"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
link.net...
"Mike Coslo" wrote:

It's not as lucrative as you make it sound, Dwight.
Also, these people are reasonably well off, retiring
with money equivalent to upper middle class or
better. (snip)


I have no idea how lucrative it is. An acquaintance (hard to call this
guy
a friend) works for a mortgage company and just loves to talk about the
shady side of that industry. The company he works for (a nation-wide
franchise chain) just switched to more agressive foreclosure practices
and,
based on the stories he tells, I most certainly would not want to be a
customer of that company. Of course, this company has always had
questionable (in my opinion) foreclosure practices. He told me years ago
(late 80's, early 90's) that, mainly because of increasing property
values,
it was far more profitable to foreclose on older properties than to
maintain
the mortgage. As such, the company used every opportunity to foreclose on
those mortgages. Today, according to him, long term mortgage foreclosure
offers the most gain. Therefore, they now actively seek those who have the
greatest possibility of foreclosure years from now, such as the elderly,
those with speading habits that suggest possible credit problems down the
road, and so on. Now, since I don't work in that industry, I have no idea
if
this is entirely true or even widespread. But, I've seen enough written
about these types of practices to suggest there is at least some truth to
it.

The key to being successful is having some way of estimating who would be in
trouble approximately 5 years or more down the road not the person who is
currently in trouble or on the ragged edge of currently being in trouble.
Then the property has had time to appreciate enough to be able to turn a
profit.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

N2EY wrote:

That's a Yankee frugality philosphy. I've been repeatedly told it's
"old-fashioned" and "out of date"....

And will continue to be old fashioned and out of date well after the
proponents of the "New accounting" are in the breadlines.

- Mike KB3EIA -

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 19:38:08 GMT, Dee D. Flint wrote:

In reality we rent the place from Fannie May or Freddy Mac, whomever
wound up with the paper..... We know it, they know it.....


But there are advantages. As the owner (even though heavily mortgaged), you
can put up antennas or remodel or whatever without asking the landlord. And
since the interest is tax deductable, you can have a nicer place for the
same money than if it was just a rental.

That's why we bought when we first got together (discounting the
four months it took for us to merge our separate rented apartments
and find what we wanted). When we bought our present place, it
helped that we came in with 50% equity....

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

In article , "Ryan, KC8PMX"
writes:

I think what Jim was trying to say, that if a meal at Ma's diner averages
say for instance $5.50, (and a good meal too) and the corporate conglomerate
Taco Heaven is around $4.50 for instance, in some cases it is worthwhile
supporting the locally owned, Ma's place versus some criminally corporate
organization like Taco Heaven. Support the local business before supporting
the corporate ones.....

That's part of it. But the main point is that we *do* have choices, and if we
choose TH over Ma's enough times, TH will survive and Ma's won't. And we
shouldn't gripe if that happens and we're the cause.

And if you find out that all the corporate ones have squeezed out the family
and/or locally owned ones, then what ever you have left is your own fault if
you didn't support the local ones.

Exactly.

Maybe I am wrong, but that's what I got out of Jim's message, and might not
have explained it the best. Myself? I believe in supporting the local
businessperson whenever and where ever I can FIRST, then supporting the
corporations when a locally owned option is not available. Granted there are
some exceptions to the rule, as for instance, gasoline. At least I research
to find out which ones are locally owned/franchised as opposed to true
corporately owned gas stations.


Screw Corporate Amerika! (before they screw you)

Not about "screwing" anybody - just about making informed buying choices.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article , "Phil Kane"
writes:

On 17 Nov 2003 01:28:48 GMT, N2EY wrote:

Here's another one for ya: I bet neither of us would have any problem
getting a
30 year mortgage, even though we'd be nearly 80 when said mortage was paid
off
(barring any advance payments). Huh?

We got a 30-year mortgage four years ago notwithstanding that I was
retired on a moderate pension, my wife was an independent contract
employee close to retirement age, and both of us would be over 90
when it matured.

Not only that, we refinanced it last year starting a new 30 year
clock.

In reality we rent the place from Fannie May or Freddy Mac, whomever
wound up with the paper..... We know it, they know it.....

Sure. But you guys and your property are a good risk, you put up serious
equity, and you've got predictable income ahead.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article , "Phil Kane"
writes:

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 01:08:51 GMT, Dee D. Flint wrote:

OTOH, there are several "successful" enterprises that we just
wouldn't patronize - Wal-Mart leads that list.

I would go if they had a product I wanted but see no reason to do so if they
are not selling the products that I want.

We do not shop there because we do not like their business attitudes
in specific areas - hiring folks desperate for a job but only for 19
hours a week not to exceed two years' tenure, thereby avoiding
paying much above minimum wage and granting no employee benefits,
certain shenanigans about forced unpaid hours (subject of several
lawsuits across the country), and trashing the local merchants and
moving on whenever they pleased, leaving disaster in their wake.

Our choice.

Exactly. That's what I call behaving like a "customer" rather than a
"consumer".

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article , "Ryan, KC8PMX"
writes:

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Ryan, KC8PMX wrote:
If your interest rate is less than 5%, the best loan to get is a 30
year!
It's cheap money. Paying off a house quick is foolish. And the monthly
rate is usually a hell of alot less too. Spend the difference of that
paying off bills or invest it in a mutual fund or something.



Ahh, a financial truism! This belongs with:

The stock market ALWAYS goes up!

What goes up must come down as well too.

Not necessarily. Look at where the Dow was when Bill Clinton took office in
1992...

But that is the beauty of the
stock market. It is a cyclical thing. Ideally it would be like a good
sinus rhythm. It is just merely the knowledge of where to jump in at.

Just as important is knowing when to jump *out*.

(It soitanly do, but over long time periods that are not relevant to
most of us who don't live over 150 years. More importantly it is what
the market is doing around the time you take your money out.)

Move your money into high yield accounts shortly before you retire, that
way you'll have more money when you retire!

Buy high, sell low, go broke...

Only if you know what you are doing and have a really good grasp of the
market.

Which absolutely no one has.

I've listened to investment consultants actually pull this one out of
their hats. I know some older folk who have done this and now have
almost no retirement funds.

Yep... not for the weak or feable to try on thier own if not knowledgeable.

