twitter: rec.crafts.metalworking - 25 new messages in 10 topics

rec.crafts.metalworking
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking?hl=en

rec.crafts.metalworking@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: What is it? Set 315
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/ab205759b3a85337?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 8:58 am
From: "Rob H."

"Y?" <A@B.com> wrote in message
news:4b2a174f$0$1782$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>
> "Rob H." <rhvp65@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:hgd2gi019n3@news1.newsguy.com...
>>A new set of items has been posted:
>>
>> http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>>
>>
>> Rob
>
>
> 1801 - A Dipstick of some sort, possibly broken/shortened?

This was an advertising give-away, the text on it is not related to its use
but it would have been used indoors.

Rob

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 9:00 am
From: "Rob H."

>> http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>>
>>
>> Rob
>
> 1802 is easy. It's a chimney cleaner. Used to remove
> built up creosote. No doubt in my mind. I've used one
> of these _many_ times. They don't do a good job on
> removing the hard glass like creosote so I came up
> with my own design.
> phil kangas

This answer is correct.

Rob

== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 9:03 am
From: "Rob H."

> http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>
> Rob

>I think I saw something similar to #1803 many years ago when a wayward
>uncle took me to a cock fight back in the 1950's. They put these
>around the legs of the fighting roosters. They are very nasty and the
>guys handling the roosters had to be very careful when they tried to
>grab the winner. Sometimes there wasn't a winner because both roosters
>died. Have the times changed?

>DL

Apparently the times haven't changes, it is indeed a cock fighting spur.

Rob

== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 9:06 am
From: "Steve W."

Rob H. wrote:
> A new set of items has been posted:
>
> http://55tools.blogspot.com/
>
>
> Rob

1801 - Looks like a dipstick for a transfer pump.

1802 - Chimney cleaner.

1803 - nasty looking back scratcher?

1804 - Looks like a modified gas burner, maybe for glass work?. The tip
isn't original judging by the knurling on it compared to the rest of the
fixture.

1805 - Version of a Plinko machine?

1806 - I have seen one of these. Didn't know what it was then either ;-)

--
Steve W.

== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 9:49 am
From: Ted Schuerzinger

On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 12:06:52 -0500, Steve W. wrote:

> 1806 - I have seen one of these. Didn't know what it was then either ;-)

Fence tightener. That's the default answer to all of these. :-)

--
Ted S.
fedya at hughes dot net
Now blogging at http://justacineast.blogspot.com

==============================================================================
TOPIC: See those photos of Gunner?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/ccfc6d790eee4d34?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 10:02 am
From: "Steve B"

"Hawke" <davesmithers@digitalpath.net> wrote in message
news:hgclno$anv$2@aioe.org...
> Steve B wrote:
>> "Hawke" <davesmithers@digitalpath.net> wrote in message
>> news:hgbs8h$ghp$1@aioe.org...
>>> Over on talk politics.guns there was a post that had a link where Gunner
>>> had put some post operative photos of himself. Anybody see those? Wow,
>>> is all I can say. That guy looks bad but for once we know he was telling
>>> the truth. He really did have major surgery. Of course, after seeing
>>> what he really looks like you can put away any notion of that guy being
>>> physically able to do jack shit. Next time you hear him offering to go
>>> into a pitch black room with a Kabar you'll know how ludicrous the offer
>>> really is.
>>>
>>> Hawke
>>
>> Are you okay?
>
>
> I'm fine. Thanks for asking. But after seeing the real Gunner it was
> pretty disappointing. I was expecting someone like Rambo but older. Not
> some old fucked up putz. He's a sad case. No wonder he has to make up so
> many stories. The truth is hard to take.
>
> Hawke

You'd know.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Stimulating the economy, do not rely on Keynesian theory
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/0fc6474b820ad97a?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 9:05 am
From: "Ed Huntress"

<dcaster@krl.org> wrote in message
news:53a75321-6cd8-4a5b-820e-ec860da06cbd@21g2000vbh.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 17, 4:07 pm, "Ed Huntress" <huntre...@optonline.net> wrote:

