Full time campers in state parks
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Tom J - 03 Jul 2009 17:10 GMT ************************************************ BIRMINGHAM, Ala. (AP) - The recession is helping create a new lifestyle in Alabama: Permanent camping.
Campgrounds across Alabama are filling with permanent residents seeking less-stressful, less-expensive lifestyle. Campground operators say it's an enticing option for both retired people and younger adults who have fallen on hard times.
Alabama's state parks didn't allow full-time residents in its campgrounds for decades. But it now allows full-time residents at Lake Guntersville State Park and Wind Creek State Park near Alexander City.
State Parks Director Mark Easterwood said pressure from campers created the change. *************************************************
Is the happening everywhere?? Tom J
Steve Wolf - 03 Jul 2009 17:28 GMT I hope not. I'd be surprised to find an area that would welcome such a mess!
Steve www.wolfswords.com under the motorhome link
> ************************************************ > BIRMINGHAM, Ala. (AP) - The recession is helping create a new [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Is the happening everywhere?? > Tom J The Hamster - 03 Jul 2009 17:35 GMT > Is the happening everywhere?? FWIW, in Ontario, Canada, we just rented a seasonal camping site at Lyndhurst for our trailer... management announced recently they intend to convert all existing seasonal sites to year-round fully serviced sites within 10 years. No more seasonal camping. They already have quite a few year-round residents... big house-type trailers with insulated plumbing hook-ups and huge propane tanks.
We'll have to decide what to do if we're still there when the mandated change occurs - either buy a house trailer and sell the Zeppelin... or move.
David "The Hamster" Malone
D. Arlington - 03 Jul 2009 20:10 GMT On Jul 3, 12:10 pm, "Tom J" <tomne...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Is the happening everywhere?? FWIW, in Ontario, Canada, we just rented a seasonal camping site at Lyndhurst for our trailer... management announced recently they intend to convert all existing seasonal sites to year-round fully serviced sites within 10 years. No more seasonal camping. They already have quite a few year-round residents... big house-type trailers with insulated plumbing hook-ups and huge propane tanks.
>>> It will then be a trailer park, not a campground. We'll have to decide what to do if we're still there when the mandated change occurs - either buy a house trailer and sell the Zeppelin... or move.
David "The Hamster" Malone
The Hamster - 03 Jul 2009 20:30 GMT > It will then be a trailer park, not a campground. Does that mean we'll automatically become white trailer trash?
David "The horrified Hamster" Malone
Owen McKenzie - 04 Jul 2009 03:15 GMT >> It will then be a trailer park, not a campground. > > Does that mean we'll automatically become white trailer trash? > > David "The horrified Hamster" Malone Become?
 Signature Owen McKenzie Posting from Pigeon Forge, TN
2nd Chronicles 7:14
The Hamster - 06 Jul 2009 14:45 GMT > Become? Lol... good point, Owen...
David "The TT Hamster" Malone
D. Arlington - 05 Jul 2009 02:32 GMT On Jul 3, 3:10 pm, "D. Arlington" <inva...@nowhere.invalid> wrote:
> It will then be a trailer park, not a campground. Does that mean we'll automatically become white trailer trash?
>>> In some people's eyes... probably. ;-) David "The horrified Hamster" Malone
Carl A. in FL - 05 Jul 2009 02:42 GMT > On Jul 3, 3:10 pm, "D. Arlington" <inva...@nowhere.invalid> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > David "The horrified Hamster" Malone Stupid is as stupid does. Trash is as trash does.
 Signature Carl A. in FL http://sky.prohosting.com/chainfl/
D. Arlington - 05 Jul 2009 18:57 GMT >> On Jul 3, 3:10 pm, "D. Arlington" <inva...@nowhere.invalid> wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Stupid is as stupid does. Trash is as trash does. And trash is found everywhere.
Janet Wilder - 03 Jul 2009 22:48 GMT > On Jul 3, 12:10 pm, "Tom J" <tomne...@earthlink.net> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > quite a few year-round residents... big house-type trailers with > insulated plumbing hook-ups and huge propane tanks. It will then be a trailer park, not a campground.
The term is "mobile home park" and there are some very lovely ones where the residents take pride in their homes.
Also, here in the Lower Rio Grande Valley most of the RV parks have a combination of mobile homes, park models and RVs.
I am constantly amazed by your limited knowledge.
 Signature Janet Wilder Way-the-heck-south Texas Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
D. Arlington - 05 Jul 2009 02:40 GMT >> On Jul 3, 12:10 pm, "Tom J" <tomne...@earthlink.net> wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > The term is "mobile home park" and there are some very lovely ones where > the residents take pride in their homes. *Here* we call them trailer parks or mobile home parks. Don't assume things have the same names everywhere. They're "tags" here and "license plates" in NY. There are other examples.
> Also, here in the Lower Rio Grande Valley most of the RV parks have a > combination of mobile homes, park models and RVs. I don't live in the lower Rio Grande Valley where most of the RV parks have a combination of mobile homes, park models and RVs. Here Trailer Parks are primarily mobile homes.
> I am constantly amazed by your limited knowledge. And I am constantly amazed by your nasty small minded mean spiritedness, laughable haughtiness and ignorant assumptions that everyone lives where you do and things are the same everywhere.
R.J.(Bob) Evans - 05 Jul 2009 04:21 GMT >And I am constantly amazed by your nasty small minded mean spiritedness, >laughable haughtiness and ignorant assumptions that everyone lives where you >do and things are the same everywhere. You may not have been around here for long but you've sure got Janet's number.
 Signature R.J.(Bob) Evans (return address needs alteration to work) http://travellingwithgeorge.blogspot.com/
D. Arlington - 05 Jul 2009 18:59 GMT >>And I am constantly amazed by your nasty small minded mean spiritedness, >>laughable haughtiness and ignorant assumptions that everyone lives where [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > You may not have been around here for long but you've sure got Janet's > number. It took about a week.........
Chuck Norris - 06 Jul 2009 01:28 GMT >>>And I am constantly amazed by your nasty small minded mean spiritedness, >>>laughable haughtiness and ignorant assumptions that everyone lives where [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >It took about a week......... How about the other 'Twisted sister'?
--
Liberals. You can't talk to them and bullets are just so damned expensive!
Chuck Norris
D. Arlington - 07 Jul 2009 14:34 GMT >>>>And I am constantly amazed by your nasty small minded mean spiritedness, >>>>laughable haughtiness and ignorant assumptions that everyone lives where [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > How about the other 'Twisted sister'? Whom may that be?
> -- > > Liberals. You can't talk to them and bullets are just so damned > expensive! > > Chuck Norris Carl A. in FL - 07 Jul 2009 14:59 GMT >>>>>And I am constantly amazed by your nasty small minded mean >>>>>spiritedness, [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Whom may that be? Shouldn't that be "Who may that be?"
 Signature Carl A. in FL http://sky.prohosting.com/chainfl/
Elliot Richmond - 08 Jul 2009 02:01 GMT >> Whom may that be? > >Shouldn't that be "Who may that be?" Nope. "whom" is the object of the verb "to be" so it is appropriate.
Elliot Richmond Itinerant astronomy teacher
Carl A. in FL - 08 Jul 2009 02:28 GMT >>> Whom may that be? >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Elliot Richmond > Itinerant astronomy teacher Nope. You may know your astronomy, but you don't know your grammar.
"Knock knock, who is there?" "To whom am I speaking?"
 Signature Carl A. in FL http://sky.prohosting.com/chainfl/
Elliot Richmond - 08 Jul 2009 18:11 GMT >>>> Whom may that be? >>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >"Knock knock, who is there?" "To whom am I speaking?" Maybe, but I stick by what I said. I repeat my argument that "whom" is the object of the verb "to be." The subject is the relative pronoun "that."
Nevertheless, "whom" is rapidly disappearing from English. Even such advocates of proper English usage as the OED now suggest that the "who versus whom" distinction no longer serves any useful purpose.
The only place in English where the objective pronoun is still used is as the object of a preposition, as in your second example.
Elliot Richmond Itinerant astronomy teacher
Bob Giddings - 08 Jul 2009 18:20 GMT >>>>> Whom may that be? >>>> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >Elliot Richmond >Itinerant astronomy teacher "whom" may be disappearing, but "whoosh" will always be with us.
:o) Elliot Richmond - 08 Jul 2009 18:27 GMT >"whom" may be disappearing, but "whoosh" will always be with us. >:o) Well, then, we can always discuss Jane Fonda!
Elliot Richmond Itinerant astronomy teacher
Chuck Norris - 10 Jul 2009 00:26 GMT >"whom" may be disappearing, but "whoosh" will always be with us. >:o) Womb is still with us, right?
Chuck --
Liberals. You can't talk to them and bullets are just so damned expensive!
Chuck Norris
Elliot Richmond - 08 Jul 2009 18:23 GMT My last words on the subject, I promise.
I have found a little trick that works most of the time, but not always. Substitute "he" for "who" and "him" for "whom" and see if which sounds right.
Using Carl's examples:
"To he am I speaking" sounds clearly wrong. "To him am I speaking?" still sounds weird, but may be a little better.
"Knock knock, he is there." Sounds okay. "Knock, knock, him is there." Obviously wrong.
Now which of these sounds better?
"That may be he," Or "That may be him."
Hmmmm. Not much help, but to my ear, the second sounds a little better.
Elliot Richmond Itinerant astronomy teacher
Carl A. in FL - 08 Jul 2009 18:55 GMT > My last words on the subject, I promise. > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > Elliot Richmond > Itinerant astronomy teacher Your ear is OK on the last sentence, "him" in this construct is the accusative, and the accusative form of who is who. Whom is the dative, and whose the genitive. IIR my "English as a Foreign Language" grammar lessons correctly.
 Signature Carl A. in FL http://sky.prohosting.com/chainfl/
matt_colie - 08 Jul 2009 21:24 GMT > My last words on the subject, I promise. > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > Elliot Richmond > Itinerant astronomy teacher Elliot,
What sounds better is not a functional reference anymore - now that certain ethnic structures are often considered acceptable. Case in point; My wife is a multi subject tutor and she came home after a particularly difficult time with a student. The young man had written a sentence that made no sense in standard English. When he was offered corrections, he replied, "It say more better wrote like this." (??)
Just watching and listening
Matt
Carl A. in FL - 08 Jul 2009 22:22 GMT > Elliot, > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Matt He's probably preparing himself for a career with the 0bama Domestic Security Service.
 Signature Carl A. in FL http://sky.prohosting.com/chainfl/
Carl A. in FL - 08 Jul 2009 18:47 GMT >>>>> Whom may that be? >>>> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > Elliot Richmond > Itinerant astronomy teacher "Who" is the nominative/subject, "is there" like "to be there" = verb, etc. There is no object.
Sentence = subject/nominative + verb + adverb.
Consult the English department at whatever school you may be teaching, or trust Google: http://hubpages.com/hub/Grammar_Mishaps__Who_vs_Whom
 Signature Carl A. in FL http://sky.prohosting.com/chainfl/
Chuck Norris - 07 Jul 2009 18:04 GMT >> How about the other 'Twisted sister'? > >Whom may that be? Hunter.
>> Chuck Norris --
Liberals. You can't talk to them and bullets are just so damned expensive!
Chuck Norris
Joe - 05 Jul 2009 20:01 GMT >>And I am constantly amazed by your nasty small minded mean spiritedness, >>laughable haughtiness and ignorant assumptions that everyone lives where >>you do and things are the same everywhere. >> > You may not have been around here for long but you've sure got Janet's > number. I see Bob is vying for Will's old job as the number one w.nker chasing the women in the newsgroup around with his dick in his hand.
Pegleg - 05 Jul 2009 21:30 GMT > I see Bob is vying for Will's old job as the number one w.nker chasing > the women in the newsgroup around with his dick in his hand. Dick in one hand and umbilical cord in the other looking for a place to plug in!