The term is "risk tolerance"- a fancy way of saying how ready you are to lose
money. And the rule is simple: the closer you are to actually needing the
money, the less your risk tolerance should be.

I have to chuckle at your truism. first, because your friend the real
estate agent uses those sort of arguments to talk you into buying
several thousand or tens of thousands more dollars worht of house.
Second is that You are saying a person who gets out of debt is foolish.

Actually the person I got this truism from and believe in it is Bruce
Williams, the talkshow host. If you do the math, it is fairly true.

I did the math and it's false enough to be a worthless truism.

Best way to not be a fool is to not go heavily into debt in the first
place. I have a 5 percent loan, but I'll pay it off quickly, I think.

I wouldn't but thats me. What I would do is see if you can refinance at all
to a lower rate. I have actually seen a interest rate recently somewhere in
the 3 percent range!! Talk about a cheap loan, hell, I would
refinance/remortgage my neighbors house if I could legally get away with it!
LOL

Sure - because a house is something you need anyway, it's insured and not
likely to wind up obsolete or useless in a few years. Most of all, almost no
one can afford to buy a house for cash.

Instead of paying off that low interest loan quickly, one is smarter
paying
off the higher interest loans like automobiles, department and credit
card
charges, and other loans/debts.

Again, it's better to not get into a situation where you would have to
choose which loan you're paying off early.

Well, its not paying the principle that kills ya, its the interest that does
over a long time. The lesser the interest rate, the less I am interested in
rushing to pay it off extra early. Either way, one needs to do the math or
find someone who does understand real estate finance and other financal
calculations to make sure in their own individual circumstances.

Exactly - it's all in the numbers for your particular situation.

The biggest financial boo-boos people make a

- confusing "wants" and "needs" (you may need a car, but you want a new SUV)
- not having a budget, or not having one based on real data
- looking at their income out-of-context and saying "I can afford X" without
doing the numbers.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

N2EY wrote:

That's a Yankee frugality philosphy. I've been repeatedly told it's
"old-fashioned" and "out of date"....

And will continue to be old fashioned and out of date well after the
proponents of the "New accounting" are in the breadlines.

That's always been my plan.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote

Screw Corporate Amerika! (before they screw you)

EXACTLY!!!!!! You've got it all figured out for sure!

Who the hell do General Motors and Ford and Mercedes think they are
anyhow --- we used to have hundreds of different auto manufacturers? Let's
open a blacksmith shop in our village and build our own cars, like our
grandfathers did! And, yeah, quit buying computers from Dell and
Gateway --- we have sand in our neighborhood --- we can make our own silicon
chips just as well as Intel does! Dole pineapples --- who needs them
anyhow, I bet we can grow perfectly good pineapples here in Minnesota. Who
needs all this corporate crap anyhow?

73, de Hans, K0HB

N2EY wrote:

In article , "Ryan, KC8PMX"
writes:


"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

Ryan, KC8PMX wrote:

If your interest rate is less than 5%, the best loan to get is a 30

year!

It's cheap money. Paying off a house quick is foolish. And the monthly
rate is usually a hell of alot less too. Spend the difference of that
paying off bills or invest it in a mutual fund or something.



Ahh, a financial truism! This belongs with:

The stock market ALWAYS goes up!

What goes up must come down as well too.


Not necessarily. Look at where the Dow was when Bill Clinton took office in
1992...


But that is the beauty of the
stock market. It is a cyclical thing. Ideally it would be like a good
sinus rhythm. It is just merely the knowledge of where to jump in at.


Just as important is knowing when to jump *out*.

And there is the problem for those playing the market for their
retirements. They know about when they are going to jump out, but if the
market doesn't cooperate....oh oh!

(It soitanly do, but over long time periods that are not relevant to
most of us who don't live over 150 years. More importantly it is what
the market is doing around the time you take your money out.)

Move your money into high yield accounts shortly before you retire, that
way you'll have more money when you retire!

Buy high, sell low, go broke...

Only if you know what you are doing and have a really good grasp of the
market.


Which absolutely no one has.

I've listened to investment consultants actually pull this one out of
their hats. I know some older folk who have done this and now have
almost no retirement funds.

Yep... not for the weak or feable to try on thier own if not knowledgeable.


The term is "risk tolerance"- a fancy way of saying how ready you are to lose
money. And the rule is simple: the closer you are to actually needing the
money, the less your risk tolerance should be.

I have to chuckle at your truism. first, because your friend the real
estate agent uses those sort of arguments to talk you into buying
several thousand or tens of thousands more dollars worht of house.
Second is that You are saying a person who gets out of debt is foolish.

Actually the person I got this truism from and believe in it is Bruce
Williams, the talkshow host. If you do the math, it is fairly true.

I did the math and it's false enough to be a worthless truism.

If you look at the total dollars spent, you can still pay less money on
some of the higher interest lower cost loans than lower interest higher
priced loans. (although I'd never suggest doing that) It's just the
sheer amount of dollars. So the best bet is to pay all the loans off as
quickly as possible.


Best way to not be a fool is to not go heavily into debt in the first
place. I have a 5 percent loan, but I'll pay it off quickly, I think.

I wouldn't but thats me. What I would do is see if you can refinance at all
to a lower rate. I have actually seen a interest rate recently somewhere in
the 3 percent range!! Talk about a cheap loan, hell, I would
refinance/remortgage my neighbors house if I could legally get away with it!
LOL


Sure - because a house is something you need anyway, it's insured and not
likely to wind up obsolete or useless in a few years. Most of all, almost no
one can afford to buy a house for cash.


Instead of paying off that low interest loan quickly, one is smarter
paying
off the higher interest loans like automobiles, department and credit
card
charges, and other loans/debts.

Again, it's better to not get into a situation where you would have to
choose which loan you're paying off early.

Well, its not paying the principle that kills ya, its the interest that does
over a long time. The lesser the interest rate, the less I am interested in
rushing to pay it off extra early. Either way, one needs to do the math or
find someone who does understand real estate finance and other financal
calculations to make sure in their own individual circumstances.


Exactly - it's all in the numbers for your particular situation.

The biggest financial boo-boos people make a

- confusing "wants" and "needs" (you may need a car, but you want a new SUV)
- not having a budget, or not having one based on real data
- looking at their income out-of-context and saying "I can afford X" without
doing the numbers.

