Most issue you're concern in political?

[Reba]

I don't agree that the cost of electricity expenses is less than shutters. You pay electricity expenses forever which shutters only once. Sure, windows and shutters are expensive but only once in rest of life which electricity expenses doesn't. You can count up electricity expenses for long years to compare with windows/shutters at once.

I think our electricity is cheaper than your electricity. If it takes 20 years of using shutters to reduce the electric bill to equal the cost of installing new shutters, then it's not cost effective for that reason.

I will try to get some estimates in a couple weeks.

But just guessing for now, if it costs about $500 to replace each window and shutters, times 24 windows, that equals $12,000. If I save $60 per year in electricity costs, then it would take at least 20 years just to break even.

Yes, I can understand that each person has different preference. I prefer to have our room to being cool than worry about views until the heat gone into sunset. I love sunset views.

I don't "worry" about the view. I enjoy my views of nature, and I don't like feeling closed in and dark. My rooms are cool and comfortable, bright and cheery.

But it still reduce.

We don't have condensation, so there is nothing to reduce. It's already zero.

I has to honest with you that a lot of people didn't aware about this. I have seen a lot of Americans use aluminum foil to cover their windows to protect heat in their rooms like this for years.

Well, a lot of Americans are stupid. What can I say?

We live in the sunny South. I haven't seen a window with foil covering it in many, many years. If that was a useful solution more people would be doing that here. But they are not.

In the offices, some Americans open the windows and let AC on...

I don't know why they do that. Most of the office buildings and schools where I work we can't even open the windows. They use just AC.

Yes, each person has different preference but some person tries her/his best how to take care of or get feedback from someone else how to protect their rooms against heat/humitiy etc.

That's why the best advice comes from people living in the same climate. I don't have good advice for people living in the desert or in the snow zones. Their houses are built differently, their heating and AC systems and costs are different.

I has to honest with you that the thermal windows and shutters help alot when you have a house with full bricks.

That's great for you because you have a brick house. I don't have a brick house, so I use the best system that fits my house and climate.

Some people in SC do have brick homes and thermal pane windows but they don't have roller shutters.

 

[Foxrac]

I think our electricity is cheaper than your electricity. If it takes 20 years of using shutters to reduce the electric bill to equal the cost of installing new shutters, then it's not cost effective for that reason.

I will try to get some estimates in a couple weeks.

But just guessing for now, if it costs about $500 to replace each window and shutters, times 24 windows, that equals $12,000. If I save $60 per year in electricity costs, then it would take at least 20 years just to break even.


I don't "worry" about the view. I enjoy my views of nature, and I don't like feeling closed in and dark. My rooms are cool and comfortable, bright and cheery.



We don't have condensation, so there is nothing to reduce. It's already zero.



Well, a lot of Americans are stupid. What can I say?

We live in the sunny South. I haven't seen a window with foil covering it in many, many years. If that was a useful solution more people would be doing that here. But they are not.


I don't know why they do that. Most of the office buildings and schools where I work we can't even open the windows. They use just AC.



That's why the best advice comes from people living in the same climate. I don't have good advice for people living in the desert or in the snow zones. Their houses are built differently, their heating and AC systems and costs are different.



That's great for you because you have a brick house. I don't have a brick house, so I use the best system that fits my house and climate.

Some people in SC do have brick homes and thermal pane windows but they don't have roller shutters.

I think that her home is full of stucco.

 

[webexplorer]

Sillycat and Dark-Half -

Yes, I agreed with you guys in the first place. That's what we need to start with especially to support in green environement such as windpowers, solar panels, and many kinds of alternative energies.

Most people want the money first - than taking care of our Earth. Just like shoot someone first then ask questions later.

 

[webexplorer]

Reba -

Off subject -

Actually, oldest brick is made of real solid of cement. Now, a new brick in our Era is made of compressed gas in it and it is very light. The old one is far better than the new one. They don't make heavy bricks anymore. I dunno.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

I think our electricity is cheaper than your electricity. If it takes 20 years of using shutters to reduce the electric bill to equal the cost of installing new shutters, then it's not cost effective for that reason.

I will try to get some estimates in a couple weeks.

Okay, No matter how difference utility prices we have but look at how much we used.

ADers and I shared our utility used in my thread at few pages to 5 pages.

http://www.alldeaf.com/general-chat/14918-laundry-3.html

But just guessing for now, if it costs about $500 to replace each window and shutters, times 24 windows, that equals $12,000. If I save $60 per year in electricity costs, then it would take at least 20 years just to break even

.

Okay

I don't "worry" about the view. I enjoy my views of nature, and I don't like feeling closed in and dark. My rooms are cool and comfortable, bright and cheery.

Okay, our rooms are still light and friendly as well when we loose to shut the shutters. Feel comfortable ourselves are mainly important to us.

We don't have condensation, so there is nothing to reduce. It's already zero.

Okay

Well, a lot of Americans are stupid. What can I say?