Brian
Lone Haranguer - 05 Jul 2009 23:23 GMT >>> And I am constantly amazed by your nasty small minded mean spiritedness, >>> laughable haughtiness and ignorant assumptions that everyone lives where [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I see Bob is vying for Will's old job as the number one w.nker chasing > the women in the newsgroup around with his dick in his hand. Is he chasing D. Arlington? Or just old bimbos? LZ
Joe - 05 Jul 2009 23:47 GMT >>>> And I am constantly amazed by your nasty small minded mean >>>> spiritedness, laughable haughtiness and ignorant assumptions that [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Is he chasing D. Arlington? Or just old bimbos? LZ If your wife posted, he would chase her. You choose.
Janet Wilder - 05 Jul 2009 18:47 GMT > "Janet Wilder" <kelliepoodle@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> I am constantly amazed by your limited knowledge. > > And I am constantly amazed by your nasty small minded mean spiritedness, > laughable haughtiness and ignorant assumptions that everyone lives where > you do and things are the same everywhere. You are the one who has to brand everything according to your narrow knowledge base.
I have RV'd in every state in the Union except Hawaii, every Canadian province and the Yukon Territory. I'm a published author in RV and travel publications, wrote a successful book about housekeeping in an RV (proceeds of which went to charity) and was a frequently invited seminar speaker at national RV Club rallies. What are your credentials?
I've crossed the US from coast to coast in an RV more times than you've camped in a WalMart parking lot (and that's a considerable number since you are too cheap to pay for a campground) I think that if you asked the people who lived in what you are calling a "trailer park" where they lived, they would call it a "mobile home park." Many people who live in mobile home parks consider the term "trailer park" to be a pejorative. (Look it up)
I have your number, sister, and I think others here do, too. You post a question, we graciously provide you with answers and information then you proceed to tell us why our information and answers are no good. If anyone here is a troublemaker, it's not I.
 Signature Janet Wilder Way-the-heck-south Texas Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
Dfrenchy@abc.com - 06 Jul 2009 01:24 GMT >> "Janet Wilder" <kelliepoodle@yahoo.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] >you proceed to tell us why our information and answers are no good. If >anyone here is a troublemaker, it's not I. You forgot to mention what a pain in the a.s you are.
D. Arlington - 07 Jul 2009 14:38 GMT >>> "Janet Wilder" <kelliepoodle@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > You forgot to mention what a pain in the a.s you are. Janet is a truly unhappy person who takes it out here on the net. I'm sure she's no different in her dealings with people offline. She must feel superior to others by trying to diminish them in some way. It's very sad but you can be sure something made her the way she is. Some unhappy, painful or traumatic experience in her life she can't get over.
Janet Wilder - 07 Jul 2009 21:02 GMT >>>> "Janet Wilder" <kelliepoodle@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>> [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > very sad but you can be sure something made her the way she is. Some > unhappy, painful or traumatic experience in her life she can't get over. Hey there "snippy"! You haven't a clue about me. You certainly don't have a clue about my "offline" behavior. It takes some intelligence to answer with something other than an ad hominum falsehood. You demonstrate your ignorance with that remark.
There are many people here who have known me for years "offline" who can attest to my being a really nice person and a good cook (except for Hunter who got fish sticks and I'm still humiliated about that <g>)I've had people from this group whom I'd never before met in person to my home and while I was living in my RV, to that home, too. I've visited many of them in their homes or met them on the road. Anyone here invite you to visit? I haven't seen any posts.
There are people I "feud" with on this group, but trade grandbaby pictures with via email. Your attempts to look intelligent by psychoanalyzing me backfire and just make you look like the pathetic loser that you are.
BTW, Bob, the Canadian nut job, never met me. He has had a bug up his a.s about me for years and you are the only one here to fall for it. Could be you caught that bug kissing his a.s.
In real life I am a very happy person. You can't seem to understand that I just don't like you. It has nothing to do with my life, my happiness or my financial status. You whine. You fib and you didn't take responsibility for your own lot in life.
 Signature Janet Wilder Way-the-heck-south Texas Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
Squire - 07 Jul 2009 22:27 GMT > > <Dfren...@abc.com> wrote in message > >news:00h255ti3aqur9p5ilb0llj74ampa5eel2@4ax.com... [quoted text clipped - 70 lines] > Way-the-heck-south Texas > Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.- Hide quoted text - Woooo Janet.......I feel sorry for Ol' Barry, when yer angry with him !!! LOL
I bet you could really kick LZs butski, if he crossed ya....
Eddy
Janet Wilder - 07 Jul 2009 22:35 GMT > Woooo Janet.......I feel sorry for Ol' Barry, when yer angry > with him !!! LOL He's careful. <vbg>
> I bet you could really kick LZs butski, if he crossed ya.... I have, Eddy, many times. <g> A few folks here felt sorry for the bruises I inflicted on him, so they made me promise to filter him.
 Signature Janet Wilder Way-the-heck-south Texas Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
Lone Haranguer - 08 Jul 2009 03:12 GMT >> I bet you could really kick LZs butski, if he crossed ya.... > > I have, Eddy, many times. <g> A few folks here felt sorry for the > bruises I inflicted on him, so they made me promise to filter him. You couldn't keep up and you CHOSE to use Hunter as an excuse for dropping out.
Does Eddy know what a whiz-bang truck driver you were? One who never heard of aquaplaning or truck turbulence?
An English Major (with honors, ahem!) who can't spell as well as a third grader?
Who is forced to put "spelling doesn't count" in her sig line as an apology for being a dummkopf? LZ
nothermark - 03 Jul 2009 18:02 GMT >************************************************ >BIRMINGHAM, Ala. (AP) - The recession is helping create a new [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >Tom J >` To some degree it has always been around. A lot of places make you miove out after 14 days so there is a park rotation every two weeks or the SO becomes the new site renter. I've seen it work both ways.
D. Arlington - 03 Jul 2009 20:09 GMT > ************************************************ > BIRMINGHAM, Ala. (AP) - The recession is helping create a new lifestyle in [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Is the happening everywhere?? > Tom J I hope not. Where are people who "camp" for the holidays and weekends supposed to go? Expensive private CGs? Once we get our senior "passport" next week, we wont be using private CGs anymore - or will use them as little as possible.
Lone Haranguer - 03 Jul 2009 21:30 GMT >> ************************************************ >> BIRMINGHAM, Ala. (AP) - The recession is helping create a new [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > next week, we wont be using private CGs anymore - or will use them as > little as possible. You're in for some major disappointments. LZ
D. Arlington - 05 Jul 2009 02:43 GMT >> I hope not. Where are people who "camp" for the holidays and weekends >> supposed to go? Expensive private CGs? Once we get our senior "passport" [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > You're in for some major disappointments. > LZ Why? So far we've had much better experiences in State and COE CGs than private CGs.
Lone Haranguer - 05 Jul 2009 03:45 GMT >>> I hope not. Where are people who "camp" for the holidays and weekends >>> supposed to go? Expensive private CGs? Once we get our senior [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Why? So far we've had much better experiences in State and COE CGs than > private CGs. The Senior Passport is not honored in most state parks and COE parks are sparse in many states. I've traveled enough that I have my own list of favored spots. I usually stay west of the big river though. LZ
D. Arlington - 05 Jul 2009 19:02 GMT >>>> I hope not. Where are people who "camp" for the holidays and weekends >>>> supposed to go? Expensive private CGs? Once we get our senior [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > The Senior Passport is not honored in most state parks and COE parks are > sparse in many states. Here in TN there is no shortage and they all honor that passport. Our State and COE parks can't be beat. Large wooded sites, privacy, quiet at night, clean, wooded lakeside sites...... only thing missing is sewer hookups in most, but we've learned to use a minimum of water when camping.
I've traveled enough that I have my own list
> of favored spots. I usually stay west of the big river though. We'll be sticking mostly to the south and north east.
> LZ Joe - 05 Jul 2009 20:03 GMT >>>>> I hope not. Where are people who "camp" for the holidays and >>>>> weekends supposed to go? Expensive private CGs? Once we get our [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > >> LZ Most of us here in the South would prefer you stayed the f.ck in the north where you came from.
Carl A. in FL - 05 Jul 2009 22:05 GMT >>>>>> I hope not. Where are people who "camp" for the holidays and >>>>>> weekends supposed to go? Expensive private CGs? Once we get our [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > Most of us here in the South would prefer you stayed the f.ck in the > north where you came from. Thank you for your intelligent contribution to the discussion,
You are, indeed, an invaluable RORT campfire participant.
 Signature Carl A. in FL http://sky.prohosting.com/chainfl/
Joe - 05 Jul 2009 22:29 GMT >>>>>>> I hope not. Where are people who "camp" for the holidays and >>>>>>> weekends supposed to go? Expensive private CGs? Once we get our [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > You are, indeed, an invaluable RORT campfire participant. As good as your liver-can reports?
Carl A. in FL - 05 Jul 2009 22:35 GMT >>>>>>>> I hope not. Where are people who "camp" for the holidays and >>>>>>>> weekends supposed to go? Expensive private CGs? Once we get our [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > As good as your liver-can reports? Bet you can't quote one, can you?
Would you mind also quoting a single RV-related post you've made?
Thank you and have a nice day.
 Signature Carl A. in FL http://sky.prohosting.com/chainfl/
Joe - 05 Jul 2009 23:12 GMT >>>>>>>>> I hope not. Where are people who "camp" for the holidays and >>>>>>>>> weekends supposed to go? Expensive private CGs? Once we get our [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > > Thank you and have a nice day. f.ck you and have an even nicer day, liver-can boy. Eat sh.t and die while you are at it. Are you the f.cking net nanny this week. If so, f.ck you again.
Chuck Norris - 06 Jul 2009 01:34 GMT >> Bet you can't quote one, can you? >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >while you are at it. Are you the f.cking net nanny this week. If so, >f.ck you again. Nailed your snarky a.s, huh.
Bwahahahahahahah.
Chuck --
Liberals. You can't talk to them and bullets are just so damned expensive!
Chuck Norris
Carl A. in FL - 06 Jul 2009 02:18 GMT > f.ck you and have an even nicer day, liver-can boy. Eat sh.t and die > while you are at it. Are you the f.cking net nanny this week. If so, > f.ck you again. In view of your demonstrated verbal skills, I assume I can safely conclude that you are a Liberal.
You ought to get together with Hunter, she loves to talk the way you do.
 Signature Carl A. in FL http://sky.prohosting.com/chainfl/
Joe - 06 Jul 2009 04:01 GMT >> f.ck you and have an even nicer day, liver-can boy. Eat sh.t and die >> while you are at it. Are you the f.cking net nanny this week. If so, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > You ought to get together with Hunter, she loves to talk the way you do. In view of your propensity to f.ck liver cans, you ought to get with Technopervert. You have similar deviant sexual practices.
You are also wrong.
nothermark - 06 Jul 2009 04:10 GMT >> f.ck you and have an even nicer day, liver-can boy. Eat sh.t and die >> while you are at it. Are you the f.cking net nanny this week. If so, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >You ought to get together with Hunter, she loves to talk the way you do. You folks have a better eye than I do. JAWS or Landfill?
Hunter Hampton - 06 Jul 2009 04:30 GMT >>In view of your demonstrated verbal skills, I assume I can safely conclude >>that you are a Liberal. >> >>You ought to get together with Hunter, she loves to talk the way you do. > >You folks have a better eye than I do. JAWS or Landfill? Carl? Just troll.
Hunter
nothermark - 06 Jul 2009 13:05 GMT >>>In view of your demonstrated verbal skills, I assume I can safely conclude >>>that you are a Liberal. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Hunter No, Joe
Frank Howell - 06 Jul 2009 16:25 GMT >> f.ck you and have an even nicer day, liver-can boy. Eat sh.t and die >> while you are at it. Are you the f.cking net nanny this week. If [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > You ought to get together with Hunter, she loves to talk the way you > do. Dang Carl, that person is just a troll, but somehow you had to bring Hunter into the non-existent conversation. Naughty naughty.
 Signature Frank Howell
Pegleg - 06 Jul 2009 16:35 GMT > Dang Carl, that person is just a troll, but somehow you had to bring Hunter > into the non-existent conversation. Naughty naughty. Carl has some serious problems!