Don't forget succumbing to the credit card problem. It's soooo easy to
live life large when you have 10 credit cards with a 20 thousand liimit
on each card.

One of those nifty little life secrets I've found out is that if you
are willing to avoid spending credit money like a drunken sailor while
you are young, you will have much more money for your toys when you get
older.

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Mike Coslo" wrote

....avoid spending credit money like a drunken sailor....

And how does a drunken sailor spend differently from a drunken marine or a
drunken soldier or a drunken airman or a drunken draft-dodger? Or do you
just have a thing about sailors? Or do you even have a clue, Mike?

With kindest personal regards,

de Hans, K0HB

KØHB wrote:

"Mike Coslo" wrote


....avoid spending credit money like a drunken sailor....


And how does a drunken sailor spend differently from a drunken marine or a
drunken soldier or a drunken airman or a drunken draft-dodger? Or do you
just have a thing about sailors?

You've never heard the term, Hans? since you took the time to write
this, I'll elaborate:

Sailors on leave have been known to be avery exciting bunch for years.
They spend a lot of their lives at sea, and when they get to land often
have a fair amount of discretionary cash to spend, and a lot of steam to
work off. So sailors often spend their money at an alarming pace, thus
the phrase.

And where did I refere to the Navy? A sailor is a generic term for:

1. One who serves in a navy or works on a ship.
2. One who travels by water.
3. A low-crowned straw hat with a flat top and flat brim.

It wasn't number three, so it was numbers one and two.

Or do you even have a clue, Mike?

Proudly serving my Navy and country since 1976.........


- Mike KB3EIA

"Mike Coslo" wrote

And where did I refere to the Navy?

Do what?!?!?

Who mentioned 'Navy'? (DOS Hint: It wasn't me!)

Sunvuagun!

With all kind wishes,

de Hans, K0HB
Master Chief Radioman, US Navy
--
For details, go to http://www.home.earthlink.net/~k0hb/id5.html

In article m, "Dee D. Flint"
writes:

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
nk.net...
You seriously need to climb off your high horse, Kim. Who in the heck
asked you to "help" anyone in this newsgroup? I came to this newsgroup to
discuss various topics - not be lectured by you with a mandate to drop my
opinions in favor of yours. So, if you're sitting around waiting for that
to
happen, you're going to be one very, very, tired old woman long before
there's even a glimmer of hope.


While I normally disagree with a great many of Kim's posts. Here she is
fundamentally correct. Consumers do have the choice to be informed if they
really want to. If they don't want to go to that much work, then it is
their own problem.

AGREED!

Government should NOT be doing your research for you.

I disagree. Govt. has a legitimate role in making sure products are reasonably
safe and that claims made for them are not false.

But providing information isn't the same thing as "protecting consumers" from
every imaginable hazard.

I
certainly don't want MY taxes to go for the checks on goods and information
dissemination that you seem to think the government should do for you.

Remember what cars were like when we were kids, Dee? No seat belts, no head
restraints, single brake systems. Roofs that would crush in a rollover and
solid steering posts that would spear the driver in even a mild crash. Sharp
metal objects all over the inside and outside of the car.

All of these were easily avoidable hazards whose remedies required govt.
intervention in the form of safety legislation. Something as simple as seat
belts was aggressively fought by all of the major US carmakers. Not just on a
cost issue, either - they did not like the psychological impact that they
believed seat belts would create in the minds of car buyers.

Would you want to go back to the kinds of cars we had back then?

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article . net, "Dwight
Stewart" writes:

if the mortgage isn't paid off, the mortgage company can
foreclose and resell the house for a very tidy profit. That alone is enough
to attract many mortgage companies to the elderly. This may also be why some
mortgage companies actually seem to seek out those who will likely not fully
pay off a mortgage (excessive debt, a history of bad credit, or whatever).
After the mortgagor has partially paid down the amount owed on the property,
the mortgage company can foreclose and retain the property for a much lower
amount than they would have paid in an outright purchase.

Only if the total costs of doing all that do not exceed the recovered value
after the sale.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article . net, "Dwight
Stewart" writes:

"N2EY" wrote:

How do you know they haven't?

Because absolutely nothing has happened.

Exactly.

Perhaps something really bad would have happened, but the spell prevented it.
Who can ever say?

Well, would you like if someone called a
religion you respect "all nonsense"?

If it were a ligitimate religion, no.

Who determines what is a "legitimate" religion and what isn't? Who *can*
determine such a thing (other than God?)

However, it is a little hard to
perceive wicca as a ligitimate religion.

Why not? People have come up with new religions all over the map. Who is to say
they were not "legitimate" because their beliefs are different?

Since little is really known of the
old pagan religions (especially directly), wicca practices today cannot
seriously be linked to paganism.

Probably not. Doesn't mean wicca is or isn't legitimate, though. From what
little I know, they are trying to reconnect with the *spirit* of those old
pagans.

Instead, the practices today mostly seem
made up from images and stories in movies, television, and fiction books
(old and new). And the people involved often take on the personas of
characters directly from those fiction stories.

Couldn't the same be said of almost all religions now in existence? Most are
based on a book or series of books written hundreds or thousands of years ago.
Most describe events of the long past that are not provable to be fact or
fiction in any way.

Would you say they weren't legitimate?

Further, their claims of
spells, charms, and so on, are simply hogwash (childish hogwash).

Would you say the same thing about the power of prayer, miracles,
transubstantiation, and other central beliefs of modern Christianity?

Everyone
is certainly free to believe what they want, including those who consider
the whole thing absolutely ludicrous.

Everyone is free to believe up to a point. That point is where someone's purely
religious beliefs begin to infringe on the rights of others for reasons based
purely on belief and not provable scientific fact.

As an extreme example, a religion that required the human sacrifice of
unbelievers can't coexist with others. (There have been forms of Christianity
that fit this description, btw).

By the way, this is not "us versus them." I have no specific religious
beliefs, so pointing to a ligitimate religion is not really going to change
my opinions of wicca. All religions have their faults and doubters, but I
have no doubts about my opinions of wicca. :-)

Fine - but then why discriminate between "legitimate" and "illegitimate"
religions?

I wonder what the Book of Bokonon has to
say about all that...