The
> impression that many people have is that Reagan greatly reduced taxes. As
> you can see from the CBO report, the effective tax rates, across the
> board,
> hardly moved during Reagan's term. There was a lot of smoke and wind, but
> they really didn't do squat. Some effective rates actually moved *up*.
>
> If you're looking at the total tax burden on the economy, the effect of
> Reagan's various tax bills was roughly zero.
> Ed Huntress

>The total tax burden may have been the same, but there were a lot of
>changes that affected what one did. The deduction for interest other
>than mortgages went away for example. Another was lowering the cap
>gains tax, so people were more likely to sell and reinvest where the
>investment might be more needed and profitable. So in my opinion the
>changes reduced the distortions caused by loopholes ( not the best
>word, but conveys the idea ) in the tax code. So I think the changes
>were beneficial to growth, even though the total tax burden was the
>same.

Possibly. Again, impressions are one thing, and actual numbers are another.
I'd need to see the numbers before commenting about it, and that's a big
job.

>
>Now if the deduction for interest on mortgages had been eliminated,
>the housing bubble would have been smaller.

Sure. Fewer people would own houses, for one thing. d8-)

Housing and the housing bubble are tough issues. There's a very large
economic benefit, and an even larger social benefit, to having people own
their own homes. How that stacks up against the effect on housing inflation
is another issue that would have to be explored in terms of actual numbers.

As for the bubble, the dynamics really don't change by adding or subtracting
interest deductions. What shifts is some combination of house prices and
affordability. More people own houses, but there also is a shift toward
higher prices. As always, we'd need the numbers rather than the philosophy
to see what actually happened.

--
Ed Huntress

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 9:10 am
From: "John R. Carroll"

Ed Huntress wrote:
> <dcaster@krl.org> wrote in message
> news:53a75321-6cd8-4a5b-820e-ec860da06cbd@21g2000vbh.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 17, 4:07 pm, "Ed Huntress" <huntre...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> The
>> impression that many people have is that Reagan greatly reduced
>> taxes. As you can see from the CBO report, the effective tax rates,
>> across the board,
>> hardly moved during Reagan's term. There was a lot of smoke and
>> wind, but they really didn't do squat. Some effective rates actually
>> moved *up*.
>>
>> If you're looking at the total tax burden on the economy, the effect
>> of Reagan's various tax bills was roughly zero.
>> Ed Huntress
>
>> The total tax burden may have been the same, but there were a lot of
>> changes that affected what one did. The deduction for interest other
>> than mortgages went away for example. Another was lowering the cap
>> gains tax, so people were more likely to sell and reinvest where the
>> investment might be more needed and profitable. So in my opinion the
>> changes reduced the distortions caused by loopholes ( not the best
>> word, but conveys the idea ) in the tax code. So I think the changes
>> were beneficial to growth, even though the total tax burden was the
>> same.
>
> Possibly. Again, impressions are one thing, and actual numbers are
> another. I'd need to see the numbers before commenting about it, and
> that's a big job.
>
>>
>> Now if the deduction for interest on mortgages had been eliminated,
>> the housing bubble would have been smaller.
>
> Sure. Fewer people would own houses, for one thing. d8-)

You'd think that wouldn't you, Ed.
It is not, however, reflective of any reality I know of.
IOW, it isn't true and the numbers back me up on this.
Nearly 100 percent of the tax deduction for mortgage interest has lead to
higher prices ( for everything )
in about the amount of that subsidy.

--
John R. Carroll

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 9:26 am
From: "Ed Huntress"