Brian
Carl A. in FL - 06 Jul 2009 17:46 GMT >> Dang Carl, that person is just a troll, but somehow you had to bring >> Hunter into the non-existent conversation. Naughty naughty. > Carl has some serious problems! > > Brian Absolutely. When Hunter wrote me "f.ck You," my world came to an end, and Joe's suggestion reopened the barely healed wounds that Hunter's suggestion had cut.
You see, I live in a world where such language is generally attributed to sluts, trash, and trolls - the type of people one really wouldn't want to associate with.
 Signature Carl A. in FL http://sky.prohosting.com/chainfl/
Technobarbarian - 06 Jul 2009 18:06 GMT >>> Dang Carl, that person is just a troll, but somehow you had to bring >>> Hunter into the non-existent conversation. Naughty naughty. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > sluts, trash, and trolls - the type of people one really wouldn't want to > associate with. Sooooo, of the 3, which one does that make you?
TB
Carl A. in FL - 06 Jul 2009 18:52 GMT >>>> Dang Carl, that person is just a troll, but somehow you had to bring >>>> Hunter into the non-existent conversation. Naughty naughty. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > TB I may answer your question in the spirit it was asked, provided that you show by example how I routinely engage in the practice of using Joe's kind of language.
And please, for once be intellectually honest and do not quote out of context.
Thank you.
 Signature Carl A. in FL http://sky.prohosting.com/chainfl/
Technobarbarian - 06 Jul 2009 20:43 GMT >>>>> Dang Carl, that person is just a troll, but somehow you had to bring >>>>> Hunter into the non-existent conversation. Naughty naughty. [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > And please, for once be intellectually honest and do not quote out of > context. Unfortunately Google's group search isn't working at the moment, but here you go: http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Rec/rec.outdoors.rv-travel/2008-08/msg04 635.html
One of the fun things about stuff like that is that once you throw it out there it's allllllllll over the place. Of course the liver can insult that you've become known by is one of your own insults that backfired on you. Just because you're generally slightly more creative in your insults than a simple FU it doesn't elevate them or you any. So, again, which one of the 3 are you?
TB
Carl A. in FL - 06 Jul 2009 21:48 GMT >>>>>> Dang Carl, that person is just a troll, but somehow you had to bring >>>>>> Hunter into the non-existent conversation. Naughty naughty. [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > TB Context. Sorry you can't grasp that. Go spank someone.
I don't think I'd want to share a campfire with you.
 Signature Carl A. in FL http://sky.prohosting.com/chainfl/
Technobarbarian - 06 Jul 2009 23:05 GMT >>>>>>> Dang Carl, that person is just a troll, but somehow you had to bring >>>>>>> Hunter into the non-existent conversation. Naughty naughty. [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > Context. Sorry you can't grasp that. Go spank someone. Oh, I understand completely. You're so disinhibited on usenet that you'll post all sorts of filth that you would never say to someone's face and so egotistical that you think you can throw mud far more vile than the stuff you're complaining about without having any of it stick to you.
The context of the accusation you threw at Gar was that you misunderstood what he said. Under what circumstances is it ok to accuse someone of being a pedophile when you have no basis for the accusation? Is it ok when that's the only way you can think of to escalate the insults? In what context is the word "slut" ok here? I'd really like to know so we have some rational basis to distinguish the "sluts, trash, and trolls" who use FU and such from the nice people using those phrases.
> I don't think I'd want to share a campfire with you. Yeah, I suspect you wouldn't. In the first place I'm so low that I object to accusing some one of being a pedophile unless there's some reasonable basis to think that they are in fact a pedophile. About the best that can be said about it is that it trivializes a horrific accusation. In the second place I'm so rough and tumble that I would talk about the filth you post to your face around the campfire.
TB
Carl A. in FL - 07 Jul 2009 02:54 GMT > Yeah, I suspect you wouldn't. In the first place I'm so low that I > object to accusing some one of being a pedophile unless there's some [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > TB No, it's because you are so dishonest that you misinterpret context, and so incredibly stupid that you don't comprehend a "reductio ad absurdum" statement.
Gar's jumping into a discussion and supporting an unsupportable accusation was at precisely the same level of inappropriateness as my absurd accusation to him. I'm sure you understood that but in your usualy dishonest fashion chose to misinterpret.
Now, go practice your perversions on someone sick enough to appreciate it..
Carl A. in FL http://sky.prohosting.com/chainfl/
Technobarbarian - 07 Jul 2009 03:08 GMT >> Yeah, I suspect you wouldn't. In the first place I'm so low that I >> object to accusing some one of being a pedophile unless there's some [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Now, go practice your perversions on someone sick enough to appreciate > it.. What a coincidence, you told Gar he had missed the point too. Here's the whole sick thing so Carl can't say I took it out of context:
> "Gar" <olg...@myrvspace.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > The senior senator from Delaware describing the junior > senator from Illinois. TB
Carl A. in FL - 07 Jul 2009 03:57 GMT >>> Yeah, I suspect you wouldn't. In the first place I'm so low that I >>> object to accusing some one of being a pedophile unless there's some [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > > TB Thank you for making my point.
 Signature Carl A. in FL http://sky.prohosting.com/chainfl/
Technobarbarian - 07 Jul 2009 04:21 GMT >>>> Yeah, I suspect you wouldn't. In the first place I'm so low that I >>>> object to accusing some one of being a pedophile unless there's some [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > > Thank you for making my point. LOL, even if it really was a reduce to the absurd arguement, which it isn't, it still wouldn't excuse posting that sort of disgusting BS. There are all sorts of ways you could have made a reduce to the absurd arguement without making that sort of vile accusation. Compared to you the people who are simply posting FU are nearly saints.
TB
Owen McKenzie - 06 Jul 2009 19:30 GMT > You see, I live in a world where such language is generally > attributed to sluts, trash, and trolls - the type of people one > really wouldn't want to associate with. So do I, and I really hate it when about a 1/2 dozen people that I read quote Joe, who I've plonked, spouting vulgarities.
 Signature Owen McKenzie Posting from Pigeon Forge, TN
2nd Chronicles 7:14
bill horne - 06 Jul 2009 19:44 GMT >> You see, I live in a world where such language is generally >> attributed to sluts, trash, and trolls - the type of people one >> really wouldn't want to associate with. > > So do I, and I really hate it when about a 1/2 dozen people that I read > quote Joe, who I've plonked, spouting vulgarities. Well, it beats spouting vigilantes.
 Signature bill Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
Max - 06 Jul 2009 20:52 GMT >>> You see, I live in a world where such language is generally >>> attributed to sluts, trash, and trolls - the type of people one [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Well, it beats spouting vigilantes. Vigilantes have been known to use the term.
Max ( do vigilantes spout?)
Frank Howell - 07 Jul 2009 00:13 GMT >>> You see, I live in a world where such language is generally >>> attributed to sluts, trash, and trolls - the type of people one [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Well, it beats spouting vigilantes. Not if they came from Moby Dick.
 Signature Frank Howell
Raymond J. Johnson Jr. - 07 Jul 2009 01:33 GMT Are there any guesses as to whom "Liver Can" would like to have around his campfire? I'll bet he'd love to have bill horne, Juicy Brucie, LZ, BILL P. "The Lawyer" <G> and Bob Hatch around HIS campfire? They could all whine about how liberals lie, cheat, and get away with things which conservatives would be crucified for! Ain't it awful! HawHawHaw! As the fire burned down, they could then whisper what they'd do to liberals, if they met up with one of those - Liberals! They they could growl at each other, to show how serious they are about hating YKW! Of course, who would want to hang out with "Liver Can" in person? HawHawHaw! Cheer up Carl! I'm sure BILL P., and Linus would love to hear stories about you using your panzerfaust on GIs in WWII? HawHawHaw! Raymond
Lone Haranguer - 07 Jul 2009 02:24 GMT Prison screw Don Lampson wrote:
> Cheer up Carl! I'm sure BILL P., and Linus would love to hear > stories about you using your panzerfaust on GIs in WWII? HawHawHaw! > Are you saying you wouldn't defend YOUR home from an attacking army?
Probably you would be under the bed wetting your pants and cutting your underwear into surrender flags... LZ
bill horne - 07 Jul 2009 02:50 GMT > Prison screw Don Lampson wrote: >> Cheer up Carl! I'm sure BILL P., and Linus would love to hear [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > underwear into surrender flags... > LZ Yellow and brown surrender flags?
 Signature bill Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
Lone Haranguer - 07 Jul 2009 03:03 GMT >> Prison screw Don Lampson wrote: >>> Cheer up Carl! I'm sure BILL P., and Linus would love to hear [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Yellow and brown surrender flags? Ummmm.....SPARE underwear, not the ones he was wearing. LZ
Bruce S - 07 Jul 2009 02:54 GMT > Prison screw Don Lampson wrote: >> Cheer up Carl! I'm sure BILL P., and Linus would love to hear [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > your underwear into surrender flags... > LZ Well, he did have to be drafted before he would go into the service in the '60s. Cowardice appears to be obvious.
Bruce
Mark Jones - 07 Jul 2009 03:57 GMT > Prison screw Don Lampson wrote: >> Cheer up Carl! I'm sure BILL P., and Linus would love to hear [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Probably you would be under the bed wetting your pants and cutting > your underwear into surrender flags... I haven't had the health to directly defend myself, but I have always done what I can to help the military have the tools they need to build their weapons.
It is interesting to talk the guys at Norfolk, or one of the other Naval yards, through a measurement they are making. They can now build the large ship modules and know in advance that these large pieces will fit together easily at the proper temperature.
Lone Haranguer - 07 Jul 2009 04:19 GMT >> Prison screw Don Lampson wrote: >>> Cheer up Carl! I'm sure BILL P., and Linus would love to hear [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > now build the large ship modules and know in advance that these > large pieces will fit together easily at the proper temperature. I would say that is a worthwhile contribution. One grandson is doing internet installations for Navy/Marine bases overseas. 1 trip to Djibouti and 2 to Italy so far. He designs the systems when he's back in the office. Our younger son works with military aircraft systems. 2 weeks ago he was in Kansas City, Topeka and Wichita for a week. Electronics emissions are his specialty. LZ
Max - 06 Jul 2009 20:48 GMT > Absolutely. When Hunter wrote me "f.ck You," my world came to an end, and > Joe's suggestion reopened the barely healed wounds that Hunter's [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > sluts, trash, and trolls - the type of people one really wouldn't want to > associate with. Aw, Carl. You left out most soldiers, sailors, marines, airmen, policemen, firemen, most politicians, factory workers, lots of doctors, lawyers. The list is long.
Max
Carl A. in FL - 06 Jul 2009 21:47 GMT >> Absolutely. When Hunter wrote me "f.ck You," my world came to an end, >> and [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Max Mixed company? As a means of communicating?
It's OK with me that you defend Joe's sickening behavior, if you are comfortable with that.
But I doubt you would correspond the way he does.
I've met your wife ... I think she would make you rinse out your mouth/wash your hands if you wrote like Joe does. And you would say "yes ma'm" and follow orders.
 Signature Carl A. in FL http://sky.prohosting.com/chainfl/
D. Arlington - 07 Jul 2009 14:54 GMT >> As good as your liver-can reports? > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Thank you and have a nice day. Usenet is being destroyed by trolls and mean spirited people. This is why so many people are migrating to Forums that are moderated. The trolls and those with psychological problems are removed, are banned, so the rest of the members can post and read in peace. This is another reason so many ISPs have dropped Usenet. They're tired of dealing with complaints concerning their customers.
Doc - 07 Jul 2009 15:24 GMT >>> As good as your liver-can reports? >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > reason so many ISPs have dropped Usenet. They're tired of dealing with > complaints concerning their customers. You're wrong about the ISPs. They are dropping the news feeds because of the terrific costs of storage, the costs of bandwidth, and a decreasing usage by knowledgeable people.
You sound like the prime candidate for a moderated webforum, It's about your speed.
Don't let the doorknob hit ya where the good Lord split ya. Bye.
Janet Wilder - 07 Jul 2009 21:05 GMT > Don't let the doorknob hit ya where the good Lord split ya. Bye. Doc, I just love the way you put that! May I borrow it?