Why you said that Americans are stupid? It doesn´t mean that they are stupid that´s because they didn´t aware about this. Like what I said in several threads that we still learn something new everyday is normal. Some people (not just Americans but British) were like wow and thank for tip how to protect themselves and some prefer to do like that. My Dad and brother were like wow when they saw our house... and like it very much... I told my Dad & my British friends to not open the window during hot and humitiy weather etc ... I was raised to know nothing until I learn a lot from my hubby when I first lived in Germany. Each person is different and prefer what she/he did instead of accept anyone´s advice or whatever.

We live in the sunny South. I haven't seen a window with foil covering it in many, many years. If that was a useful solution more people would be doing that here. But they are not.

I only shared what I withnessed American apartments here in Germany, that´s all. *shrug* I only accept their answer - some Americans like to know how to protect their rooms against heat or whatever.

I don't know why they do that. Most of the office buildings and schools where I work we can't even open the windows. They use just AC.

Yeah I am wondering the same and has no idea why some Americans do like that... *shrug*... It´s okay when they realized how to protect themselves and thank us... I see no problem for that because I know everyone learn something new everyday like that.

That's why the best advice comes from people living in the same climate. I don't have good advice for people living in the desert or in the snow zones. Their houses are built differently, their heating and AC systems and costs are different.

Well, I prefer to get advices/feedback from different countries where there´re difference % of humilaty, etc. I travel different countries and collect their experiences how to protect heat/humitiy, snow, etc. which is interesting experience for me... A lot of Germans collect their ideas to build their homes. I got the idea from Greek and Italian to use marble floor and also they took German´s ideas to use wall/floor tiles for bathroom, WC, basement & kitchen to protect from damp, mold,.....etc... We exchange our experiences and feedback which is great, no matter how difference climate we have.

That's great for you because you have a brick house. I don't have a brick house, so I use the best system that fits my house and climate.

Some people in SC do have brick homes and thermal pane windows but they don't have roller shutters.

Okay

 

[Liebling:-)))]

I think that her home is full of stucco.

Yes that´s right but it´s for outside and part inside (mud-room, kitchen and basement).

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Reba -

Off subject -

Actually, oldest brick is made of real solid of cement. Now, a new brick in our Era is made of compressed gas in it and it is very light. The old one is far better than the new one. They don't make heavy bricks anymore. I dunno.

very light bricks? I have many different bricks here in Germany but I didn´t know that there´re light bricks. I mentioned different bricks in my post toward you.
http://www.alldeaf.com/current-even...e-protect-next-hurriance-windstorm-etc-2.html

 

[mecooncat]

My house is built in 1850. I have very old brink foundation, it's so much cooler in the cellar during the summer but it's very cold in the winter. Great for storage for the hard vegetables like butternut squash, potatoes (both sweet and white), blue hubbard squash, etc. Around the house is wood. I need to re-insulate the whole inside outer walls. Right now, it's made of lathe and small woods. Very messy job to remove it. I have a wood stove for the winter, great for in case the power goes out during the storm. The best way to keep your house cool is keep your dark shades down and it will keep the sun out. I have few ceiling fans.

 

[dreama]

I've always felt that a lot of the public aid programs are nothing more than charities and should be funded by voluntary donations.

If someone has a special place in their heart for women and children, then donate to WIC or welfare. If someone thinks deafness is a disability and deaf people should get money for it (like SSI) then they could donate voluntarily to give money to deaf people, or blind people, or whatever.

So you think that my mum should not have been given government money? She did try to find work. She really did but nobody was willing to employ her. Would you see us all starve on the streets like in some 3rd world countries where the unemployed have to fend for themselves?

I would MUCH prefere tax money went towards families that couldn't find work then other things such as warfare, susidising farmers, subsidising animal research etc etc...

 

[vrsterp]

medical care is the same as public healthy insurance.

This is your own risk and choice living without medical care (health insurance). I prefer to have medical care (health insurance) for the safety.

I think you misunderstood me. I'm saying a lot of middle class people CAN'T GET or CAN'T AFFORD health/medical insurance. Yes they are the same thing. That is not my point.

When you aren't "low income" you can't get medicare or medicaid. You have to buy your own insurance if your employer doesn't provide it. Insurance is EXPENSIVE. Most people can't afford it.

I'm not talking about taking a risk and making a choice not to have health insurance.

 

[webexplorer]

I assume that you already know that many gov't are doing their dirty money for not helping people. Of course, the gov't bank has trillions of money - maybe a zillion. The money goes to the government people, not everyone. It gives a very small percent of money to welfare people.

U.S. never broke since the Depression Era or approximately in the 1980's (unsure), and it always tells us that they want more money from us for taxes by telling that U.S. has financial problems - that's a big lie. It does not matter which party (Republican or Democrat) is involved. i.e. paying a property tax, Fed tax, state tax, buying items for taxes from stores, tolls, and more.