"John R. Carroll" <nunya@bidness.dev.nul> wrote in message
news:us6dnZ277Piw-7fWnZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@giganews.com...
> Ed Huntress wrote:
>> <dcaster@krl.org> wrote in message
>> news:53a75321-6cd8-4a5b-820e-ec860da06cbd@21g2000vbh.googlegroups.com...
>> On Dec 17, 4:07 pm, "Ed Huntress" <huntre...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> The
>>> impression that many people have is that Reagan greatly reduced
>>> taxes. As you can see from the CBO report, the effective tax rates,
>>> across the board,
>>> hardly moved during Reagan's term. There was a lot of smoke and
>>> wind, but they really didn't do squat. Some effective rates actually
>>> moved *up*.
>>>
>>> If you're looking at the total tax burden on the economy, the effect
>>> of Reagan's various tax bills was roughly zero.
>>> Ed Huntress
>>
>>> The total tax burden may have been the same, but there were a lot of
>>> changes that affected what one did. The deduction for interest other
>>> than mortgages went away for example. Another was lowering the cap
>>> gains tax, so people were more likely to sell and reinvest where the
>>> investment might be more needed and profitable. So in my opinion the
>>> changes reduced the distortions caused by loopholes ( not the best
>>> word, but conveys the idea ) in the tax code. So I think the changes
>>> were beneficial to growth, even though the total tax burden was the
>>> same.
>>
>> Possibly. Again, impressions are one thing, and actual numbers are
>> another. I'd need to see the numbers before commenting about it, and
>> that's a big job.
>>
>>>
>>> Now if the deduction for interest on mortgages had been eliminated,
>>> the housing bubble would have been smaller.
>>
>> Sure. Fewer people would own houses, for one thing. d8-)
>
> You'd think that wouldn't you, Ed.

I'm being slightly facetious but it's provable that sales of houses are
*very* sensitive to tax rates, mortgage interest rates, and housing
inflation. The best way to look at it is that people buy houses as soon as
they can afford them, and they buy the most expensive houses they can
afford. In the main.

So tax deductions for mortgage interest is one small factor that influences
sales rates. Unfortunately, houses, and real estate in general, have little
to do with replacement costs. Prices are based on what people can afford and
will buy. That's the real driver in residential housing sales numbers and
prices.

> It is not, however, reflective of any reality I know of.
> IOW, it isn't true and the numbers back me up on this.
> Nearly 100 percent of the tax deduction for mortgage interest has lead to
> higher prices ( for everything )
> in about the amount of that subsidy.

I suspect that's close to being right. I also suspect there is a small
residual benefit, in terms of numbers of houses sold, that can be isolated
as being the result of tax deductions. Most of the gain gets eaten up by
housing inflation, but a small residual remains. I think. <g>

A problem with tax deductions for houses is that they're regressive -- most
of the benefit accrues to people in the highest brackets. That's not where
you want to pump up housing, because they're going to buy houses anyway.

This is where you need a good econometrician who's handy with multivariate
analysis. I'll ask my son when he graduates in June. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 10:18 am
From: "John R. Carroll"

dcaster@krl.org wrote:
> On Dec 17, 4:07 pm, "Ed Huntress" <huntre...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> The
>> impression that many people have is that Reagan greatly reduced
>> taxes. As you can see from the CBO report, the effective tax rates,
>> across the board, hardly moved during Reagan's term. There was a lot
>> of smoke and wind, but they really didn't do squat. Some effective
>> rates actually moved *up*.
>>
>> If you're looking at the total tax burden on the economy, the effect
>> of Reagan's various tax bills was roughly zero.
>> Ed Huntress
>
> The total tax burden may have been the same, but there were a lot of
> changes that affected what one did. The deduction for interest other
> than mortgages went away for example. Another was lowering the cap
> gains tax, so people were more likely to sell and reinvest where the
> investment might be more needed and profitable.

LOL
What happened then has happened again since the tax cuts of the Bush jr
administration. Profit taking.
Anytime you tax something you get less of it.
Taxing profits doesn't mean people suddenly quit working. What it means is
that they leave their money in
their businesses where it isn't taxed, or at least can be protected by
putting it to work.

So in my opinion the
> changes reduced the distortions caused by loopholes ( not the best
> word, but conveys the idea ) in the tax code. So I think the changes
> were beneficial to growth, even though the total tax burden was the
> same.

The changes did real long term damage to the American work force.