Thanks for the chuckle
 Signature Janet Wilder Way-the-heck-south Texas Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
Doc - 07 Jul 2009 22:08 GMT >> Don't let the doorknob hit ya where the good Lord split ya. Bye. > > Doc, I just love the way you put that! May I borrow it? > > Thanks for the chuckle Tain't mine to loan. I heard it years ago. I guess you can call it Public Domain.
Janet Wilder - 07 Jul 2009 22:36 GMT >>> Don't let the doorknob hit ya where the good Lord split ya. Bye. >> Doc, I just love the way you put that! May I borrow it? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Tain't mine to loan. I heard it years ago. I guess you can call it > Public Domain. Then I'll "borrow it" I just love it!
 Signature Janet Wilder Way-the-heck-south Texas Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
Chuck Norris - 08 Jul 2009 17:53 GMT >You're wrong about the ISPs. They are dropping the news feeds because of >the terrific costs of storage, the costs of bandwidth, and a decreasing [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Don't let the doorknob hit ya where the good Lord split ya. Bye. My ISP didn't store any news stuff. They dropped it because I was the only one requesting it. I went to individual.net. --
Liberals. You can't talk to them and bullets are just so damned expensive!
Chuck Norris
Janet Wilder - 07 Jul 2009 21:04 GMT >>> As good as your liver-can reports? >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > reason so many ISPs have dropped Usenet. They're tired of dealing with > complaints concerning their customers. No one is holding a gun to your head to stay here. Go to a forum and don't let the door hit you.....
 Signature Janet Wilder Way-the-heck-south Texas Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
Elliot Richmond - 08 Jul 2009 02:09 GMT >Usenet is being destroyed by trolls and mean spirited people. This is why >so many people are migrating to Forums that are moderated. The trolls and >those with psychological problems are removed, are banned, so the rest of >the members can post and read in peace. This is another reason so many ISPs >have dropped Usenet. They're tired of dealing with complaints concerning >their customers. Yabbut, forums are so booooooorrrrring.
I am subscriber to RV.NET and two Casita forums. I can have more fun at a Home Depot workshop on installing ceramic tile. This group at least has entertainment value, as well as some extremely useful information from time to time.
Elliot Richmond Itinerant astronomy teacher
nothermark - 09 Jul 2009 03:40 GMT >>> As good as your liver-can reports? >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >have dropped Usenet. They're tired of dealing with complaints concerning >their customers. Usenet was dropped for many reasons. One was for the same reason TW tried capping downloads. They are really trying to stop folks from sharing movies and big files. In TW's case they also want to sell movies on demand rather than have folks browse for content. They don't make any extra money on just selling bandwidth.
You can add to that a movement to get rid of usenet to get rid of porn as that takes more than 50% of the bandwidth. Several folks like Cuomo jr have successfully sued over the miniscule percentage of child porn so the providers answer is to kill the cow they don't want to get rid of the flea.
I could add to the list but the bottom line is that text only groups are insignificant in the total bandwidth. That is why there are free or very cheap text only servers. The reason web forums gained popularity was that most folks never figure out how to read netnews but every idiot learned to use a browser. I tend to avoid forums because they are sterile and filled with netkops. Just no fun.
abc@xyz.eu - 05 Jul 2009 23:57 GMT >Most of us here in the South would prefer you stayed the f.ck in the >north where you came from. When did you become the voice for most of us here in the South? I prefer to speak for myself. Is that language from the same mouth you kissed your mother with?
 Signature Larry
Joe - 06 Jul 2009 02:08 GMT On Sun, 05 Jul 2009 18:57:06 -0400, abc wrote:
>>Most of us here in the South would prefer you stayed the f.ck in the >>north where you came from. > > When did you become the voice for most of us here in the South? I > prefer to speak for myself. Is that language from the same mouth you > kissed your mother with? Nah, it's the mouth I kissed your mother with. Buzz off, buckaroo.
Frank Howell - 06 Jul 2009 16:11 GMT >>>>>> I hope not. Where are people who "camp" for the holidays and >>>>>> weekends supposed to go? Expensive private CGs? Once we get our [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > Most of us here in the South would prefer you stayed the f.ck in the > north where you came from. Go back to chasing cars.
 Signature Frank Howell
nothermark - 05 Jul 2009 21:10 GMT >>>>> I hope not. Where are people who "camp" for the holidays and weekends >>>>> supposed to go? Expensive private CGs? Once we get our senior [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > >> LZ Check out Massachusetts and Vermont - half the price of NY. Also check passortamerica - good deals can be had.
D. Arlington - 07 Jul 2009 14:45 GMT >>We'll be sticking mostly to the south and north east.
> Check out Massachusetts and Vermont - half the price of NY. Also > check passortamerica - good deals can be had. We probably will in the next few years. :^) Like I said, one long trip per summer and the rest will be local (within 250 miles of home). We have Good Sam but so far only saved at one place with that membership - 10%. I doubt we'll renew it. I will look into Passport America. We're leaving in a few hours for Land-Between-The-Lakes for a few days. I need to get offline and bring the cold stuff out to the TT.............
Mike Hendrix - 05 Jul 2009 21:43 GMT >> The Senior Passport is not honored in most state parks and COE parks are >> sparse in many states. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >clean, wooded lakeside sites...... only thing missing is sewer hookups in >most, but we've learned to use a minimum of water when camping. Are you saying that Tennessee State Parks offer 1/2 price camping for folks with a "geezer-card" even folks from other states?
I know Louisiana does but was not aware of Tennessee doing the same thing.
mike --
D. Arlington - 07 Jul 2009 14:50 GMT >>> The Senior Passport is not honored in most state parks and COE parks are >>> sparse in many states. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Are you saying that Tennessee State Parks offer 1/2 price camping for > folks with a "geezer-card" even folks from other states? If you live here you get a certain percentage off as a senior. With the geezer card I was told it's either 50% off or close to it. :^) But it has to be the one issued by a Federal Park as I understand it. The state parks and COE parks honor it.
> I know Louisiana does but was not aware of Tennessee doing the same > thing. The geezer card you buy there should be honored in other states.
> mike > -- Chuck Norris - 04 Jul 2009 02:23 GMT >I hope not. Where are people who "camp" for the holidays and weekends >supposed to go? Expensive private CGs? Once we get our senior "passport" >next week, we wont be using private CGs anymore - or will use them as little >as possible. Bwahaha. - -
All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent. Thomas Jefferson
Chuck Norris
Ron Recer - 04 Jul 2009 04:55 GMT >> ************************************************ >> BIRMINGHAM, Ala. (AP) - The recession is helping create a new lifestyle [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > next week, we wont be using private CGs anymore - or will use them as > little as possible. It would probably shock you to learn that some 'Expensive private CGs' are cheaper by the month than many/most federal and state CG even with a senior 'passport! Of course those won't be at places like the Teton's, Yellowstone, Grand Canyon etc.
Ron
D. Arlington - 05 Jul 2009 02:55 GMT > "D. Arlington" <invalid@nowhere.invalid> wrote in message >> I hope not. Where are people who "camp" for the holidays and weekends [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Ron Not everyone camps by the month or camps at popular CGs in those places you mention. If that were the case, we'd look for the best park with the best prices for long term camping. Most of our camping will be in our own state and for less than a week at a time. Our biggest gripe about private CGs isn't the price per se, it's that lots are too small and too close together. They're like trailer parking lots. Buttonwood in PA was like that as was Fort Chizwell in VA. Good for overnight only or if you don't plan to hang out "camping" there. Every COE we camped at had large shady lots with privacy and enforced the quiet time rule. The private CGs did not.
Mike Hendrix - 05 Jul 2009 17:43 GMT >> "D. Arlington" <invalid@nowhere.invalid> wrote in message >>> I hope not. Where are people who "camp" for the holidays and weekends [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >Not everyone camps by the month or camps at popular CGs in those places you >mention. As you point out RV'ers are all different, very different. Some "full-time" yet only experience a handful of parks/campgrounds each year. You would think their 365 days per-year experience they would be "knowledgable" but the fact of the matter is they only know about those "handful" of campgrounds they stay in. Many weekend-warriors have more experience than those "full-timers".
I would only expect a small percentage of RV'ers pay monthly rates. Most, I would suspect, stay in any campground more than a few days to a week at a time.
> Most of our camping will be in our own state >and for less than a week at a time. Our biggest gripe about private CGs >isn't the price per se, it's that lots are too small and too close together. Price, is my gripe about private CG's. I do not use the amenities they have to charge for and I do not want to pay for them. We do not put out our awning and sit under the canopy drinking beer hoping someone will walk by to talk to.
>. Every COE we camped at had large shady lots with >privacy and enforced the quiet time rule. Wow! Now that is different from what we have experienced. COE parks have always been the worst when in comes to enforcing the rules. Some COE parks are quiet during the week but even those become "monkey-pins" on the weekend.
>The private CGs did not. I have never experienced a private campground that didn't enforce noise.
Like I said earlier we are all different and looking for different things. Our commonality is our RV's and even those are different.
mike --
D. Arlington - 05 Jul 2009 20:18 GMT > As you point out RV'ers are all different, very different. Some > "full-time" yet only experience a handful of parks/campgrounds each > year. You would think their 365 days per-year experience they would > be "knowledgable" but the fact of the matter is they only know about > those "handful" of campgrounds they stay in. Many weekend-warriors > have more experience than those "full-timers". At this point we want to try them all! :-) They're all new to us since we only started camping last summer. I camped in the 70s, but that's another story. We'll work our way farther and farther from home. We plan on one long trip per year and the rest will be long weekends. We just got back from a trip to PA and NY. A 2400 mi round trip. We only spent one night at a Flying-J. We may hit Atlanta for a week this coming fall. I have to do some Googling for State Parks around that city. I know what you're saying about the full-timers. We've met a few on our travels these past two years.
> I would only expect a small percentage of RV'ers pay monthly rates. > Most, I would suspect, stay in any campground more than a few days to > a week at a time. Most I've met so far mention they're staying "...for the week" or "...just for the weekend."
>> Most of our camping will be in our own state >>and for less than a week at a time. Our biggest gripe about private CGs [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Price, is my gripe about private CG's. I do not use the amenities > they have to charge for and I do not want to pay for them. We feel the same way. I personally resent paying for pools and laundry rooms and rec halls etc. myself. If we're not off somewhere, we're in the shade sipping cold soda - just relaxing.
We do not
> put out our awning and sit under the canopy drinking beer hoping > someone will walk by to talk to. We don't mind people stopping to chat. Most have been very nice. But most campers these days stay to themselves. Some don't even leave their rigs. It's not like it was in the 1970s.
>>. Every COE we camped at had large shady lots with >>privacy and enforced the quiet time rule.
> Wow! Now that is different from what we have experienced. Tim's Ford, Cedars of Lebanon and Seven Points are the ones we've been to so far here in TN. All had roomy shady sites. There were sunny sites if you wanted them, but most were shady.
COE parks
> have always been the worst when in comes to enforcing the rules. Some > COE parks are quiet during the week but even those become > "monkey-pins" on the weekend. All three of these parks were quiet. At Seven Points some nitwit came in, set up a tent and turned on a boom box. In less than an hour the "parkie" came and paid them a visit. They turned off the noise and were quiet the rest of the weekend.
> I have never experienced a private campground that didn't enforce > noise. At Buttonwood the campers across from us turned on a ballgame after supper. They screamed and screeched and yelled and the lady pounded on the table every time something happened that excited her. I don't know if they were drunk or not. The office was already closed so everyone had to endure the hysterical screaming and pounding on that metal table until after 11 PM. Never again. >:-( These are limited experiences to be sure but left a bed impression about private CGs.
> Like I said earlier we are all different and looking for different > things. Our commonality is our RV's and even those are different. This is so true. We have 2 married daughters and a son. Two are into tent camping and one has no interest in camping at all.
> mike Janet Wilder - 05 Jul 2009 18:50 GMT >> "D. Arlington" <invalid@nowhere.invalid> wrote in message >>> I hope not. Where are people who "camp" for the holidays and weekends [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > at had large shady lots with privacy and enforced the quiet time rule. > The private CGs did not. Try staying at more than two campgrounds before you make a declaration about all private campgrounds.
