more fun to have an income that exceeds your wants. Again,
part of living life.

> Trying to make enough to buy all your wants just becomes impossible.

Some prioritizing is always needed, sure. Some wants really aren't,
at the end of the day.

> the more you make the more you want, into a spiral of unlimited
> spending maxed out credit cards etc

Wrong!

On Thu, 27 May 2010 16:44:58 +0100, Janet Baraclough
> wrote:

> The message
> >
> from " > contains these words:
>
> > Trying to make enough to buy all your wants just becomes impossible.
>
> Not in my experience.
>
> > the more you make the more you want,
>
> Nope; I've never found that either.
>
> > into a spiral of unlimited spending maxed out credit cards etc
>
> Never found that either.
>

Either you're filthy rich or you show unmitigated restraint. I've
always found "The more you make, the more you spend" to be a truism.

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

In ,
Frank Erskine >spewed forth:
> On Thu, 27 May 2010 00:35:08 -0700 (PDT), Zee >
> wrote:
>
>> On May 14, 9:44 am, Eric > wrote:
>>> What are currently your best saving tips you recommend and also
>>> practice, relating
>>> to how you make your money go much further than it used to, whether
>>> it's for
>>> food - weekly living expenses, home and financial investment, etc.
>>
>> Spend less than your income.
>
> If only the last government had heeded that maxim...

Oh, and the present one is?

Frank Erskine wrote
> Zee > wrote
>> Eric > wrote

>>> What are currently your best saving tips you recommend and also practice,
>>> relating to how you make your money go much further than it used to, whether
>>> it's for food - weekly living expenses, home and financial investment, etc.

>> Spend less than your income.

> If only the last government had heeded that maxim...

We'd be in a great depression or worse, just like we ended up in one the last time a govt tried that just after a crash.

wrote
> keith > wrote
>> Zee > wrote
>>> Eric > wrote

>>>> What are currently your best saving tips you recommend and also practice,
>>>> relating to how you make your money go much further than it used to, whether
>>>> it's for food - weekly living expenses, home and financial investment, etc.

>>> Spend less than your income. Find alternatives. Live life moderately.

>> Make more than you spend. Live life.

> learn the difference between needs and wants.

No thanks, if all I spent on was real needs, it would be a pathetic existence.

> you NEED food to live!! But you may WANT to eat out at
> fancy restaurants nightly, but you dont need to do that to live.

I prefer to eat better than the bare minimum that will keep my alive and healthy.

> Its far easier to make your wants a little less than your income.

Depends on your income. Thats a lie with the lowest incomes.

> Trying to make enough to buy all your wants just becomes impossible.

Nope, not for everyone.

> the more you make the more you want,

That isnt true of everyone.

> into a spiral of unlimited spending maxed out credit cards etc

How odd that none of mine are.

Janet Baraclough > wrote:

>from sf > contains these words:

>> > wrote:

>> > from " > contains these words:

>> > > Trying to make enough to buy all your wants just becomes impossible.

>> > Not in my experience.

>> > > the more you make the more you want,

>> > Nope; I've never found that either.

>> > > into a spiral of unlimited spending maxed out credit cards etc

>> > Never found that either.

>> Either you're filthy rich or you show unmitigated restraint.

> Or both.

Also, one does not have to be "filthy rich" to avoid maxed out credit
cards. I'm not filthy rich, and I've never bought anything on
consumer credit. That may place me in the minority, but it's
hardly impossible, in fact I think it is the ones with the maxed
out cards are likely the ones in an impossible situation.

Steve

On May 27, 1:56�pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
> wrote
>
> > keith > wrote
> >> Zee > wrote
> >>> Eric > wrote
> >>>> What are currently your best saving tips you recommend and also practice,
> >>>> relating to how you make your money go much further than it used to, whether
> >>>> it's for food - weekly living expenses, home and financial investment, etc.
> >>> Spend less than your income. Find alternatives. Live life moderately.
> >> Make more than you spend. Live life.
> > learn the difference between needs and wants.
>
> No thanks, if all I spent on was real needs, it would be a pathetic existence.
>
> > you NEED food to live!! But you may WANT to eat out at
> > fancy restaurants nightly, but you dont need to do that to live.
>
> I prefer to eat better than the bare minimum that will keep my alive and healthy.
>
> > Its far easier to make your wants a little less than your income.
>
> Depends on your income. Thats a lie with the lowest incomes.
>
> > Trying to make enough to buy all your wants just becomes impossible.
>
> Nope, not for everyone.
>
> > the more you make the more you want,
>
> That isnt true of everyone.
>
> > into a spiral of unlimited spending maxed out credit cards etc
>
> How odd that none of mine are.