--
John R. Carroll

==============================================================================
TOPIC: OT: Computer download/upload discrepancy...
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/90287d437e91cae2?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 9:07 am
From: "Ed Huntress"

"Winston" <Winston@bigbrother.net> wrote in message
news:hgdnnd01snv@news3.newsguy.com...
> Ed Huntress wrote:
>> "Winston" <Winston@bigbrother.net> wrote in message
>> news:hgdiuq01mke@news5.newsguy.com...
>>> Chet wrote:
>>>> What a great group!
>>>> Not only metalworking, but apparently everything else that matters in
>>>> life as well! ; - )
>>>> I appreciate everyone's input. Thank you!
>>>> Chet
>>> Don't forget to print Ed's great Classic quiche Lorraine recipe. Yum!
>>>
>>>
>>> --Winston
>>
>> And don't forget the cheese! See today's update. I completely missed the
>> cheese. Jeez.
>
> Yes! Why settle for 'delicious' when you can have 'magical'!
>
> --Winston

Now I'm getting worried about overextending expectations. It's still just
food. <g>

--
Ed Huntress

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 9:43 am
From: Winston

Ed Huntress wrote:
> "Winston" <Winston@bigbrother.net> wrote in message
> news:hgdnnd01snv@news3.newsguy.com...
>> Ed Huntress wrote:
>>> "Winston" <Winston@bigbrother.net> wrote in message
>>> news:hgdiuq01mke@news5.newsguy.com...
>>>> Chet wrote:
>>>>> What a great group!
>>>>> Not only metalworking, but apparently everything else that matters in
>>>>> life as well! ; - )
>>>>> I appreciate everyone's input. Thank you!
>>>>> Chet
>>>> Don't forget to print Ed's great Classic quiche Lorraine recipe. Yum!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --Winston
>>> And don't forget the cheese! See today's update. I completely missed the
>>> cheese. Jeez.
>> Yes! Why settle for 'delicious' when you can have 'magical'!
>>
>> --Winston
>
> Now I'm getting worried about overextending expectations. It's still just
> food. <g>

JUST FOOD?!!?

I think not. :)

--Winston

Congratulations Robert Piccinini and Steven A. Burd, WalMart Publicists of the Year!

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Dear Grim Reaper...
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/259c00726ce8a523?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 10:05 am
From: "Steve B"

"cavelamb" <cavelamb@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:jqadnRTNw6-ZzrfWnZ2dnUVZ_qqdnZ2d@earthlink.com...
>
>
> Dear Grim Reaper,
>
> So far this year you have taken away my favorite actor Patrick Swayze, my
> favorite singer Stephen Gately and my favorite actress Farah Fawcett.
>
>
> Just so you know, my favorite politicians are Barack Obama, Joe Biden and
> Nancy Pelosi.
>
>
> Regards

Joe Biden doesn't hold a candle to Harry Reid.

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 9:29 am
From: "Ed Huntress"

"Steve B" <deserttraver@fishmail.net> wrote in message
news:005qv6-6s71.ln1@news.infowest.com...
>
> "cavelamb" <cavelamb@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:jqadnRTNw6-ZzrfWnZ2dnUVZ_qqdnZ2d@earthlink.com...
>>
>>
>> Dear Grim Reaper,
>>
>> So far this year you have taken away my favorite actor Patrick Swayze, my
>> favorite singer Stephen Gately and my favorite actress Farah Fawcett.
>>
>>
>> Just so you know, my favorite politicians are Barack Obama, Joe Biden and
>> Nancy Pelosi.
>>
>>
>> Regards
>
> Joe Biden doesn't hold a candle to Harry Reid.

As long as we're voting on who would be more useful if he were no longer of
this Earth, I'm putting in my vote for Joe Lieberman, the State Flounder of
Connecticut.

--
Ed Huntress

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 10:44 am
From: "Steve B"

"Ed Huntress" <huntres23@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:4b2a6a7f$0$5002$607ed4bc@cv.net...
>
> "Steve B" <deserttraver@fishmail.net> wrote in message
> news:005qv6-6s71.ln1@news.infowest.com...
>>
>> "cavelamb" <cavelamb@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> news:jqadnRTNw6-ZzrfWnZ2dnUVZ_qqdnZ2d@earthlink.com...
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear Grim Reaper,
>>>
>>> So far this year you have taken away my favorite actor Patrick Swayze,
>>> my favorite singer Stephen Gately and my favorite actress Farah Fawcett.
>>>
>>>
>>> Just so you know, my favorite politicians are Barack Obama, Joe Biden
>>> and Nancy Pelosi.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>
>> Joe Biden doesn't hold a candle to Harry Reid.
>
> As long as we're voting on who would be more useful if he were no longer
> of this Earth, I'm putting in my vote for Joe Lieberman, the State
> Flounder of Connecticut.
>
> --
> Ed Huntress