WE all know that you've only stayed in private campgrounds when there was no parking lot you could freebee at.
 Signature Janet Wilder Way-the-heck-south Texas Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
nothermark - 05 Jul 2009 21:07 GMT >>> "D. Arlington" <invalid@nowhere.invalid> wrote in message >>>> I hope not. Where are people who "camp" for the holidays and weekends [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] >WE all know that you've only stayed in private campgrounds when there >was no parking lot you could freebee at. And we all know you are living off the fat of the well screwed taxpayers back home. I'd be a bit carefull when slinging insults as the government is capable if converting pensions to SSI and has done it in the past as a money saving move.
Janet Wilder - 05 Jul 2009 23:31 GMT > And we all know you are living off the fat of the well screwed > taxpayers back home. I'd be a bit carefull when slinging insults as > the government is capable if converting pensions to SSI and has done > it in the past as a money saving move. What are you talking about? Social security? Lots of people here are getting social security. I paid into it and I'm collecting on my own, not off my husband's account.
Back home? I live in Texas. Last time I heard it was still part of the USA.
My husband worked his butt off teaching retarded children in the New York City school system for 32 years. He has a PhD and could have made a whole lot more money in private industry, but he chose to do something that most people wouldn't chose to do. He made a difference in a lot of lives and he's damned proud of it. I'm proud of him, too.
He worked two jobs to put 6 kids through college because a teacher's salary wasn't enough even when his spouse was working full-time. If he is collecting a well-earned pension from the City of New York then he deserves every penny of it. He paid into social security just like everyone else. The government says you have to.
We saved our money in tax-deferred annuities and 401ks as well as in the bank. When we RV'd we paid our own way though we used membership camping (which we bought and paid for) to keep the cost down.
If you think that whiny woman who can finally go camping more often because she gets some kind of price break via the government is better than folks who worked hard and saved for their "golden years" then just come out and say so.
 Signature Janet Wilder Way-the-heck-south Texas Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
nothermark - 06 Jul 2009 04:07 GMT >> And we all know you are living off the fat of the well screwed >> taxpayers back home. I'd be a bit carefull when slinging insults as [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >getting social security. I paid into it and I'm collecting on my own, >not off my husband's account. And you and your husband could end up on nothing but Social Security just like DArlington if the state paying his pension collapses as it could do.
>Back home? I live in Texas. Last time I heard it was still part of the USA. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >that most people wouldn't chose to do. He made a difference in a lot of >lives and he's damned proud of it. I'm proud of him, too. As somebody with a special ed teacher in the family and several more teachers as friends and relatives I find that interesting. I have meet very few teachers who could hold their own in an industrial job. Most think they could but reality is most could not. If he did go that route it seems he would just be hitting retirement assuming he was not screwed over when his employer collapsed a few years ago.
>He worked two jobs to put 6 kids through college because a teacher's >salary wasn't enough even when his spouse was working full-time. If he >is collecting a well-earned pension from the City of New York then he >deserves every penny of it. He paid into social security just like >everyone else. The government says you have to. I know - teaching is back loaded - the first few years they work the hardest and are paid the least. After that they do quite well in NY. You folks are in worse shape than I thought you were as I was not sure if he was teaching in NY of NJ. CA is getting the headlines but NY is right behind them with a state legislature that does not want to deal with it. NYC has a time bomb in the police department that will drop a huge financial burden on the Police department starting in a few years.
>We saved our money in tax-deferred annuities and 401ks as well as in the >bank. When we RV'd we paid our own way though we used membership camping [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >than folks who worked hard and saved for their "golden years" then just >come out and say so. I think you are entirely clueless about how most folks don't have the easy ride you husband got as a teacher or the really nice pension and benefits package. For starters assuming he was Tier I he probably retired significantly earlier on a full pension so he had time to play with another career while socking money way. Few folks made even close to the money he did or have the pension he does let alone the benefit package. I'm sure you cut corners - it's part of your nature. OTOH you do it because you can as opposed to because you have to. You have had a lot of rocks in your personal life but you also have had a lot more rewards than the average person. Keep that in mind and you won't keep coming of so arrogant.
Janet Wilder - 06 Jul 2009 19:36 GMT >>> And we all know you are living off the fat of the well screwed >>> taxpayers back home. I'd be a bit carefull when slinging insults as [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > just like DArlington if the state paying his pension collapses as it > could do. IIRC Darlington and her husband both worked in the health care industry. I believe she once made the statement that they chose not to participate in the company's retirement plan. If people choose to live for the moment and not take the future into account, that is their business, but they don't really have a right to whine about their meager retirement income when they did have the opportunity to provide for themselves.
>> Back home? I live in Texas. Last time I heard it was still part of the USA. >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > meet very few teachers who could hold their own in an industrial job. > Most think they could but reality is most could not. ...and these are the people who are educating our future generations. You think this is a good thing?
>If he did go > that route it seems he would just be hitting retirement assuming he > was not screwed over when his employer collapsed a few years ago. He's 68. He would have been lucky to have kept any benefits in today's economy. Even back in 1995, I was "downsized" because I was pushing 50 and a "liability" because I was vested in the pension plan. As for making it in the corporate world, he was going to college and studying engineering when he worked in a summer program for retarded children. He found it so rewarding that he gave up on a more lucrative future to do something that I doubt anyone reading this would have chosen to do. Instead of deprecating him, you should be applauding him.
>> He worked two jobs to put 6 kids through college because a teacher's >> salary wasn't enough even when his spouse was working full-time. If he [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > a huge financial burden on the Police department starting in a few > years. I don't know what you think NYC pays its teachers but when he retired in 1995 he had just hit the $60,000 mark. That's with extra money for his two advanced degrees, a few dollars for his special education license and 32 years on the job. You think that's good money?
The state has nothing to to with his pension. It's from The City. They are separate funds and separately managed and administrated. It's secure and even if it wasn't we prepared for our future by SAVING so we didn't have to rely on pensions or social security if something happened.
>> We saved our money in tax-deferred annuities and 401ks as well as in the >> bank. When we RV'd we paid our own way though we used membership camping [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > easy ride you husband got as a teacher or the really nice pension and > benefits package. Easy ride! There was never a time in his working life that he didn't have to work a second job to support his family. He was up at the crack of dawn to deliver newspapers. The family helped on Sundays. When he became too ill to do the paper routes, he drove airport limousines. If he has a nice retirement plan, he earned every penny and every benefit. As for the wonderful benefits package, it sure didn't keep me from having to pay over $40,000 in cash from my own pocket for my cancer treatment. You have some weird illusions.
The father of my children who also taught elementary school was never home because he worked every night and on the weekends, too. My neighbor worked in the Ford Motor plant. He was home with his kids every night and all weekend long. He never finished high school.
For starters assuming he was Tier I he probably
> retired significantly earlier on a full pension so he had time to play > with another career while socking money way. He took a buy-out one year before his 55th birthday. It was either that or go out on disability.
>Few folks made even > close to the money he did or have the pension he does let alone the > benefit package. Most of the people we know who were not teachers made way more money. The pension is a "thank you" for the sweat and the effort that went into helping other people's children while not being able to spend enough time with his own because he needed to make enough money to support them. You have some strange ideas about teachers. He's not making millions on his pension. It's probably less than a corporate pension for a worker of the same amount of years.
>I'm sure you cut corners - it's part of your > nature. OTOH you do it because you can as opposed to because you have > to. You have had a lot of rocks in your personal life but you also > have had a lot more rewards than the average person. Keep that in > mind and you won't keep coming of so arrogant. Barry's heart is functioning at 30%. He has advanced diabetes and a degenerated herniated disc in his spine which can't be helped because of his other conditions. I have half a tongue and will never recover from the side effects of the radiation. I live with the knowledge that the kind of cancer I had is more likely to return than to not come back. Yesterday was the 13th anniversary of my daughter's death. Both of us would give up those "rewards" to have her back and to have our health.
Tell me again how lucky we are. There are few who would trade places with us.
I was a single mom for 5 years and I struggled to support my children working full-time while going to college in the evening to get my BA so that I could give them a better life. There were nights when I went to bed hungry because there was only enough food for them and not for me. I still contributed to my 401K because I did not want to be a burden on anyone when I was too old to work. I'm sure you have had a much easier life.
No one died and left me or Barry any money. We did not win any lotteries. Just where the heck do you think we got this "largess" you seem to credit us with.
Sorry, nothermark, you are just way off base. We have both worked hard all of our lives and we were careful with our money because we had to be, not because it was a whim. We planned for our retirement and did without a lot so that we could give our kids an education while we saved for our future. Don't consider us lucky or undeserving of our retirement. We labored for every penny just like a lot of other good folks.
You should be going after whiny Mrs. Darlington who did not put money away for her retirement and is now expecting the government to take care of her.
 Signature Janet Wilder Way-the-heck-south Texas Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
nothermark - 07 Jul 2009 01:22 GMT >>>> And we all know you are living off the fat of the well screwed >>>> taxpayers back home. I'd be a bit carefull when slinging insults as [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] >something that I doubt anyone reading this would have chosen to do. >Instead of deprecating him, you should be applauding him. I am not doing either one. I am dealing in reality. I know quite a few engineers who were dumped the same way you were back in the early 90's. His age would have made him a target then and he would not have had the state pension plan he has now.
>>> He worked two jobs to put 6 kids through college because a teacher's >>> salary wasn't enough even when his spouse was working full-time. If he [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >two advanced degrees, a few dollars for his special education license >and 32 years on the job. You think that's good money? In 1995 it was, and it's not bad now. In 1995 it put him in the top 40% if not top 20% of incomes. I have not looked at the table lately.
>The state has nothing to to with his pension. It's from The City. They >are separate funds and separately managed and administrated. It's secure >and even if it wasn't we prepared for our future by SAVING so we didn't >have to rely on pensions or social security if something happened. The state and the city are tied very closely. If one goes down the other goes with it.
You keep emphasizing savings but you neglect the basic fact that somebody making $60,000 / yr and somebody making $20,000 / yr both saving 10% are in very different retirement positions.
>>> We saved our money in tax-deferred annuities and 401ks as well as in the >>> bank. When we RV'd we paid our own way though we used membership camping [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >having to pay over $40,000 in cash from my own pocket for my cancer >treatment. You have some weird illusions. He chose to work that way the same way I choose to work 45 - 50 hrs / wk.
At least you had the $40,000. Most of us don't.
>The father of my children who also taught elementary school was never >home because he worked every night and on the weekends, too. My neighbor >worked in the Ford Motor plant. He was home with his kids every night >and all weekend long. He never finished high school. It's all a matter of priorities. And iin yur case the very high cost of living in the NYC area.
>For starters assuming he was Tier I he probably >> retired significantly earlier on a full pension so he had time to play >> with another career while socking money way. > >He took a buy-out one year before his 55th birthday. It was either that >or go out on disability. Very nice deal too.
>>Few folks made even >> close to the money he did or have the pension he does let alone the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >millions on his pension. It's probably less than a corporate pension for >a worker of the same amount of years. Glad you are hanging out with the "right" folks.
Don't bother with the teacher sob story, I have too many in the family.
I never said he was making millions. I have said and will say that he is probably up in the top half of the country in retirement income with a very nice benefit package compared to most folks. It is also probably quite a bit more than he would have from the corporate world as they were cutting back and would not have given him a buyout. They probably would have laid him off at 50 couple if he was having health problems. The reason given would have been poor productivity and excess personnel as things slowed down. Seen it more than once.
>>I'm sure you cut corners - it's part of your >> nature. OTOH you do it because you can as opposed to because you have [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >Yesterday was the 13th anniversary of my daughter's death. Both of us >would give up those "rewards" to have her back and to have our health.
>Tell me again how lucky we are. There are few who would trade places >with us. Probably mor ethan you think.
I was not aware of that much of what both your health issues were other than the fact that you had issues. At least you are alive.
>I was a single mom for 5 years and I struggled to support my children >working full-time while going to college in the evening to get my BA so [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >away for her retirement and is now expecting the government to take care >of her. You just cannot get past the fact that she probably never had it to put away. You did.