far too many americans had wants far larger than needs or income.

today they are the ones going bankrupt, maxed out cards, homes in
forecosure vehicles beig repoed/\\

glad you are under control but far too many arent

On 5/27/2010 5:01 PM, Steve Pope wrote:
> Janet > wrote:
>
>>from > contains these words:
>
>>> > wrote:
>
>>>> from > contains these words:
>
>>>>> Trying to make enough to buy all your wants just becomes impossible.
>
>>>> Not in my experience.
>
>>>>> the more you make the more you want,
>
>>>> Nope; I've never found that either.
>
>>>> > into a spiral of unlimited spending maxed out credit cards etc
>
>>>> Never found that either.
>
>>> Either you're filthy rich or you show unmitigated restraint.
>
>> Or both.
>
> Also, one does not have to be "filthy rich" to avoid maxed out credit
> cards. I'm not filthy rich, and I've never bought anything on
> consumer credit. That may place me in the minority, but it's
> hardly impossible, in fact I think it is the ones with the maxed
> out cards are likely the ones in an impossible situation.
>
> Steve

The one thing I noticed over the years (and I'm not filthy rich,
although that would be nice), is that the more people make in general,
the more likely they are to spend it. Upgrade the home, upgrade the
toys, upgrade cars, take actual vacations in exotic places, better
wardrobe, etc. Before you know it, the monthly out to dinner is weekly,
and to the better restaurants.

As someone else pointed out, make more than you spend. Don't be the
grasshopper.

Bob

Bob Muncie > wrote:

>As someone else pointed out, make more than you spend. Don't be the
>grasshopper.

What is the reference to grasshoppers here about? I've heard
this before but it's not in my phrasebook.

Steve

Steve Pope wrote:

>> As someone else pointed out, make more than you spend. Don't be the
>> grasshopper.
>
> What is the reference to grasshoppers here about? I've heard
> this before but it's not in my phrasebook.

That would be an Aesop's Fable. From Page by Page Books.

http://www.pagebypagebooks.com/Aesop...hopper_p1.html

In a field one summer's day a Grasshopper was hopping about, chirping
and singing to its heart's content. An Ant passed by, bearing along with
great toil an ear of corn he was taking to the nest.

"Why not come and chat with me," said the Grasshopper, "instead of
toiling and moiling in that way?"

"I am helping to lay up food for the winter," said the Ant, "and
recommend you to do the same."

"Why bother about winter?" said the Grasshopper; we have got plenty of
food at present." But the Ant went on its way and continued its toil.
When the winter came the Grasshopper had no food and found itself dying
of hunger, while it saw the ants distributing every day corn and grain
from the stores they had collected in the summer. Then the Grasshopper knew:

It is best to prepare for the days of necessity.

--Lin

Lin > wrote:

>Steve Pope wrote:

>> What is the reference to grasshoppers here about? I've heard
>> this before but it's not in my phrasebook.

>That would be an Aesop's Fable. From Page by Page Books.
>
>http://www.pagebypagebooks.com/Aesop...hopper_p1.html
>
>In a field one summer's day a Grasshopper was hopping about, chirping
>and singing to its heart's content. An Ant passed by, bearing along with
>great toil an ear of corn he was taking to the nest.
>
>"Why not come and chat with me," said the Grasshopper, "instead of
>toiling and moiling in that way?"
>
>"I am helping to lay up food for the winter," said the Ant, "and
>recommend you to do the same."
>
>"Why bother about winter?" said the Grasshopper; we have got plenty of
>food at present." But the Ant went on its way and continued its toil.
>When the winter came the Grasshopper had no food and found itself dying
>of hunger, while it saw the ants distributing every day corn and grain
>from the stores they had collected in the summer. Then the Grasshopper knew:

>It is best to prepare for the days of necessity.