Wasn't it supposedly Books (plural) of Bokonon? Anyway, I'm not so sure
all this (wicca) is exactly harmless untruths.

Couldn't that be said of many religions?

What harm does wicca do?

73 de Jim, N2EY

"N2EY" wrote

Would you want to go back to the kinds of cars we had back then?

In a heartbeat!!!!! Most wonderful car I ever owned is a 1962 Chev Corvair
Corsa convertible.

Big-brother government killed all the really good cars, trying to protect
against stupidity like poor driving habits. We could use a lot LESS
government around these parts. We'd have a lot less stupid people.

The world is methodically being dumbed down by government efforts to protect
us from stupid people.

Stupid drivers don't recognize the dangers of speed, so they drive too fast
and kill themselves. The government regulates speed, so now more stupid
people survive.

Stupid pedestrians don't know enough to not step out into a busy street, so
they get injured and killed trying to cross the street. The government makes
laws giving them the right-of-way, so now more stupid people survive.

Stupid parents don't recognize the value of childhood inoculations. The
government makes them vaccinate their children before entering school, so
now more stupid people survive.

Stupid hams don't know enough to keep their fingers out of 3KV plate
transformers, so they get fried in their own juice. Some would have the
government protect them, and more stupid people would survive.

In the ways of Mother Nature, stupidity was kept in check because stupid
people generally didn't survive to breeding age, thus our species tended to
get smarter over time.

But stupidity begets stupidity, so we are being overwhelmed by a tsunami of
stupidity. The tsunami is triggered by the government protection of stupid
people, which allows them to survive to reproduce.

Ergo, less government regulations makes a smarter populace.

73, de Hans, K0HB

KØHB wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote


And where did I refere to the Navy?


Do what?!?!?

Who mentioned 'Navy'? (DOS Hint: It wasn't me!)

You wrote earlier:

And how does a drunken sailor spend differently from a drunken marine or a
drunken soldier or a drunken airman or a drunken draft-dodger? Or do you
just have a thing about sailors? Or do you even have a clue, Mike?

Hans, even if you didn't refer to "sailor" as navy, and certainly within
the context of the statement, you referred to Marines, Soldiers, Airmen,
and even draft dodgers (hint: if you didn't, you need to arrange the
sentence differently)

but.......... The Marines are *indeed* part of the Navy, so yes, Hans,
you very much *did* mention Navy. (All apologies to the Marines in here
that know that the navy is actually a subset of the Marines! ) 8^) hehe.


Sunvuagun!

Huzzanga!

- Mike KB3EIA -

"KØHB" wrote in message
ink.net...
"N2EY" wrote

Would you want to go back to the kinds of cars we had back then?

In a heartbeat!!!!! Most wonderful car I ever owned is a 1962 Chev
Corvair
Corsa convertible.

Woo-hoo, lemme have a 1969 Super-Bee! Alas, all I had was a 1973 Dart with a
318. I would've loved to have a 340 Dart with the bumble bee stripe. sigh

One other car that is probably my all time favorite is the 1973 European
Ford Capri. Not terribly fast, but wonderfully quick and pretty agile too. I
had the 2000cc 4 cyl. model but I'd love to drop a modern Ford 3.8l V6 in
one, if I could find one in acceptable cond'n.

73 de Bert
WA2SI

"N2EY" wrote:

Perhaps something really bad would have
happened, but the spell prevented it.
Who can ever say?


The specific spell requested could only have resulted in something bad.


Who determines what is a "legitimate" religion
and what isn't? Who *can* determine such a
thing (other than God?)


You just love to ask the "who determines" question, don't you? Especially
when the answer is bloody obvious - like with most other things, people do.
People either decide it's a legitimate religion or not. A small, fringe,
group of supposed believers don't make a religion legitimate (Hale-Bop's
Heaven's Gate cult, for example), especially when the vast majority believe
it's a load of crap (and I do suspect the vast majority don't really believe
wiccas can actually cast spells, charms, and so on).


Why not?


Already answered in the paragraph you quoted (the paragraph taken as a
whole, not sliced up into individual sentences).


Couldn't the same be said of almost all religions
now in existence? Most are based on a book or
series of books written hundreds or thousands
of years ago. (snip)


However, the practices of today's wiccas seem mostly made up from images
and stories in FICTIONAL movies, television, and books, not religious
material and literature written by those who practice that religion. In
other words, since so little is known of the old pagan religions, wiccas
simply 'borrowed' things like black robes, symbols, supposed spells, and so
on, from relatively modern day fiction.


Would you say the same thing about the power
of prayer, miracles, transubstantiation, and other
central beliefs of modern Christianity?


It is one thing to pray for assistance from a God and quite another to
actually claim to have personal powers to cast spells, charms, and so on. I
would ask for similar proof from anyone, in any religion, who claimed to
have such powers (any powers).


Fine - but then why discriminate between "legitimate"
and "illegitimate" religions?


Words alone do not discriminate, Jim. Nobody has been deprived of anything
by my words.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

And how does this dictate or involve policy?



Dwight Stewart wrote:

"N2EY" wrote:

Perhaps something really bad would have
happened, but the spell prevented it.
Who can ever say?



The specific spell requested could only have resulted in something bad.



Who determines what is a "legitimate" religion
and what isn't? Who *can* determine such a
thing (other than God?)



You just love to ask the "who determines" question, don't you? Especially
when the answer is bloody obvious - like with most other things, people do.
People either decide it's a legitimate religion or not. A small, fringe,
group of supposed believers don't make a religion legitimate (Hale-Bop's
Heaven's Gate cult, for example), especially when the vast majority believe
it's a load of crap (and I do suspect the vast majority don't really believe
wiccas can actually cast spells, charms, and so on).



Why not?



Already answered in the paragraph you quoted (the paragraph taken as a
whole, not sliced up into individual sentences).



Couldn't the same be said of almost all religions
now in existence? Most are based on a book or
series of books written hundreds or thousands
of years ago. (snip)



However, the practices of today's wiccas seem mostly made up from images
and stories in FICTIONAL movies, television, and books, not religious
material and literature written by those who practice that religion. In
other words, since so little is known of the old pagan religions, wiccas
simply 'borrowed' things like black robes, symbols, supposed spells, and so
on, from relatively modern day fiction.