Janet Wilder - 07 Jul 2009 05:15 GMT > I am not doing either one. I am dealing in reality. I know quite a > few engineers who were dumped the same way you were back in the early > 90's. His age would have made him a target then and he would not have > had the state pension plan he has now. He does not have a state pension plan. New York City teachers have a New York City pension plan. I wrote that, but in your efforts to disparage him, you seemed to have missed that.
>>>> He worked two jobs to put 6 kids through college because a teacher's >>>> salary wasn't enough even when his spouse was working full-time. If he [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > In 1995 it was, and it's not bad now. In 1995 it put him in the top > 40% if not top 20% of incomes. I have not looked at the table lately. Admit you are wrong and stop the BS. I worked in finance and taxation and I can assure that $60,000 a year was no where near the top 20% of incomes in the country. You are just making stuff up to justify whatever it is that's under your skin.
>> The state has nothing to to with his pension. It's from The City. They >> are separate funds and separately managed and administrated. It's secure [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > The state and the city are tied very closely. If one goes down the > other goes with it. No they are not. They are independent. They are managed separately and administered separately. Your information is wrong.
> You keep emphasizing savings but you neglect the basic fact that > somebody making $60,000 / yr and somebody making $20,000 / yr both > saving 10% are in very different retirement positions. I saved for retirement when I was a working single mother putting myself through college. I made considerably less than $60,000 per year. And if you were able to read through your prejudices you would have seen that he only made that amount in the last year before he retired.
>>>> We saved our money in tax-deferred annuities and 401ks as well as in the >>>> bank. When we RV'd we paid our own way though we used membership camping [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > At least you had the $40,000. Most of us don't. If you are so dirt poor, how can you have ever afforded an RV? That money nearly wiped out one of our retirement plans. Do you think the angels came down from heaven and gave me that money. What is the matter with you?
>> He took a buy-out one year before his 55th birthday. It was either that >> or go out on disability. > > Very nice deal too. What do you know about his deal? Believe me it was not as good as some of the deals in the years before him. He took some heavy penalties on that "nice deal" but it worked better for him than disability.
>> Tell me again how lucky we are. There are few who would trade places >> with us. > > Probably mor ethan you think. You actually believe people would prefer a few dollars in the bank to good health? You actually think anyone would prefer to bury their 21 year-old child just to have some money in the bank? You're sick.
> I was not aware of that much of what both your health issues were > other than the fact that you had issues. At least you are alive. Maybe you should think before criticizing.
>> You should be going after whiny Mrs. Darlington who did not put money >> away for her retirement and is now expecting the government to take care >> of her. > > You just cannot get past the fact that she probably never had it to > put away. You did. But there were many years that I didn't have it to put away. I put it away anyway. I did not want to wind up like Mrs. Darlington. She stated that they chose not to participate in their company plans. She never said she could not afford to participate. They were working for a hospital,for heavens sake, not McDonalds at minimum wage.
She made her choices and her bed. I sacrificed to provide for my own future. I don't have to rely on the government to take care of me. I'm damned proud of that. If I were Mrs. Darlington, I'd have been so ashamed of my poor choices that I'd never have let anyone know about it.
Get over your stupid idea that I was born with a silver spoon in my mouth. My parents never even owned their own home. My dad worked several jobs to support his family and my mom worked full-time, too. I went to Jersey City State College even though I had been accepted by much better schools because that was all my folks could afford. I worked part-time to help pay my way. I dropped out after 2 years when I married my first husband. I was 20 years old. I got a job. He went into the National Guard then his unit was called up and I had to move to Alabama where I lost my first baby. They started levying his unit to Viet Nam and I was still not well from the miscarriage that had me in the hospital for 2 weeks. No one would have wanted to be me.
Once my children were in school, I worked full time, too. I even went back to school part-time with a 6 month old baby, a 2 year-old and a 4 year-old so I could get my associates degree and help our family finances. When that baby turned 2, I went full-time with the aid of a student loan and two scholarships and got my AAS as a Legal Assistant. I graduated in 1978 and was earning a whopping $8,000/year. A couple of years later I was a single parent making less than $12,000 a year, but I managed to save a few bucks here and there and paid for my courses, fees and books at Rutgers going to school at night after working all day with a 30-50 mile commute each way (depending on the job) and raising 3 kids. While I was doing that I was representing myself in court, because I couldn't afford a lawyer, at least 4 times a year against my crazy ex-husband whose girlfriend wanted to live in our house so he kept fighting for custody of the kids. Besides everything else, I had to find the money to take my kids to family counseling to help them get through the crap their dad was pulling.
I turned my thermostat down at night and put aluminum coated sheets under our bed sheets to reflect body warmth. I learned to cut up larger on sale cuts of meat and whole chickens to save money. I used the bones to make soup. I made pasta sauces from scratch from the tomatoes I grew and canned. Instead of resting on Sundays, I cooked for the week ahead so my kids could have decent, healthy meals. We picked apples and made our own applesauce. That's how I managed to save the little bit I could to put in my retirement fund. Ask Mrs. Whiny Darlington what she sacrificed. Her own son wouldn't even pay for her to come and visit him in New York. That tells me something about her.
No one has the right to tell me I have had an easy life and I am certain that no one would have traded places with me. I don't know what your problem is with me or care much what you fantasize about me, but I worked for my retirement and I put money aside even when there was precious little of it to go around.
I never asked anyone for anything. My husband and I worked for everything we have and because we did, we deserve to enjoy the rewards of our labor and our frugality. There is nothing you can say that will make it otherwise. You can keep trying, but you continue to bark your misconceptions and bad data up the wrong tree.
 Signature Janet Wilder Way-the-heck-south Texas Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
nothermark - 09 Jul 2009 03:20 GMT >> I am not doing either one. I am dealing in reality. I know quite a >> few engineers who were dumped the same way you were back in the early [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >York City pension plan. I wrote that, but in your efforts to disparage >him, you seemed to have missed that. No I did not miss it. NYC and NY State have so much co mingled money they might as well be married. If either one goes down the other will go with it. The way downstate is managing the state it is going down. If you want to take my remarks personally that is your issue not mine. My comments were not intended maliciously.
>>>>> He worked two jobs to put 6 kids through college because a teacher's >>>>> salary wasn't enough even when his spouse was working full-time. If he [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >incomes in the country. You are just making stuff up to justify whatever >it is that's under your skin. Quote me right - I said top 20 - 40% point. In 1995 the top 40% breakpoint was $64,533. Maybe i'm off by a couple of bucks, and maybe you lowballed him. I neither know nor care. Either way at $60,000 he was doing OK by national standards.
http://books.google.com/books?id=3l_Et2sJm8IC&pg=PA38&lpg=PA38&dq=Income+by+quin tile+1995&source=bl&ots=F0ca_M6v-X&sig=mtXgy9XNVVBY6paTuYz84uAlfQs&hl=en&ei=j0tV Sq22DsO0tgfWuqS9Ag&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2
>>> The state has nothing to to with his pension. It's from The City. They >>> are separate funds and separately managed and administrated. It's secure [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >you were able to read through your prejudices you would have seen that >he only made that amount in the last year before he retired. I understand how he was paid. I'm glad you had the money to save. Not all folks can save that much. You are still ignoring the basic point that folks making $20,000 cannot save as much as folks making $60,000 or anything in that vicinity. If they are both street people living in a cardboard box the disparity in incomes still makes a difference.
>>>>> We saved our money in tax-deferred annuities and 401ks as well as in the >>>>> bank. When we RV'd we paid our own way though we used membership camping [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] >angels came down from heaven and gave me that money. What is the matter >with you? I don't own the RV. I just get to fix it and drive it. ;-) We are more like you and Barry in reverse. As far as that goes we still have less than $18,000 in it with the repairs and improvements.
BTW, I never said I was dirt poor. We are somewhere between DArlington and you.
>>> He took a buy-out one year before his 55th birthday. It was either that >>> or go out on disability. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >of the deals in the years before him. He took some heavy penalties on >that "nice deal" but it worked better for him than disability. How about I have a relaitves and three friends who got the teacher buyouts.
My points are he got the buyout young enough to retire and enjoy it and he got it instead of getting canned. Neither were likely if he was working in private industry.
>>> Tell me again how lucky we are. There are few who would trade places >>> with us. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >good health? You actually think anyone would prefer to bury their 21 >year-old child just to have some money in the bank? You're sick. Not sick, just understand folks from a different angle than you. You are still alive, doing some traveling and getting by. I know folks who are not. That does not mean your life is a bed of roses. It does mean there are folks worse off than you.
>> I was not aware of that much of what both your health issues were >> other than the fact that you had issues. At least you are alive. > >Maybe you should think before criticizing. Can't think without data but that probably would not change anything I said.
>>> You should be going after whiny Mrs. Darlington who did not put money >>> away for her retirement and is now expecting the government to take care [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >said she could not afford to participate. They were working for a >hospital,for heavens sake, not McDonalds at minimum wage. Have you checked what most folks in Hospitals are paid? It drops quickly after the medical staff. I have no idea what she was doing but assume she was not professional medical.
>She made her choices and her bed. I sacrificed to provide for my own >future. I don't have to rely on the government to take care of me. I'm [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >still not well from the miscarriage that had me in the hospital for 2 >weeks. No one would have wanted to be me. And I did a two year college instead of 4 because my folks could or would not pay for more.
I never said you were born rich. What I said was you did a lot better than a lot of folks but you keep complaining about everybody who did not make your choices or get your breaks. You and LZ could form a club.
>Once my children were in school, I worked full time, too. I even went >back to school part-time with a 6 month old baby, a 2 year-old and a 4 [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] >make it otherwise. You can keep trying, but you continue to bark your >misconceptions and bad data up the wrong tree. One of us does not understand basic economics or wealth distribution.
You just keep enjoying. I really don't care. All I said and will continue to say is that it could be worse and you could have been worse off than you are.
The only thing I really got annoyed at was your attitude that everybody else could be as well off as you are and they deserve not to be because they must have deliberately screwed up. Life is much like a card game. Every winner means a loser. Some folks win more hands than others. Stop whining because you won more than some folks but less than others.
Lone Haranguer - 09 Jul 2009 03:57 GMT > One of us does not understand basic economics or wealth distribution. Or maybe both of you.
I had the opportunity to make more money than I did but I valued my time more than money.
I kept my family fed and got to spend a lot of time with them. That was time well spent and the rewards are never-ending.
When I got married in 1955 I had $50 and a '49 Ford. I spent the next 17 years as an enlisted person in the AF so obviously I didn't get paid a lot of money. I worked at various jobs over the years, mostly self-employed but was able to remain debt free so I could afford to retire at age 55.
You didn't have the option to earn a military or civil service pension? I doubt that.
People who didn't want to move more than 3 miles from Mom do not get much sympathy from me when they complain about "not getting any breaks". LZ
nothermark - 09 Jul 2009 13:04 GMT >> One of us does not understand basic economics or wealth distribution. > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >much sympathy from me when they complain about "not getting any breaks". >LZ Actually pensions went away for most folks about the time you left the workforce. The stock market was running and the buzzword was 401K. We were all going to get 401K's and ride the wave of happiness as the stock market soared. Problem was the crash. Other problem is that many big companies have stopped supporting 401K's now. Many small none's never supported any kind of pension plan. many folks do not know the options available for anything other than a basic bank account.
Pegleg - 09 Jul 2009 13:39 GMT > Actually pensions went away for most folks about the time you left the > workforce. The stock market was running and the buzzword was 401K. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > know the options available for anything other than a basic bank > account. Assuming he left the workforce in the late 80s there were plenty of options still available in the form of corporate, civil service and individual retirement plans for those self employed. IRAs have been around for ages. The biggest turn around occurred in the very late 90s early 2000 when things started to go to sh.t.
The need to responsibly manage your future has always been there, I was taught. Too many just ignored that responsibility out of greed and the need for instant gratification.
Brian
Max - 09 Jul 2009 15:19 GMT "Pegleg" wrote
>........... the need for instant gratification. > > Brian That right there covers at least ninety percent of it.