Right.

Somebody send this to CALPERS!


Steve

In article >,
Frank Erskine > wrote:
>On Thu, 27 May 2010 00:35:08 -0700 (PDT), Zee >
>wrote:
[ ... ]

>>Spend less than your income.

>If only the last government had heeded that maxim...

They did a lot better than the current spendthrift.


Gary

--
Gary Heston http://www.thebreastcancersite.com/

Did you hear about the new saint, San Adreas? He's the patron saint of
blame, it's all his fault.

On 5/27/2010 6:48 PM, Lin wrote:
> Steve Pope wrote:
>
>>> As someone else pointed out, make more than you spend. Don't be the
>>> grasshopper.
>>
>> What is the reference to grasshoppers here about? I've heard
>> this before but it's not in my phrasebook.
>
> That would be an Aesop's Fable. From Page by Page Books.
>
> http://www.pagebypagebooks.com/Aesop...hopper_p1.html
>
>
> In a field one summer's day a Grasshopper was hopping about, chirping
> and singing to its heart's content. An Ant passed by, bearing along with
> great toil an ear of corn he was taking to the nest.
>
> "Why not come and chat with me," said the Grasshopper, "instead of
> toiling and moiling in that way?"
>
> "I am helping to lay up food for the winter," said the Ant, "and
> recommend you to do the same."
>
> "Why bother about winter?" said the Grasshopper; we have got plenty of
> food at present." But the Ant went on its way and continued its toil.
> When the winter came the Grasshopper had no food and found itself dying
> of hunger, while it saw the ants distributing every day corn and grain
> from the stores they had collected in the summer. Then the Grasshopper
> knew:
>
> It is best to prepare for the days of necessity.
>
> --Lin

Thanks Lin for replying quickly and accurately to Steve's question. I
was just trying to not be overly verbose.

Besides, hasn't everyone read Aesop's fables? I myself received the 600+
page fable book as a gift when I was just learning to read.

I *don't* think I want to explain "The Princess and the Pea" though :-)

Almost brings me back to "Late Night Radio", and the Shadow (who knows),
when it was "light's out", and the flash light had to come out under the
blankie.

(Yes Larry, I'm being strange again)

Regards,

Bob

Bob Muncie wrote:

> Thanks Lin for replying quickly and accurately to Steve's question. I
> was just trying to not be overly verbose.

:-)

> Besides, hasn't everyone read Aesop's fables? I myself received the 600+
> page fable book as a gift when I was just learning to read.
>
> I *don't* think I want to explain "The Princess and the Pea" though :-)

I used to love the fables. "And the moral of the story is ...."

> Almost brings me back to "Late Night Radio", and the Shadow (who knows),
> when it was "light's out", and the flash light had to come out under the
> blankie.

Would have been the Little Golden Books for me. I wish I still had all
the original printings.

> (Yes Larry, I'm being strange again)

It's okay. Seems like there's lots of that going around these days! The
more, the merrier. ;-)

--Lin

Take cash and a written list to the grocery store.
Leave debit cards, credit cards and the checkbook home when you go
shopping. Stick to the list and don't browse.

You will save hundreds per month....Trust me.
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
Â*Only Irish Â*coffee provides in a single glass all four Â*essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar Â*and fat. --Alex Levine

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> On Thu, 27 May 2010 16:44:58 +0100, Janet Baraclough
> > wrote:
>
> > The message
> > >
> > from " > contains these words:
> >
> > > Trying to make enough to buy all your wants just becomes impossible.
> >
> > Not in my experience.
> >
> > > the more you make the more you want,
> >
> > Nope; I've never found that either.
> >
> > > into a spiral of unlimited spending maxed out credit cards etc
> >
> > Never found that either.
> >
>
> Either you're filthy rich or you show unmitigated restraint. I've
> always found "The more you make, the more you spend" to be a truism.

I have to agree. It seems to be human nature and does take a bit of
restraint to counter. Sometimes it helps to be strapped for cash for
awhile as you are given no choice, so have to sit back and re-assess. ;-)
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar and fat. --Alex Levine