Seriously, I wouldn't want them to leave the planet from anything other than
natural causes. Just either do what they're supposed to do, or get out of
the way and let someone else do it. But now, we're in a mode of
internationalizing everything, and brokering carbon credits based on flawed
and fraudulent science, so even electing representative politicians won't
help a lot. It seems as if the actual control of things has shifted to the
Rothschilds and the like, and since they own the politicians, it's a done
deal.

As I see it, there's just a few ways to go: sheeple socialism, armed
revolution, anarchy, or social and financial collapse.

First we had the Euro. Now, the Amero? One worldism isn't far off, folks.

Steve

==============================================================================
TOPIC: For once, I wish I lived somewhere icy
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/07032a740505f66b?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 9:13 am
From: "Stupendous Man"

> When I first saw those plans, I imagined a vehicle that could travel on
> snow as well as ice. Like a snowmobile. Am I wrong or can some
> propeller-driven sleds do this?

Depends on where you are. Lots of things work well on the flats, but here in
the Sierras, it is a bit challenging.
We like to ride about 50 miles south of where the Donner party had their
mis-adventure.
Some days we can climb any mountain with our 20 year old snowmobiles, but
most days we have limitations.
Lakes at 10000 Ft are not frozen enough for us to go out on, but we do cross
shallow creeks.
I am going up tomorrow.

Plenty of Archimedes screw vehicles have been tried, here is an interesting
one, later in the film chainguards appear
http://www.flixxy.com/snow-vehicle-concept.htm

--
Stupendous Man,
Defender of Freedom, Advocate of Liberty

==============================================================================
TOPIC: thousands of dollars in cash overflowing your PAYPAL account
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/9aaeb0bb4ce956fd?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 9:16 am
From: "james"

How to make thousands of dollars in cash overflowing your PAYPAL
account. This is not some stupid gimmick! Try It! Simply follow the
instructions below and in 2 to 3 weeks you will have will have about
$20,000 in your PayPal account.
You have most likely seen or heard about "The Letter" $5.00 program
that was recently televised on 20/20, OPRAH WINFREY, and an article
published in the Wall Street Journal on 6/16/2001. If Not, here it is!!

NOTE: THIS IS ALL PERFECTLY LEGAL (refer to US Lottery Laws, Title 18,
section 1302 and 1341, or Title 18, Section 3005 in the US code, also
in the code of Federal Regulations, Volume 16, Sections 255 and 436,
which state a product or service must be exchanged for money received).
This version has nothing to do with Postal Laws, as it' EMAIL ONLY.
Most people respond to this program because of the low Investment and
high Profit Potential. The return rate is currently 50 to 80%. There is
No Limit to the income you can generate from this Business; you can do
it over and over. The only down fall is people who try to put their
address in the #1 place if they do that they will only reach the people
they send to, and only make a couple of dollars.
If you follow the instructions you will reach thousands of people!
LETS GET STARTED!

I think everyone has heard of "PayPal"(if not you will). PayPal is the
simplest method of making and receiving payments online. Anyone with an
email address can join for FREE! If you're not already a Paypal user,
the first thing you need to do is go to PayPal and Sign Up FREE:

https://www.paypal.com/us/mrb/pal=MUWMEDAL4NR9U

Use the link above to sign up for a PREMIER (FREE) account or you will
be limited to accepting only $100. You Will Make Much More Than That!
1st, send a $5.00 donation/payment from your PayPal Account (You will
earn back $5.00 from PayPal) to The FIRST email address on the list
along with a note saying "Please add me to your mailing list",
Understand that you need to pay as NON AUCTION GOOD. When you pay title
it "money add to mailing list." This way there Is no question about
getting money for nothing? You saying put me on your mailing list is a
way of saying you are paying for them to do so. So you see you are
paying for something. This is 100% legal paypal likes to see that you
are paying for something. This is why you do it, just to make paypal
happy. Now send an email to the 3rd person on the list saying "Thanks
I've joined". the second place into the first place spot and the third
place into second place spot and your Then, Remove the first email
address and place your address at the bottom. This should move address
will be in the third place spot.