Max (a penny saved is a penny earned) <G>
nothermark - 09 Jul 2009 22:19 GMT >> Actually pensions went away for most folks about the time you left the >> workforce. The stock market was running and the buzzword was 401K. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > >Brian Not arguing but it's worth pointing out that most working class folks do not know how to set up an IRA or who to talk to to do it. It's really look at as a "rich folks thing".
Lone Haranguer - 09 Jul 2009 22:45 GMT >>> Actually pensions went away for most folks about the time you >>> left the workforce. The stock market was running and the [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Not arguing but it's worth pointing out that most working class folks > do not know how to set up an IRA or who to talk to to do it. Not true of working class folks that I know. If they can read; the information is widely available and was before the internet became common. Ignorance is no excuse applies here too.
It's
> really look at as a "rich folks thing". Pure baloney. There has been information available on setting up IRAs for over 30 years.
http://www.freeirahelp.com/
Traditional IRA Information A traditional IRA is the original account which became available in the 1970s. Some people get a tax deduction for contributions to these accounts. A great opportunity to save for retirement. ***************** LZ
Janet Wilder - 09 Jul 2009 23:11 GMT >>> Actually pensions went away for most folks about the time you left the >>> workforce. The stock market was running and the buzzword was 401K. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > do not know how to set up an IRA or who to talk to to do it. It's > really look at as a "rich folks thing". That is total BS! Even H&R Block preparers recommend them and help people set them up. You can set up an IRA with a CD in a bank. It's hard to find a local bank office that doesn't have a sign somewhere in or on the branch advertising tax savings with an IRA during income tax season.
 Signature Janet Wilder Way-the-heck-south Texas Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
Pegleg - 10 Jul 2009 00:04 GMT > Not arguing but it's worth pointing out that most working class folks > do not know how to set up an IRA or who to talk to to do it. It's > really look at as a "rich folks thing". I never was nor am I now "rich" but was taught early in life to take care of my self because you can't count on anyone or anything (govt) to do it for you. That came from my Dad.
There was and still is a huge need to educate our young folks while they are at the secondary education level on how to plan their future whether they chose to be doctors, lawyers, plumbers or painters. This has been talked about a lot but is still not being addressed thoroughly. Instead of buying kids cars,iphones and designer clothes we should be helping them manage savings accounts, IRAs, etc. We helped our grandson open his first savings account and opened a Fidelity retirement account for him for HS graduation. He has been adding to that while serving in Afghanistan. He knows it won't be available to him until in his late 50s. Education is the key to everything!
Brian
Janet Wilder - 10 Jul 2009 19:32 GMT >> Not arguing but it's worth pointing out that most working class folks >> do not know how to set up an IRA or who to talk to to do it. It's [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Afghanistan. He knows it won't be available to him until in his late > 50s. Education is the key to everything! First. I want to wish your grandson a safe return.
You and I are very much alike in that we were taught to rely upon ourselves and not the government. My parents were raised during the Great Depression and the only time they borrowed money was to finance their cars. They wouldn't even buy a home because they were afraid of a mortgage. (They were raised in apartments in New York City, a mortgage was something they knew about from watching "The Perils of Pauline")
When my children were 16 they were required to get a part-time job. I paid for their winter coats and shoes ( they were given a limit for sneakers) but they had to pay for half of their clothes. They learned to save their money. They learned how to shop for the best quality at the lowest prices. They also learned responsibility by having to show up for work, dress a certain way and do what they were told to do.
 Signature Janet Wilder Way-the-heck-south Texas Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
Janet Wilder - 09 Jul 2009 23:07 GMT >> Actually pensions went away for most folks about the time you left the >> workforce. The stock market was running and the buzzword was 401K. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > taught. Too many just ignored that responsibility out of greed and the > need for instant gratification. Here! Here! You got that right, Brian. That is exactly what I was trying to say to the whiners. Even when I was struggling to raise a family on less than $13,000 a year, I managed to put some money away in an IRA. I made some good choices and I paid attention to what was going on in the financial world not relying upon the so-called experts to take care of my tiny fund. I never went looking for quick returns and invested on a time-line that coincided with my age and anticipated date of retirement.
Nothermark seems to think that everyone who invested wisely had tons of extra cash to do it with, but that's just not true. He seems to be very bitter about his own situation and wants to take it out on those of us who, because of a little foresight, are in better financial shape than he is. JMHO
 Signature Janet Wilder Way-the-heck-south Texas Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
Lone Haranguer - 09 Jul 2009 14:43 GMT >>> One of us does not understand basic economics or wealth distribution. >> Or maybe both of you. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > Actually pensions went away for most folks about the time you left the > workforce. The only pensions I mentioned were military or civil service. To get a job in the post office you need only a 6th grade education to score well on the test. I worked as a substitute rural mail carrier while going to college and even when I was doing appraisals. Easiest money I ever made and I could have gone full time if my back had been up to it.
The stock market was running and the buzzword was 401K.
Not with me it wasn't. My wife's pension plan was a 401K but you could roll those over into IRAs and that is what we did when she retired in 1989. A CD IRA only paid 5% but it is insured by the FDIC and you know how much it's worth. When her brother retired in 1999 I advised him to do the same and now his widow is glad I talked him into it. It wasn't an easy sell.
> We were all going to get 401K's and ride the wave of happiness as the > stock market soared. Problem was the crash. Nope. The problem was you gambled that the market would always keep going up. Greed trumped common sense.
Other problem is that
> many big companies have stopped supporting 401K's now. Many small > none's never supported any kind of pension plan. many folks do not > know the options available for anything other than a basic bank > account. I do my best educating friends and relatives about the options. I was a state certified life estate planner and I don't gamble. I couldn't look people in the eye if I had been peddling stocks and the buyers are now holding worthless paper. Those I advised to buy annuities or CDs are still smiling. LZ
nada - 09 Jul 2009 19:50 GMT >> One of us does not understand basic economics or wealth distribution. > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > much sympathy from me when they complain about "not getting any breaks". > LZ no more politics. I absolutely refuse to be dra23n in or to even think of politics.
Lone Haranguer - 09 Jul 2009 20:20 GMT >>> One of us does not understand basic economics or wealth distribution. >> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > no more politics. I absolutely refuse to be dra23n in or to even think > of politics. Nothing in my remarks above are political. Just the facts of living and how we all make choices.
We may all be born with equal rights but we aren't all born in equal circumstances or with equal talents. You go with what you have.
I learned early in life that when listening to losers whining, NOTHING was ever their fault. LZ
nada - 09 Jul 2009 21:29 GMT >>>> One of us does not understand basic economics or wealth distribution. >>> [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > was ever their fault. > LZ Nothing wrong with looking at politics. The challenge is to be centered on what is best for everyone and the Republic and not just a few. Reality is they are political. There is no escaping it. We should all be involved and maybe we wouldn't be enduring the messes heaped upon us. Form time to time we get tired of fooling with it. I'm about permanently tired of hearing the latest assaults up on the People and the republic. I hope the younger generation will get away from the TV and get to work to defend the Constitution and our Country. No offense will be taken. My resume need not be published. I was born poorer than dirt. Never made a mint but we do better than most even though we still think we are poor. As far as doing with what we are or have I did more than my share and will continue to try and contribute to the good of my Countrymen and Country. At this stage in life it will be negligible though. I would dearly love to hear about RVing. I would and will contribute if I have anything to offer.
Lone Haranguer - 09 Jul 2009 22:16 GMT >>>>> One of us does not understand basic economics or wealth distribution. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > dearly love to hear about RVing. I would and will contribute if I have > anything to offer. Because I retired at age 55, I've had 20 good years of RVing. Prior to that it was mostly weekends, deer hunting trips to Montana and one vacation to Florida.
We learned as we went and I wouldn't have it any other way. It's more of an adventure that way. If my back were up to it, we would still be doing a lot more traveling. I've towed a pickup with a boat on top all over the western U.S. and fished dozens of lakes and rivers. LZ
Chuck Norris - 10 Jul 2009 00:34 GMT >The challenge is to be centered >on what is best for everyone and the Republic and not just a few. And that would be for government to get the helll out of peoples' way and allow them to rise to their maximum potential. Of course, teaching this tidbit in school, starting in grade 1 would help.
Chuck --
Liberals. You can't talk to them and bullets are just so damned expensive!
Chuck Norris
nothermark - 10 Jul 2009 01:59 GMT >>The challenge is to be centered >>on what is best for everyone and the Republic and not just a few. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Chuck along with teaching how to do it.
nada - 10 Jul 2009 03:04 GMT >> The challenge is to be centered >> on what is best for everyone and the Republic and not just a few. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Chuck Norris Government is necessary to prevent predation, in the business arena. We've just seen a graphic episode and it continues. As long as we have Lobbyists and their Employer's money perverting our Government they will continue these escapades. I hope eliminating government is what is necessary for your success. Corporate money bought much, of the roadblocks, to the small business enterprises. They legislated away their competition.
D. Arlington - 07 Jul 2009 03:31 GMT >>>> And we all know you are living off the fat of the well screwed >>>> taxpayers back home. I'd be a bit carefull when slinging insults as [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > IIRC Darlington and her husband both worked in the health care industry. Just for the record. No Janet. "I" worked in the health care industry. He worked in telecommunications.
> I believe she once made the statement that they chose not to participate > in the company's retirement plan. I never made any such statement. Neither of us had the opportunity to participate on any company's retirement plans.
Snip!
Hunter Hampton - 07 Jul 2009 03:43 GMT >Snip! Snip?
Is "snip" the new plonk?
Hunter
Doc - 07 Jul 2009 04:12 GMT >>Snip! > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Hunter No, snip is supposed to be to remove irrelevant parts of the quoted post and to trim the sheer length of multiple quoted posts.
Hunter Hampton - 07 Jul 2009 04:51 GMT >No, snip is supposed to be to remove irrelevant parts of the quoted post >and to trim the sheer length of multiple quoted posts. I know what that snip is... her placement of snip, without <> around it led me to ask her... not you.
D. Arlington - 07 Jul 2009 14:04 GMT >>>Snip! >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > No, snip is supposed to be to remove irrelevant parts of the quoted post > and to trim the sheer length of multiple quoted posts. Thank you. I'm surprised she didn't know that.
Carl A. in FL - 07 Jul 2009 14:58 GMT >>>>Snip! >>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Thank you. I'm surprised she didn't know that. and I'm surprised that the original snipper didn't know that the proper way to indicate a snip is
---- snip ----
 Signature Carl A. in FL http://sky.prohosting.com/chainfl/
Max - 07 Jul 2009 15:57 GMT >>>>>Snip! >>>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > ---- snip ---- And I'm surprised that it matters in a place where protocol receives such short shrift.
Max
Carl A. in FL - 07 Jul 2009 17:47 GMT >>>>>>Snip! >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > Max Well, observance of basic protocols of RORT like bottom-posting, proper plonking, snipping format, and never letting an opportunity go by to not make a useless contribution all contribute to a long shrift atmosphere.
 Signature Carl A. in FL http://sky.prohosting.com/chainfl/
nothermark - 09 Jul 2009 03:22 GMT >>>>>Snip! >>>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >---- snip ---- I learned it as:
>snip< I guess there are options. ;-)
Carl A. in FL - 09 Jul 2009 03:40 GMT >>>>>>Snip! >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > I guess there are options. ;-) You say >snip< and I say ---- snip ---- and I'm OK with either, as long as there is enough left to fertilize the conversation.
 Signature Carl A. in FL http://sky.prohosting.com/chainfl/
bill horne - 09 Jul 2009 05:21 GMT >>>>>>> Snip! >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > You say >snip< and I say ---- snip ---- and I'm OK with either, as long > as there is enough left to fertilize the conversation. And I say <snipped>. That means I took out stuff that no longer seemed relevant as the thread progressed.
If I were to say Snip!, that would mean I not only thought it was no longer relevant, but also that it was worthless sh.t in the first place.
SNIP! would be the same as Snip!, but that I did it while standing up and flailing my arms.
 Signature bill Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
Hunter Hampton - 09 Jul 2009 05:47 GMT >If I were to say Snip!, that would mean I not only thought it was no >longer relevant, but also that it was worthless sh.t in the first place. > >SNIP! would be the same as Snip!, but that I did it while standing up >and flailing my arms. See, that's what I thought... it was snippy.