Would you say the same thing about the power
of prayer, miracles, transubstantiation, and other
central beliefs of modern Christianity?



It is one thing to pray for assistance from a God and quite another to
actually claim to have personal powers to cast spells, charms, and so on. I
would ask for similar proof from anyone, in any religion, who claimed to
have such powers (any powers).



Fine - but then why discriminate between "legitimate"
and "illegitimate" religions?



Words alone do not discriminate, Jim. Nobody has been deprived of anything
by my words.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article , "Ryan, KC8PMX"
writes:


"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

Ryan, KC8PMX wrote:

If your interest rate is less than 5%, the best loan to get is a 30

year!

It's cheap money. Paying off a house quick is foolish. And the monthly
rate is usually a hell of alot less too. Spend the difference of that
paying off bills or invest it in a mutual fund or something.



Ahh, a financial truism! This belongs with:

The stock market ALWAYS goes up!

What goes up must come down as well too.


Not necessarily. Look at where the Dow was when Bill Clinton took office in
1992...


But that is the beauty of the
stock market. It is a cyclical thing. Ideally it would be like a good
sinus rhythm. It is just merely the knowledge of where to jump in at.


Just as important is knowing when to jump *out*.

And there is the problem for those playing the market for their
retirements. They know about when they are going to jump out, but if the
market doesn't cooperate....oh oh!

(It soitanly do, but over long time periods that are not relevant to
most of us who don't live over 150 years. More importantly it is what
the market is doing around the time you take your money out.)

Move your money into high yield accounts shortly before you retire, that
way you'll have more money when you retire!

Buy high, sell low, go broke...

Only if you know what you are doing and have a really good grasp of the
market.


Which absolutely no one has.

I've listened to investment consultants actually pull this one out of
their hats. I know some older folk who have done this and now have
almost no retirement funds.

Yep... not for the weak or feable to try on thier own if not knowledgeable.


The term is "risk tolerance"- a fancy way of saying how ready you are to
lose
money. And the rule is simple: the closer you are to actually needing the
money, the less your risk tolerance should be.

I have to chuckle at your truism. first, because your friend the real
estate agent uses those sort of arguments to talk you into buying
several thousand or tens of thousands more dollars worht of house.
Second is that You are saying a person who gets out of debt is foolish.

Actually the person I got this truism from and believe in it is Bruce
Williams, the talkshow host. If you do the math, it is fairly true.

I did the math and it's false enough to be a worthless truism.

If you look at the total dollars spent, you can still pay less money on
some of the higher interest lower cost loans than lower interest higher
priced loans. (although I'd never suggest doing that) It's just the
sheer amount of dollars.

Yep. That's why you have to calculate the options.

So the best bet is to pay all the loans off as
quickly as possible.

Not always.

Suppose you're in a situation where money is tight but you can expect big
increases some time in the future. (example: kids are small and one parent is
home with them, but when the youngest reaches school age both parents will be
working full time). In a case like that, having a lower monthly payment may be
the best alternative even if it requires a longer loan term.

Best way to not be a fool is to not go heavily into debt in the first
place. I have a 5 percent loan, but I'll pay it off quickly, I think.

I wouldn't but thats me. What I would do is see if you can refinance at
all
to a lower rate. I have actually seen a interest rate recently somewhere
in
the 3 percent range!! Talk about a cheap loan, hell, I would
refinance/remortgage my neighbors house if I could legally get away with
it!
LOL


Sure - because a house is something you need anyway, it's insured and not
likely to wind up obsolete or useless in a few years. Most of all, almost
no
one can afford to buy a house for cash.


Instead of paying off that low interest loan quickly, one is smarter
paying
off the higher interest loans like automobiles, department and credit
card
charges, and other loans/debts.

Again, it's better to not get into a situation where you would have to
choose which loan you're paying off early.

Well, its not paying the principle that kills ya, its the interest that
does
over a long time. The lesser the interest rate, the less I am interested
in
rushing to pay it off extra early. Either way, one needs to do the math
or
find someone who does understand real estate finance and other financal
calculations to make sure in their own individual circumstances.


Exactly - it's all in the numbers for your particular situation.

The biggest financial boo-boos people make a

- confusing "wants" and "needs" (you may need a car, but you want a new
SUV)
- not having a budget, or not having one based on real data
- looking at their income out-of-context and saying "I can afford X"
without
doing the numbers.

Don't forget succumbing to the credit card problem. It's soooo easy to

live life large when you have 10 credit cards with a 20 thousand liimit
on each card.

That's simply another version of looking at their income out-of-context and
saying "I can afford X" without doing the numbers. If you can't afford to pay
off the credit cards at the end of the month, you really can't afford the
purchase made on them.

I consider credit cards as "payment cards", nothing more.

One of those nifty little life secrets I've found out is that if you
are willing to avoid spending credit money like a drunken sailor while
you are young, you will have much more money for your toys when you get
older.

New verse to an old song:

What shall we do with a drunken sailor
What shall we do with a drunken sailor
What shall we do with a drunken sailor
Ear-lie in the morning?

Put 'im in charge of an Exxon tanker
Put 'im in charge of an Exxon tanker
Put 'im in charge of an Exxon tanker
Ear-lie in the morning!

73 de Jim, N2EY

"Dwight Stewart" wrote

A small, fringe, group of supposed believers don't make
a religion legitimate, especially when the vast majority believe
it's a load of crap.

Since no single religion in the world enjoys a "vast majority" of the
population as "supposed believers", then it follows that the "vast majority"
of the worlds population on average believes that Judaism, Islam,
Christianity, Hinduism, Shintoism, Scientism, Buddhism, etc. are each
individually a "load of crap" also, and not really legitimate. I think
I'll just believe in all of them to make sure my bases are covered.

Sunuvagun!

With all kind wishes,

de Hans, K0HB

N2EY wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

some snippage

If you look at the total dollars spent, you can still pay less money on
some of the higher interest lower cost loans than lower interest higher
priced loans. (although I'd never suggest doing that) It's just the
sheer amount of dollars.


Yep. That's why you have to calculate the options.


So the best bet is to pay all the loans off as
quickly as possible.


Not always.