DON'T TRY TO PLACE YOURSELF IN THE FIRST PLACE. IT WILL ONLY REACH THE
PEOPLE YOU SEND IT TO, AND THEN YOUR NAME WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE 1ST
PLACE BY THAT PERSON. If you do this the way it was designed it will
reach thousands by the time your name gets to the top. REMEMBER TO ONLY
SEND a $5.00 donation/payment to the First email address, and Send
"THANKS I'VE JOINED" to the 3rd person. This lets the 3rd person keep
track of their progress. Please understand that by removing the top
address and not paying Them the 5 dollars, you are only hurting the
system. You will make money only if everyone is honest. I know there
will be some who do this but it is not smart. This way works if
everyone goes along with it and everyone will be happy trust me. It is
only 5 dollars! Pay it!! Most people are honest when it comes to this
process I hope you are to. Look at it this way. They were the
ones who helped spread this process and helped it get to you for you to
make money, so 5 bucks is not much. You will want the money from
others! 5 dollars for thousands is a good exchange!!!!

NOW that you have made your donation to the first person and sent the
third person a note, place your email address in the 3rd slot (Make
sure its the same email address you used for your PayPal account. This
is the way you will receive payment.) OK, the only thing left to do is
Mail out at least 20 copies or more of this letter in a week or so.
When your name reaches the TOP of the list it will be your turn to
Collect your Money from thousands of people just like yourself who are
willing to spend $5.00 and half an hour of there time to receive
$20,000 in CASH!
Look how your address will spread: First you send of 20 copies of the
letter with you in the 3rd spot Second the people you send the email to
will remove the top address and move yours into the 2nd slot and will
send of 20 copies. So now you have 20 x 20 =400 total copies of letter
with Your address in the 2nd spot. Then the recipients of those 400
emails send of 20 copies each With your address in the 1st spot and
that equals 8000 copies will be received with your address in the top
spot. You have 8000 people will send you 5 dollars. That is how it
works and you will Be very happy!

This is a site that you would pay $20-$50 for the same type of
information:

http://instantpaydayclub.com/cgi-bin/club/index.cgi?TrUguN

Here's your starting list below, give it a try:

1. Sali88@interia.pl
2.james-burke@live.ca
3. YOUR EMAIL HERE

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 9:52 am
From: "Dawne Peterson"

Oh thank you so much for this opportunity to become fabulously wealthy for
nothing. But I think I will wait a day or two--by that time the pyramid
(and this is a pyramid scheme) will have become so big that everybody on
earth will be on the list by the time my name comes to the top, and since of
course they will ALL send me money, I will become a gazillionaire.

Can't hardly wait

Dawne

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 10:10 am
From: "Lucille"

"Dawne Peterson" <valkyrie@sasktel.net> wrote in message
news:4tSdnYgkc9yd7bfWnZ2dnUVZ_jqdnZ2d@posted.sasktel...
> Oh thank you so much for this opportunity to become fabulously wealthy for
> nothing. But I think I will wait a day or two--by that time the pyramid
> (and this is a pyramid scheme) will have become so big that everybody on
> earth will be on the list by the time my name comes to the top, and since
> of course they will ALL send me money, I will become a gazillionaire.
>
> Can't hardly wait
>
> Dawne

And please don't hesitate to share it with me. I promise not to be
embarrassed and will take it happily.

Lucille
>
>

==============================================================================
TOPIC: left hand boring bar
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/bc82b796adeac910?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 9:28 am
From: Mark Rand

On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 05:46:13 -0600, "Karl Townsend"
<karltownsend.NOT@embarqmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>>> looking for a left hand boring bar; C6 or m42 tip , small radius
>>> cutting edge is acceptable. Anybody got a lead on where I can buy one
>>> of these?
>...
>> Why? Explain the job and you might get a better idea how to do it.
>
>The only thing i could think of is left hand inside threading, but he's not
>looking for a thread tool. But it got me thinking, I don't know how to cut a
>left hand thread on my manual lathe anyway. How is this done?
>