Hunter
Chuck Norris - 08 Jul 2009 03:15 GMT >>>>Snip! >>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Thank you. I'm surprised she didn't know that. Me too. Of course, Janet and Hunter are the resident experts on every subject. Keepers Of Odd Knowledge, AKA KOOKs. It is unwise to challenge them when they speak on a subject. Since even when wrong, they are always correct, but never right.
--
Liberals. You can't talk to them and bullets are just so damned expensive!
Chuck Norris
Hunter Hampton - 08 Jul 2009 04:06 GMT >> No, snip is supposed to be to remove irrelevant parts of the quoted post >> and to trim the sheer length of multiple quoted posts. > >Thank you. I'm surprised she didn't know that. Sigh... when you put an exclamation mark behind a simple word like snip it changes the meaning.
When you are cropping words out of a post it's like this <snip>
I'm surprised you didn't know that.
Hunter
D. Arlington - 07 Jul 2009 14:03 GMT >>Snip! > > Snip? > > Is "snip" the new plonk? No, "snip" removes extraneous text that was irrelevant to what I posted.
> Hunter Hunter Hampton - 08 Jul 2009 04:07 GMT >No, "snip" removes extraneous text that was irrelevant to what I posted. With an exclamation mark?
I don't think so.
Hunter
Janet Wilder - 07 Jul 2009 05:18 GMT >>>>> And we all know you are living off the fat of the well screwed >>>>> taxpayers back home. I'd be a bit carefull when slinging insults as [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Snip! Yes you did. I distinctly remember it in one of your whines about not having any money to pay for campgrounds. That was the time you came here asking everyone for advice on where to camp so you could visit your son in Queens. Then when everyone made suggestions, you started complaining about not having any money and having to wait for social security because you "chose" not to put money in your company pension plans. I have a good memory.
 Signature Janet Wilder Way-the-heck-south Texas Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
D. Arlington - 07 Jul 2009 14:13 GMT > Yes you did. I distinctly remember it in one of your whines about not > having any money to pay for campgrounds. A that time I didn't. Everything to you is a "whine." What a pathetic person you are.
That was the time you came here
> asking everyone for advice on where to camp so you could visit your son in > Queens. Then when everyone made suggestions, you started complaining > about not having any money and having to wait for social security because > you "chose" not to put money in your company pension plans. I have a good > memory. Please produce the post where I claimed we CHOSE to "not" put money in our Company's *non-existent* pension plans. Where is that post? You are a miserable lying wretch, a poor excuse for woman. My husband worked for himself so there was no company pension plan. I worked for a small company and there was no pension plan there. I was happy to get health Ins. You're an unhappy frustrated pathetic wretch lashing out at others for the misery in your own life. It has to suck to be you.
Janet Wilder - 07 Jul 2009 20:40 GMT >> Yes you did. I distinctly remember it in one of your whines about not >> having any money to pay for campgrounds. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > worked for himself so there was no company pension plan. I worked for a > small company and there was no pension plan there. Ever hear of an IRA? They were and are tax deductions. I only had a pension at one job. I had 401Ks at only 3 jobs. I had to keep changing jobs to make more money. I didn't use "no company pension plan" as an excuse. How sad for you that you did.
If I could manage to scrounge up a few dollars a year to fund my retirement, you could have found even more with two wage earners. Face it, you were too into spending your money for the moment and now you have to wait for the government to take care of you.
I was happy to get
> health Ins. You're an unhappy frustrated pathetic wretch lashing out at > others for the misery in your own life. It has to suck to be you. You just can't stand the truth, can you?
As for my life, I have had an amazing time and continue to enjoy it. I was not complaining, just replying to nothermark's silliness.
Despite all the rotten things I have had to deal with in my life, I have managed to be a productive citizen. I give of my time and my resources to many charitable organizations as a way of thanking the "powers that be" for the good things in my life. I even give blood 3 times a year.
My home is always open to my friends and I have many friends all over the world.
You are just jealous of me because I have a comfortable retirement and you, who didn't have the brains to plan for it, have to pinch pennies and wait for freebees from the government. I can understand that. I would feel sorry for you, but you traded the present for the future and now you expect the rest of to take care of you with government money while you look down your nose at folks who live in mobile home parks.
 Signature Janet Wilder Way-the-heck-south Texas Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
Lone Haranguer - 06 Jul 2009 00:04 GMT >>>> "D. Arlington" <invalid@nowhere.invalid> wrote in message >>>>> I hope not. Where are people who "camp" for the holidays and weekends [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > the government is capable if converting pensions to SSI and has done > it in the past as a money saving move. Barry may not be around long if his pension dries up.... LZ
Lone Haranguer - 03 Jul 2009 21:16 GMT > ************************************************ > BIRMINGHAM, Ala. (AP) - The recession is helping create a new [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Is the happening everywhere?? > Tom J There have been families living in tents in parks and BLM lands along the Colorado River for over 15 years that I'm aware of.
SSI recipients had a regular commune down at the Lake Corpus Christi KOA for a few years until they got the boot. In those days the monthly rent was only about $140. Pretty cheap living. LZ
D. Arlington - 05 Jul 2009 02:59 GMT > There have been families living in tents in parks and BLM lands along the > Colorado River for over 15 years that I'm aware of. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > rent was only about $140. Pretty cheap living. > LZ I'm curious. Why were they given the boot? It was a steady year round income for the KOA park.
Lone Haranguer - 05 Jul 2009 03:52 GMT >> There have been families living in tents in parks and BLM lands along >> the Colorado River for over 15 years that I'm aware of. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I'm curious. Why were they given the boot? It was a steady year round > income for the KOA park. The other customers didn't trust them and they got into a lot of arguments about their lifestyle. They were drawing SSI as "recovering alcoholics" and spent their days guzzling O'Douls. LZ
Carl A. in FL - 05 Jul 2009 03:56 GMT >>> There have been families living in tents in parks and BLM lands along >>> the Colorado River for over 15 years that I'm aware of. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > SSI as "recovering alcoholics" and spent their days guzzling O'Douls. > LZ In addition, in those days KOAs typically charged $20 to $25/night (including necessary extras).
$20 x 30 days = $600. Assume an occupancy rate of only 50% ... still a lot more lucrative than renting by the month.
 Signature Carl A. in FL http://sky.prohosting.com/chainfl/
D. Arlington - 05 Jul 2009 20:20 GMT >> I'm curious. Why were they given the boot? It was a steady year round >> income for the KOA park. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > SSI as "recovering alcoholics" and spent their days guzzling O'Douls. > LZ Oh! :-\
Pepperoni - 05 Jul 2009 05:21 GMT > I'm curious. Why were they given the boot? It was a steady year round > income for the KOA park. In some states, once you occupy a rental for a length of time, you have "tenants rights". It then takes court action to evict you after you fail to pay rent. Easier to move them out after 89 days or 179 days, as the case may be.
Laws vary and are tricky. Freeloaders know their rights and advocate agencies. The owner could even be prevented from cutting electric and water, for example.
Janet Wilder - 05 Jul 2009 18:55 GMT > In some states, once you occupy a rental for a length of time, you have > "tenants rights". It then takes court action to evict you after you fail [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > agencies. The owner could even be prevented from cutting electric and > water, for example. The management in the mobile home/RV park we used to stay at in Rio Hondo are experiencing a similar problem. The people living in a mobile home evacuated it and left no forwarding address. Back taxes to the city are owed on it and the RV park wants to move it out, but they can't even contract a mover without a title. The park owner has to go through several legal processes to get the unit out of his park so he can rent the space.
 Signature Janet Wilder Way-the-heck-south Texas Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
Pegleg - 05 Jul 2009 19:18 GMT > The management in the mobile home/RV park we used to stay at in Rio > Hondo are experiencing a similar problem. The people living in a mobile [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > several legal processes to get the unit out of his park so he can rent > the space. Same thing happened to a friend of ours here in Washington. People bailed and the county won't let her touch it. She finally had it moved to an area on her property where it doesn't impact the rest of the sites but she still can't do anything with it and it has been 2 1/2 years.
Brian
Janet Wilder - 05 Jul 2009 20:52 GMT >> The management in the mobile home/RV park we used to stay at in Rio >> Hondo are experiencing a similar problem. The people living in a [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > to an area on her property where it doesn't impact the rest of the sites > but she still can't do anything with it and it has been 2 1/2 years. Just another case of laws passed to supposedly protect someone that make it impossible for the law-abiding, tax-paying people to get on with making a living.
 Signature Janet Wilder Way-the-heck-south Texas Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
NotMe - 05 Jul 2009 21:04 GMT : >> The management in the mobile home/RV park we used to stay at in Rio : >> Hondo are experiencing a similar problem. The people living in a [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] : it impossible for the law-abiding, tax-paying people to get on with : making a living. For the most part (in Texas and Louisiana, don't know about other states) anything that carries a MV type title the matter can be resolved with a public notice of abandoned property and a bit of paperwork. One of my nephews ended up with two FEMA trailers (one deer camp and one fishing camp) when FEMA parked them on his property and flat refused to move them after proper notice.
Janet Wilder - 05 Jul 2009 23:32 GMT > : >> The management in the mobile home/RV park we used to stay at in Rio > : >> Hondo are experiencing a similar problem. The people living in a [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > when FEMA parked them on his property and flat refused to move them after > proper notice. That's good to know. I'll pass it along. Unfortunately, this is a mobile home and doesn't have a MV title.
 Signature Janet Wilder Way-the-heck-south Texas Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
Pegleg - 05 Jul 2009 21:38 GMT > Just another case of laws passed to supposedly protect someone that make > it impossible for the law-abiding, tax-paying people to get on with > making a living. Another ridiculous case here in WA...A WA legislature wanted to move an older trailer onto a piece of property but local laws prohibited trailers over a certain age so hers didn't meet the requirement. She had a law passed making that prohibition illegal.
Brian
Lone Haranguer - 05 Jul 2009 23:43 GMT >>> The management in the mobile home/RV park we used to stay at in Rio >>> Hondo are experiencing a similar problem. The people living in a [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > it impossible for the law-abiding, tax-paying people to get on with > making a living. That is the main purpose of groups like ACORN. LZ
Bruce S - 06 Jul 2009 03:31 GMT >>> The management in the mobile home/RV park we used to stay at in Rio >>> Hondo are experiencing a similar problem. The people living in a [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > make it impossible for the law-abiding, tax-paying people to get on > with making a living. Last I knew, Nevada had about the most landlord friendly eviction laws in the country. 15 days of non payment, and you are out - and the Marshall's office will sent a deputy out to assist with the eviction.
Bruce
Chuck Norris - 06 Jul 2009 01:39 GMT >> In some states, once you occupy a rental for a length of time, you have >> "tenants rights". It then takes court action to evict you after you fail [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >several legal processes to get the unit out of his park so he can rent >the space. Accidental fire time.
--
Liberals. You can't talk to them and bullets are just so damned expensive!
Chuck Norris
D. Arlington - 05 Jul 2009 20:22 GMT >> I'm curious. Why were they given the boot? It was a steady year round >> income for the KOA park. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > agencies. The owner could even be prevented from cutting electric and > water, for example. In that case.... if I were a CG owner I would do the same thing. I didn't know that was going on.
Frank Howell - 03 Jul 2009 23:38 GMT > ************************************************ > BIRMINGHAM, Ala. (AP) - The recession is helping create a new [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Is the happening everywhere?? > Tom J I don't think it could happen in Calif. Probably 90% of the campgrounds are without hookups. Also most of the campgrounds are $25 a day and those few that have hookups are $39 a day.
 Signature Frank Howell
Pegleg - 04 Jul 2009 05:21 GMT > I don't think it could happen in Calif. Probably 90% of the campgrounds are > without hookups. Also most of the campgrounds are $25 a day and those few > that have hookups are $39 a day. California is looking at selling some of its state parks.
Brian
bobert - 04 Jul 2009 09:43 GMT > California is looking at selling some of its state > parks. > > Brian Heard the other day the Feds want to take them over.
 Signature Hey! It compiles. Ship it.
Bobert In Central California
|
|
|