Suppose you're in a situation where money is tight but you can expect big
increases some time in the future. (example: kids are small and one parent is
home with them, but when the youngest reaches school age both parents will be
working full time). In a case like that, having a lower monthly payment may be
the best alternative even if it requires a longer loan term.

Well, a qualified yes. I've found people, including myself, sometimes
too optimistic when dealing with "future" things, like earnings and
expenditures. While what you sat is true, I'll take the tack of either
paying the thing off ASAP, or go without. Maybe even save for what I
want. (Modern Heresy Alert!)


Best way to not be a fool is to not go heavily into debt in the first
place. I have a 5 percent loan, but I'll pay it off quickly, I think.

I wouldn't but thats me. What I would do is see if you can refinance at

all

to a lower rate. I have actually seen a interest rate recently somewhere

in

the 3 percent range!! Talk about a cheap loan, hell, I would
refinance/remortgage my neighbors house if I could legally get away with

it!

LOL


Sure - because a house is something you need anyway, it's insured and not
likely to wind up obsolete or useless in a few years. Most of all, almost

no

one can afford to buy a house for cash.



Instead of paying off that low interest loan quickly, one is smarter
paying
off the higher interest loans like automobiles, department and credit
card
charges, and other loans/debts.

Again, it's better to not get into a situation where you would have to
choose which loan you're paying off early.

Well, its not paying the principle that kills ya, its the interest that

does

over a long time. The lesser the interest rate, the less I am interested

in

rushing to pay it off extra early. Either way, one needs to do the math

or

find someone who does understand real estate finance and other financal
calculations to make sure in their own individual circumstances.


Exactly - it's all in the numbers for your particular situation.

The biggest financial boo-boos people make a

- confusing "wants" and "needs" (you may need a car, but you want a new

SUV)

- not having a budget, or not having one based on real data
- looking at their income out-of-context and saying "I can afford X"

without

doing the numbers.

Don't forget succumbing to the credit card problem. It's soooo easy to


live life large when you have 10 credit cards with a 20 thousand liimit
on each card.


That's simply another version of looking at their income out-of-context and
saying "I can afford X" without doing the numbers. If you can't afford to pay
off the credit cards at the end of the month, you really can't afford the
purchase made on them.

I consider credit cards as "payment cards", nothing more.

One of those nifty little life secrets I've found out is that if you
are willing to avoid spending credit money like a drunken sailor while
you are young, you will have much more money for your toys when you get
older.


New verse to an old song:

What shall we do with a drunken sailor
What shall we do with a drunken sailor
What shall we do with a drunken sailor
Ear-lie in the morning?

Put 'im in charge of an Exxon tanker
Put 'im in charge of an Exxon tanker
Put 'im in charge of an Exxon tanker
Ear-lie in the morning!


HeHe!

- Mike KB3EIA -

connection to ham radio is?
Maybe you need a new group: rec.boring.nolife.discussion

Mike Coslo wrote:

N2EY wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


some snippage

If you look at the total dollars spent, you can still pay less money
on some of the higher interest lower cost loans than lower interest
higher priced loans. (although I'd never suggest doing that) It's
just the sheer amount of dollars.



Yep. That's why you have to calculate the options.


So the best bet is to pay all the loans off as quickly as possible.



Not always.

Suppose you're in a situation where money is tight but you can expect big
increases some time in the future. (example: kids are small and one
parent is
home with them, but when the youngest reaches school age both parents
will be
working full time). In a case like that, having a lower monthly
payment may be
the best alternative even if it requires a longer loan term.


Well, a qualified yes. I've found people, including myself,
sometimes too optimistic when dealing with "future" things, like
earnings and expenditures. While what you sat is true, I'll take the
tack of either paying the thing off ASAP, or go without. Maybe even save
for what I want. (Modern Heresy Alert!)


Best way to not be a fool is to not go heavily into debt in the first
place. I have a 5 percent loan, but I'll pay it off quickly, I think.


I wouldn't but thats me. What I would do is see if you can
refinance at


all

to a lower rate. I have actually seen a interest rate recently
somewhere


in

the 3 percent range!! Talk about a cheap loan, hell, I would
refinance/remortgage my neighbors house if I could legally get away
with


it!

LOL


Sure - because a house is something you need anyway, it's insured
and not
likely to wind up obsolete or useless in a few years. Most of all,
almost


no

one can afford to buy a house for cash.



Instead of paying off that low interest loan quickly, one is smarter
paying
off the higher interest loans like automobiles, department and
credit
card
charges, and other loans/debts.


Again, it's better to not get into a situation where you would
have to
choose which loan you're paying off early.


Well, its not paying the principle that kills ya, its the interest
that


does

over a long time. The lesser the interest rate, the less I am
interested


in

rushing to pay it off extra early. Either way, one needs to do
the math


or

find someone who does understand real estate finance and other
financal
calculations to make sure in their own individual circumstances.


Exactly - it's all in the numbers for your particular situation.
The biggest financial boo-boos people make a

- confusing "wants" and "needs" (you may need a car, but you want a new


SUV)

- not having a budget, or not having one based on real data
- looking at their income out-of-context and saying "I can afford X"


without

doing the numbers.


Don't forget succumbing to the credit card problem. It's soooo
easy to



live life large when you have 10 credit cards with a 20 thousand
liimit on each card.



That's simply another version of looking at their income
out-of-context and
saying "I can afford X" without doing the numbers. If you can't afford
to pay
off the credit cards at the end of the month, you really can't afford the
purchase made on them.

I consider credit cards as "payment cards", nothing more.

One of those nifty little life secrets I've found out is that if
you are willing to avoid spending credit money like a drunken sailor
while you are young, you will have much more money for your toys when
you get older.



New verse to an old song:

What shall we do with a drunken sailor
What shall we do with a drunken sailor
What shall we do with a drunken sailor
Ear-lie in the morning?

Put 'im in charge of an Exxon tanker
Put 'im in charge of an Exxon tanker
Put 'im in charge of an Exxon tanker
Ear-lie in the morning!


HeHe!

- Mike KB3EIA -

Arf! Arf! wrote:

connection to ham radio is?
Maybe you need a new group: rec.boring.nolife.discussion

I've seen your other ng posts mr anonymous, yours are as relevant as
this thread.

p.s. if you let me know your mailreader, I can send you instructions on
how to filter us out.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Well, of course there is no such thing as a simple one sentence answer in
these regards. Specific details would have to be investigated for each
person. In my old man's case..... he feels it is a good deal. And the
funds that he would be recieving would go to his investments which would
yield a better dividend to him, and if things get really hairy, he can
always utilize those funds for care. Again, not the same for others.