You'll need one if you put it in the side hole of a boring head :-)

Mark Rand
RTFM

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Emerson Electric
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/d5334a532acd709a?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 9:43 am
From: Gunner Asch

On Sun, 06 Dec 2009 20:52:43 -0800, Rich Grise <richgrise@example.net>
wrote:

>On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 00:47:04 -0500, Ed Huntress wrote:
>> "Gunner Asch" <gunner@lightspeed.net> wrote in message
>>> On Sun, 6 Dec 2009 22:42:34 -0500, "ATP*" <waxwingslain@azurepane.com>
>>>>"Gunner Asch" <gunner@lightspeed.net> wrote in message
>>>>> On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 14:53:50 -0500, "Buerste" <buerste@wowway.com>
>>>>>>"Ignoramus26134" <ignoramus26134@NOSPAM.26134.invalid> wrote in
>>>>>>message news:-t2dnRkESNtIVoTWnZ2dnUVZ_vSdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>><snip>
>>>>>>> Republicans like corporations and "the wealthy" to pay less income
>>>>>>> taxes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Interesting, most of Obama's cabinet were caught with "mistakes" on
>>>>>>their
>>>>>>returns.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The next question is why exactly they do so. Maybe it is because
>>>>>>> they like downtrodden people? Or maybe it is accidental? Or,
>>>>>>> perhaps, maybe it is because Republicans get donations from those
>>>>>>> wealthy people?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Interesting, do you know that Wall Street donated to Democrats by
>>>>>>something
>>>>>>like a 4-to-1 ratio? The falacy is that the "wealthy" are Republicans
>>>>>>when
>>>>>>the fact is the "wealthy" are largely Democrats.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Don't be blinded by your bias.
>>>>>>
>>>>> True indeed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just keep in mind..that Iggy is in fact an ex communist from
>>>>> Russia..and as such...his entire mental background has been formed on
>>>>> the Soviet ideal.
>>>>>
>>>>> I cut him slack because of this defect in his thinking. He really cant
>>>>> help it..its so deeply engrained into his world view that it colors
>>>>> everything he sees and do.
>>>>>
>>>>So the ex-communist is making a go of it in this capitalistic system and
>>>>paying taxes and you are leeching off the system, getting free
>>>>government services and free healthcare. Kind of ironic.
>>>>
>>> Free government services? Which ones? And free healthcare? Ive paid
>>> for those many many times in the past 45 yrs in taxes alone.
>>>
>>> But hey...spew all you want. Im now a Democrat..and as such, deserve
>>> everything the Party gives me. And you are bitching about it? Talk to
>>> your masters in the DNC and complain.
>>>
>>> Laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh!!
>>
>> Jeez, Gunner, the way you're plonking everyone who makes you look foolish,
>> you'll soon be able to fit your whole little group into a couple of body
>> bags.
>
>Liberals don't recognize sarcasm either?
>
Nope...they think their lies are real and reality is a lie.

Libs are really messsed up people.

Gunner

>Thanks,
>Rich

"First Law of Leftist Debate
The more you present a leftist with factual evidence
that is counter to his preconceived world view and the
more difficult it becomes for him to refute it without
losing face the chance of him calling you a racist, bigot,
homophobe approaches infinity.

This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned
race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to
the subject." Grey Ghost

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 9:48 am
From: Gunner Asch

On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 16:16:02 -0600, Yooper <yooper1950@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>In article <4b1d4759$0$31258$607ed4bc@cv.net>, huntres23@optonline.net
>says...
>>
>> Have you heard the one about the gang-bangers at the desert pistol
>range? That one was far more
> imaginative. d8-)
>
>
> I think my favorite was his snow camping at minus 60 deg. I was born
>up here, been here 62 years, and it's never hit -60.

Never figured wind chill eh? -30 with a nice nippy 30mph breeze
blowing through the pines, eh?

Btw...in still air...

"The lowest temperature in Michigan, -51°, was recorded on February 9,
1934 at Vanderbilt."

