On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 13:12:56 -0700, "xrongor"
wrote:


"Chuck Harris" wrote in message
...
mike murphy wrote:
anyone ever expect to get a notice of rates going down?

The rates can't go down, because the economy keeps inflating.
The inflation rate may be slow, 1% to 5% per year, but it is
inflating none the less.

Everyone wants their salaries to keep rising, so ...

yeah thats the ticket. salaries are skyrocketing so fast its causing
inflation.....

voted for bush too, did ya?

randy




What a boob! If you have to post this garbage, take it to
rec.radio.shortwave. They would love you over there.

On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:37:52 GMT, Lazy Senior
wrote:

Chuck Harris wrote:

Whether or not I voted for Bush is of course, immaterial. Do you
recall the level of inflation that existed when Carter was president?
How about the relative gas prices? Oh, probably not, you weren't born yet.

-Chuck

That's the way to go, ridicule someone you dont agree with..
Most people dont care what happened 25 yrs ago, we are worried about now
and the future.....

Lazy Senior



So it's OK for Randy to ridicule Chuck but not the other way around?

On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 16:59:50 -0500, " Uncle Peter"
wrote:


"Lazy Senior" wrote in message
news:J9Nff.1009$792.780@trnddc08...

Carefull, Bush supporters are a bit testy these days......

Lazy Senior

Better watch it. They are talking about cutting back on
the food stamp program. It might be back to catfood
for you.





Canned at that!

On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:33:49 GMT, Lazy Senior
wrote:

Chuck Harris wrote:

The rates can't go down, because the economy keeps inflating.
The inflation rate may be slow, 1% to 5% per year, but it is
inflating none the less.

Everyone wants their salaries to keep rising, so ...

-Chuck

The economy keeps inflating cuz we have a president who spends money
like a drunken sailor on a saturday night. The national deficit is
trillions cause he doesnt know how or want to balance a budget. Course
we got a War going that is costing us billions and dont forget our
prez's oil buddies who got a nice tax cut while making billions in
profits. Not surprising UPS has to raise rates when diesel is $3 a
gallon or more....

I havent even mentioned about ham gear going up cause the yen is strong
against our deficited dollar- and its going to get much worse.

Lazy Senior



Better reason to buy boatanchors!

On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 02:27:30 GMT, Bob Miller
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 23:18:45 -0400, Bill wrote:

David Stinson wrote:

...Since you are a UPS customer, we want to give you advance notice of
new UPS rates that will take effect January 2, 2006. You can click here
by December 12, 2005 to request a reminder e-mail when the new rates go
into effect and the 2006 UPS Rate and Service Guide is available on
ups.com®.

They're just doing that to keep up with the USPS rate increase because
they have the opportunity to get away with it

-Bill

I think they're just trying to deal with higher fuel prices. One of my
regional delivery services, Lone Star Overnight, now adds a "Fuel
Surcharge" to all deliveries. It's about $1.50 to $2.00 for a run of
about 180 miles.

Bob
k5qwg




It's the same in other industries too. We received a rate increase
from our power company because of fuel costs.

Beerbarrel wrote:

Better reason to buy boatanchors!

Dunno. But it's interesting... after the end of WWII, the amount of surplus
equipment on the market was amazing. Even considering the total cost of
the war being so high, it was amazing.

After Korea, after Vietnam, after the Gulf War, there has been a move to
shrink the size of the military a little, but nothing like what happened
after WWII. And nothing like the amount of surplus stuff came out either.

(There _was_ a lot of interesting captured radio gear on the market after
the first Gulf War, though. Lots of ex-Soviet VHF-LO gear. Prices weren't
so low, though.)

Some of the wideband HF surveillance systems that were installed in the
eighties should be about getting ready for boatanchor status, shouldn't
they? I'll be looking forward to that.

But it'll be very interesting to see what happens after this war is over,
or at least when the buildup is over. Lots of UHF satellite gear coming
down the pike in another five to ten years?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 20 Nov 2005 19:49:37 -0500, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Beerbarrel wrote:

Better reason to buy boatanchors!

Dunno. But it's interesting... after the end of WWII, the amount of surplus
equipment on the market was amazing. Even considering the total cost of
the war being so high, it was amazing.

After Korea, after Vietnam, after the Gulf War, there has been a move to
shrink the size of the military a little, but nothing like what happened
after WWII. And nothing like the amount of surplus stuff came out either.

(There _was_ a lot of interesting captured radio gear on the market after
the first Gulf War, though. Lots of ex-Soviet VHF-LO gear. Prices weren't
so low, though.)

Some of the wideband HF surveillance systems that were installed in the
eighties should be about getting ready for boatanchor status, shouldn't
they? I'll be looking forward to that.

But it'll be very interesting to see what happens after this war is over,
or at least when the buildup is over. Lots of UHF satellite gear coming
down the pike in another five to ten years?
--scott



I'll keep my fingers crossed Scott. I sure would like to be on the
receiving end of some of those goodies!

Beerbarrel wrote:

So it's OK for Randy to ridicule Chuck but not the other way around?

We dont need to ridicule, or make fun of, or call names of people we
dont agree with. Nothing wrong with disagreeing and showing someone the
error of their ways. What I have a problem with is (many people with
egos on this forum do this) trying to belittle people.

Disagree YES - belittle, call names - NO.......

On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 01:35:39 GMT, Lazy Senior
wrote:

Beerbarrel wrote:

So it's OK for Randy to ridicule Chuck but not the other way around?

We dont need to ridicule, or make fun of, or call names of people we
dont agree with. Nothing wrong with disagreeing and showing someone the
error of their ways. What I have a problem with is (many people with
egos on this forum do this) trying to belittle people.

Disagree YES - belittle, call names - NO.......



If that is your stance then you probably don't need to be on Usenet.
You either get thick skin or leave. It gets really rough sometimes
without moderation. I get a lot of crap but give it too sometimes. I
find that moderated forums are the place to go if you have thin skin.

"John Byrns" wrote in message
...
In article , "Mark Oppat"
wrote:

Iraq, geez, when will we learn???

I just heard that the war has cost every taxpayer about $27,000. That
will
have to be paid off over how many years now of deficits and cuts in
services?

Are you sure about that number, it sounds a little high? What has the
monetary cost of the war been up to this point, and how many taxpayers
does it assume?

ignoring any personal feelings i have against the war for other reasons:

lets say its high. lets say that is more than twice as high as what it is.
lets say its only 10,000 per taxpayer. do you pay taxes? how many years
would it take you to pay 10,000 in taxes if they jacked your taxes by
500/year? do you want to pay 500 more a year for the next 20 years just to
pay for this war? if mark is right, thats 1300 a year more for 20 years....

whatever the cost, its high and we still need a plan to pay it off.

randy