--
Ryan KC8PMX

"Why is it one careless match can start a forest fire, but
it takes a whole box to start a barbecue?"



But there are certain things to check very carefully. For example, what
interest rate is used and what are the tax ramifications? What happens if,
heaven forbid, you dad signs the papers and passes away a few
days/weeks/months
later? Or, what about just the opposite, if he outlives the mortgage? (I
know a
93-year-old still active and living alone in his own, paid-off house).

There's also the issue of what happens if he has to go into a nursing
home-type
situation somewhere down the road.

73 de Jim, N2EY

But in regards to the math..... compare a 10,000 dollar mortgage versus the
10,000 car loan with applicable rates. Nowhere did I say that one should
use refinancing money to pay off other debts. The other debts themselves to
be paid off quicker if at a higher interest rate is what I said, even if I
didn't make that painfully clear.

Ryan


OK, let's do the math.

Suppose someone goes out and buys a new car and finances $10,000 of its
price
at, say, 8% for 4 years. Their monthly payment will be $244.13 (thank you,
Quicken98) and the total cost of that $10,000 will be $11,718.24. $1718.24
of
interest.

Now suppose instead they tacked $10,000 onto a home refinance and bought
the
car for cash. Suppose they can get 5% for 30 years. Their monthly payment
increases by only $53.68 - but it does so for three decades! Total cost of
that
$10,000 is $19324.80 - that's $9324.80 of interest, even though the rate
is
much lower.

Of course the situation is muddied by the fact that you pay over a much
longer
period of time, but it's doubtful that the car will last 30 years. It's
further
muddied by tax considerations, and whether/when the borrowers can expect
increases in their income.

Most of all, there's the philosophical question of incurring long-term
debt for
a short-term purchase.

What goes up must come down as well too.

Not necessarily. Look at where the Dow was when Bill Clinton took office
in
1992...

Actually, I am not sure about the Dow, but my fund of which is comprised of
alot of the DJIA stocks, had increased substantially from the early 90's
till about the time baby Bush was elected.



But that is the beauty of the
stock market. It is a cyclical thing. Ideally it would be like a good
sinus rhythm. It is just merely the knowledge of where to jump in at.

Just as important is knowing when to jump *out*.

Yeah... after sending that message I forgot to add that line...... To use
the ghetto vernacular..... My Bad!



(It soitanly do, but over long time periods that are not relevant to
most of us who don't live over 150 years. More importantly it is what
the market is doing around the time you take your money out.)

Move your money into high yield accounts shortly before you retire,
that
way you'll have more money when you retire!

Buy high, sell low, go broke...

Only if you know what you are doing and have a really good grasp of the
market.

Which absolutely no one has.

I've listened to investment consultants actually pull this one out of
their hats. I know some older folk who have done this and now have
almost no retirement funds.

Yep... not for the weak or feable to try on thier own if not
knowledgeable.

The term is "risk tolerance"- a fancy way of saying how ready you are to
lose
money. And the rule is simple: the closer you are to actually needing the
money, the less your risk tolerance should be.

Which should be the case as nearing closer to the retirement age. Less time
to "make up" the losses if they occur then.



I have to chuckle at your truism. first, because your friend the real
estate agent uses those sort of arguments to talk you into buying
several thousand or tens of thousands more dollars worht of house.
Second is that You are saying a person who gets out of debt is foolish.

Actually the person I got this truism from and believe in it is Bruce
Williams, the talkshow host. If you do the math, it is fairly true.

I did the math and it's false enough to be a worthless truism.

Yeah... but you also added something to the equation that was not there in
the first place.



--
Ryan KC8PMX

"Never take too life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway."

Don't forget succumbing to the credit card problem. It's soooo easy to
live life large when you have 10 credit cards with a 20 thousand liimit
on each card.

One card with a 500 dollar limit here.... used for emergencies and the
occaisional on-line purchase.


One of those nifty little life secrets I've found out is that if you
are willing to avoid spending credit money like a drunken sailor while
you are young, you will have much more money for your toys when you get
older.

Bingo.... keep money going into savings and then take the funds out when you
need to purchase, but that is an idealism that most cannot grasp.


--
Ryan KC8PMX

"Health is merely the slowest possible rate at which one can die."

Well since you brought up the auto manufacturers..... Obviously there are
some cases where we have no choice in the matter. But in my own personal
case, I will NEVER buy a new car from the auto manufacturers.... I will
however buy one at least one year old, and from a private party, not a
dealership.

There are other obvious cases as well where conceding in this issue is
almost unavoidable. Obviously if your situation requires you to have an
automobile, then purchasing fuel would be an at least occaisional
requirement. Still in those cases, I choose to support the locally owned
franchisee's as opposed to truly corporate owned gas stations.


--
Ryan KC8PMX

"Give a person a fish and you feed them for a day; teach that
person to use The Internet and they won't bother you for weeks."

"KØHB" wrote in message
link.net...
"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote

Screw Corporate Amerika! (before they screw you)

EXACTLY!!!!!! You've got it all figured out for sure!

Who the hell do General Motors and Ford and Mercedes think they are
anyhow --- we used to have hundreds of different auto manufacturers?
Let's
open a blacksmith shop in our village and build our own cars, like our
grandfathers did! And, yeah, quit buying computers from Dell and
Gateway --- we have sand in our neighborhood --- we can make our own
silicon
chips just as well as Intel does! Dole pineapples --- who needs them
anyhow, I bet we can grow perfectly good pineapples here in Minnesota.
Who
needs all this corporate crap anyhow?

73, de Hans, K0HB

"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote

"Give a person a fish and you feed them for a day; teach that
person to use The Internet and they won't bother you for weeks."

"Give a person a fish and you feed them for a day; teach that
person to fish, and they'll sit out on the lake all day drinking
beer."

73, de Hans, K0HB

Ryan, KC8PMX wrote:
Don't forget succumbing to the credit card problem. It's soooo easy to
live life large when you have 10 credit cards with a 20 thousand liimit
on each card.