This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned
race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to
the subject." Grey Ghost

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 9:52 am
From: Gunner Asch

On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 17:09:29 -0600, Ignoramus8601
<ignoramus8601@NOSPAM.8601.invalid> wrote:

>> I only become annoyed at the constant bigotries and put-downs -- political,
>> geographical, etc. If that's what he needs to inflate his own self-image,
>> there's an entire literature on that subject and far be it from me to tell
>> him what to do about it in his private life. When it becomes public and it
>> sours the atmosphere, as it does here, I'll say something. Otherwise, you'll
>> have to catch his whoppers on your own. There certainly are enough of them
>> flying by to keep you busy.
>
>I personally disagree with him trying to discount my political views
>by bringing up where I came from. It makes it difficult to have a
>meaningful discourse.

Iggy iggy iggy....I find it marvelous that you came to the US from the
USSR. I welcome you with open arms! Tovarish!!

What you are stingning about is my commentary that you never did
completely take Capitalism into your heart...you still have a strong
socialist streak you may not be aware of. So I use Comrade etc etc when
it pops up as an indicator that on that subject...you are not completly
"here" yet.

Sorry if you didnt understand this. I had assumed you did. I know others
here have.

Shrug

Gunner

This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned
race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to
the subject." Grey Ghost

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 9:53 am
From: Gunner Asch

On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 21:23:25 -0600, Ignoramus8601
<ignoramus8601@NOSPAM.8601.invalid> wrote:

>On 2009-12-08, ATP* <waxwingslain@azurepane.com> wrote:
>>
>> "Ignoramus8601" <ignoramus8601@NOSPAM.8601.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:bLednWrNEsW0FoDWnZ2dnUVZ_sadnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>
>>> I personally disagree with him trying to discount my political views
>>> by bringing up where I came from. It makes it difficult to have a
>>> meaningful discourse.
>>
>> Also the part where he fantasizes that all the people he disagrees with will
>> be mass murdered in three years. That doesn't help either.
>
>Well, his time horizon keeps shifting, so I am not too worried about
>it.
>
>i

Really? "Less than 3 yrs" is a shifting horizon?

Fascinating.

Gunner

This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned
race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to
the subject." Grey Ghost

==============================================================================
TOPIC: military brass
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/ec965f20870e4bac?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Dec 17 2009 9:59 am
From: Gunner Asch

On Sun, 6 Dec 2009 11:34:19 -0500, "Buerste" <buerste@wowway.com> wrote:

>
>"Gunner Asch" <gunner@lightspeed.net> wrote in message
>news:f97nh5pnc7gfj1qa7l8ma730dfvla571p3@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 6 Dec 2009 01:31:26 -0800 (PST), "kfvorwerk@gmail.com"
>> <kfvorwerk@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Dec 5, 8:33 am, "Karl Townsend" <karltownsend....@embarqmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>> I'm mostly posting to say thanks to Gunner, Tom, and Don. "The Kid" and
>>>> I
>>>> just finished reloading 1000 rounds 9mm. It went smooth as silk once we
>>>> learned the trick to chamfer the primer ring on military brass. Just put
>>>> a
>>>> counter sink in the lathe and run it at about 500. Touch the brass to it
>>>> for
>>>> a second and its perfect. I got to grabbing another brass with one hand
>>>> and
>>>> transferring it to the other to chamfer really fast.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks again for all the help getting us in the reloading bidness.
>>>>
>>>> Karl
>>>
>>>Are these Berdan or boxer primed?
>>>Karl
>>
>> One assumes boxer. Berdan is rather rare in the US and is a pain in the
>> ass to reload for.
>>
>> Gunner
>>
>
>I made a fixture to drill out some .223 steel cases Berdan and converted
>them to Boxer. If I had a lot of them, I would have bought or made a collet
>for my W&S #2 turret lathe. That would have been FAST! I reloaded the Wolf
>cases just to see if I could...still don't like 'em.
>(I fixed the e-mail)

How did you close up the existing multiple flash holes?

Gunner

This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned
race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to
the subject." Grey Ghost

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.crafts.metalworking"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.crafts.metalworking+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en

twitter

Thursday, December 17, 2009

rec.crafts.metalworking - 25 new messages in 10 topics - digest

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

About Me

Previous Posts