One card with a 500 dollar limit here.... used for emergencies and the
occaisional on-line purchase.

I confess I have several, but one is a card which gives a discount on
gasoline - but ya have to pay it off!!! - and some others, but they get
paid off pronto.


I'll bet that P****s the companies off!



One of those nifty little life secrets I've found out is that if you
are willing to avoid spending credit money like a drunken sailor while
you are young, you will have much more money for your toys when you get
older.


Bingo.... keep money going into savings and then take the funds out when you
need to purchase, but that is an idealism that most cannot grasp.

A pity, that.

--
Ryan KC8PMX

"Health is merely the slowest possible rate at which one can die."

hehe, good one, Ryan!

- Mike KB3EIA -

"KØHB" wrote in message hlink.net...
"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote

"Give a person a fish and you feed them for a day; teach that
person to use The Internet and they won't bother you for weeks."

"Give a person a fish and you feed them for a day; teach that
person to fish, and they'll sit out on the lake all day drinking
beer."

What's the downside?

I don't see any.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Ryan, KC8PMX wrote:
Don't forget succumbing to the credit card problem. It's soooo easy to
live life large when you have 10 credit cards with a 20 thousand liimit
on each card.


One card with a 500 dollar limit here.... used for emergencies and the
occaisional on-line purchase.

I confess I have several, but one is a card which gives a discount on
gasoline - but ya have to pay it off!!! - and some others, but they get
paid off pronto.


I'll bet that P****s the companies off!


I just feel that the credit cards "trap" a person..... not only with dealing
with paying the damned things off but as a way of thinking when purchasing.
"Gee, I don't have enough money in my wallet, but wait! I have my credit
cards!!"
Thats why I have the one card... with a lower limit.




One of those nifty little life secrets I've found out is that if you
are willing to avoid spending credit money like a drunken sailor while
you are young, you will have much more money for your toys when you get
older.


Bingo.... keep money going into savings and then take the funds out when
you
need to purchase, but that is an idealism that most cannot grasp.

A pity, that.

True, that.!



--
Ryan KC8PMX

"Health is merely the slowest possible rate at which one can die."

hehe, good one, Ryan!


Yeah, I like a good tagline and always looking for more! My favorite one is
below.


--
Ryan KC8PMX

"Some people are like Slinkies . . . not really good for anything, but you
still can't help but smile when you see one tumble down the stairs."

Isn't the fishing the main excuse for drinking beer anyways?? Fishing is
something I used to do while drinking! LOL


--
Ryan KC8PMX

"Never take too life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway."

"KØHB" wrote in message
link.net...
"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote

"Give a person a fish and you feed them for a day; teach that
person to use The Internet and they won't bother you for weeks."

"Give a person a fish and you feed them for a day; teach that
person to fish, and they'll sit out on the lake all day drinking
beer."

73, de Hans, K0HB

"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote:
Isn't the fishing the main excuse for drinking
beer anyways?? Fishing is something I used
to do while drinking! LOL


It's a proven fact that beer actually improves fishing - the fish caught,
and the ones that got away, are a _LOT_ bigger while one is drinking. If you
don't believe me, just ask any fisherman. ;-)


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"Bert Craig" wrote in message
t...
"KØHB" wrote in message
ink.net...
"N2EY" wrote

Would you want to go back to the kinds of cars we had back then?

In a heartbeat!!!!! Most wonderful car I ever owned is a 1962 Chev
Corvair Corsa convertible.

Woo-hoo, lemme have a 1969 Super-Bee! Alas, all I had was a 1973 Dart with
a
318. I would've loved to have a 340 Dart with the bumble bee stripe.
sigh

One other car that is probably my all time favorite is the 1973 European
Ford Capri. Not terribly fast, but wonderfully quick and pretty agile too.
I
had the 2000cc 4 cyl. model but I'd love to drop a modern Ford 3.8l V6 in
one, if I could find one in acceptable cond'n.

Personally, as much as I like "certain" older cars (I have several
antiques),
the reality is that today's vehicles are pretty incredible. Better gas
mileage,
far better handling and they do last much longer in terms of total
mileage and/or years of age. My first new car, a 1964 Chevy Impala
convertible with 283 V8 generally got 18mpg. My 2003 Chevy Silverado,
4x4, Extended cab with a 327 V8 gets about 16-17 on average.

The more recent new cars I've owned have all made it well beyond the
150K miles before being sold or junked. Several went 200K+.
The new cars can run at 75mph all day and not falter in the
heat of summer or cold of winter.

Yes, I love the car club and occasional jaunt alone in my '61 Triumph TR-3,
but
it is the time warp element that makes it the fun event...plus the always
positive comments from bystanders at stopping point...that driving the
TR-3 is. For my day-to-day commute, however, I stick to my new
truck.

Happy Thanksgiving to all. If you like it, drive it.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

"Bill Sohl" wrote

My 2003 Chevy Silverado, 4x4, Extended cab with a 327 V8 gets about 16-17
on average.

Your engine is too small.

My 2003 Silverado 2500HD turbo-charged 32-valve 6.6L V8 gets around 21-22
MPG on the highway, and 18MPG around town.

But my 1962 Corvair turbo-charged 12-valve H-6 got only around 13 MPG, but
it was a LOT more fun to drive, and the chicks dug it!

73, de Hans, K0HB

"KØHB" wrote in message
hlink.net...
"Bill Sohl" wrote

My 2003 Chevy Silverado, 4x4, Extended cab with a 327 V8 gets about
16-17
on average.

Your engine is too small.

It has no problem towing a 5000 pound travel trailer around the northeast...
including the appalachians of PA.

My 2003 Silverado 2500HD turbo-charged 32-valve 6.6L V8 gets around 21-22
MPG on the highway, and 18MPG around town.

But my 1962 Corvair turbo-charged 12-valve H-6 got only around 13 MPG, but
it was a LOT more fun to drive, and the chicks dug it!

Like I originally said....for my daily commute, I'll take the truck.
Give me a nice two lane country road meandering about the hillsides
and I'll take the TR-3 (if it is a nice sunny and dry day). Rain and
the TR (or almost any vintage British sports car) are natural
opposites. :-) :-)

Cheers
Bill K2UNK