Helping poor people by donating the money. 75 percent of donation money goes to wealth people (the donated president-owners) and 25 percent or less goes to poor people. That's the reality. I'm telling you now so don't give your money to ANY charity or donation.

I know an old man who is extremely wealth donates some money to Africa. He is the president of a charity company. He happened to be my old friend's neighbor. He always wears classic clothes and uses a partly gold cane. He always goes out to expensive restaurants. He is really a religious man, but surely is a con man. He is too good at people for money.

Another issue, the companies are not interested in hiring people who are over 45 years old. That is not new to me.

Now, I believe that it is more important to get started by installing alternative energies in order to greatly reduce health problems from dirty air and dirty water. I think that electricity and gas companies are trying to get rid of the green energies. I heard on the news today that there will be no more gas on Earth in the future so we need to prepare now...

 

[vrsterp]

So you think that my mum should not have been given government money? She did try to find work. She really did but nobody was willing to employ her. Would you see us all starve on the streets like in some 3rd world countries where the unemployed have to fend for themselves?

I would MUCH prefere tax money went towards families that couldn't find work then other things such as warfare, susidising farmers, subsidising animal research etc etc...

I'm saying there are people who CAN'T work and those who WON'T work. I have no problem with my tax money going to those who can't work. That's different. I'm talking about things like welfare, etc. A charity is a charity. I don't mind being forced to give to charity, but I'd much rather be able to choose which charity to donate to.

I agree with not wanting it to go to warfare, dairy/meat subsidies, etc. I'm saying in a world where you didn't have to pick one or the other, ideally it would be better for those kinds of things to be voluntary.

 

[vrsterp]

I'm telling you now so don't give your money to ANY charity or donation.

That's silly. I will always donate to causes I support and believe in. I just like having the choice of "voting with my dollars."

 

[Capmeister]

I really have no problem with social insurances because it is about support the people´s welfare.

It's nice that you don't for yourself, but how about only those people who want to pay into it actually paying into it?

Then people have a choice. If not enough people would, then maybe it's not really a democratic choice but something being forced on people.

 

[Capmeister]

I'm saying there are people who CAN'T work and those who WON'T work. I have no problem with my tax money going to those who can't work. That's different. I'm talking about things like welfare, etc. A charity is a charity. I don't mind being forced to give to charity, but I'd much rather be able to choose which charity to donate to.

I agree with not wanting it to go to warfare, dairy/meat subsidies, etc. I'm saying in a world where you didn't have to pick one or the other, ideally it would be better for those kinds of things to be voluntary.

For the last 33 years, my father has run a non-profit organization that is a sheltered workshop for retarded adults. He's noticed that when taxes are low, he gets more donations for the organization.

Probably something to that, no?

 

[webexplorer]

That's silly. I will always donate to causes I support and believe in. I just like having the choice of "voting with my dollars."

You will be definitely sorry that 75% of your money goes to a president of a charity. He will be glad to thank you in order to make him rich as enjoyable.

Unfortunately, many people didn't know that. I would say 2% of charities are almost honest, and the owners will keep about 50% in their pocket so it is better than nothing. It is a legal for the owners to keep it much as they want.

I just want to "warn" you not to make another mistake. In fact, it is a well-known for a highest salary that the presidents make that donated to Africa. If you don't believe me, that's okay. In one day, it will show up on the news that will make you to be aware of it. If there is a donation in your area, then I consider that it is be ok.

I donated my 100 dollars to a family that lost their child. There was a lack of ambulance in my town so we raised the money to get more ambulances. We were successful. Guess what. The family sold the house and moved to somewhere after they received some of the money. Well, there is nothing we can do about it. Actually, we are glad that we have new ambulances to save other families in my town.

 

[webexplorer]

For the last 33 years, my father has run a non-profit organization that is a sheltered workshop for retarded adults. He's noticed that when taxes are low, he gets more donations for the organization.

That's great! It's a small non-profit organization which is fine. He can expanse it if he wants to as long as he has a good reputation.

 

[Reba]

If you use a source such as:

Charity Navigator - America's Largest Charity Evaluator

You can find out which charities wisely use their funds, and which ones use their money to support themselves.

Especially this:

Charity Navigator - 10 Charities Overpaying their For-Profit Fundraisers

 

[Liebling:-)))]

I think you misunderstood me.

I understood your post prefect. You stated at your post #173:
If I need medical care, and god forbid if something serious happens to me, I have to pay out of pocket. That's the fun of being middle class. Too rich to get publicly-funded healthcare, too poor to afford your own.

That's why I said it's your own risk and choice.

I'm saying a lot of middle class people CAN'T GET or CAN'T AFFORD health/medical insurance. Yes they are the same thing. That is not my point.

Government should follow the example of European System how to take care of people's welfare.

When you aren't "low income" you can't get medicare or medicaid. You have to buy your own insurance if your employer doesn't provide it. Insurance is EXPENSIVE. Most people can't afford it.

Yes, it's really sad to know that government doesn't bother to support the poor people with tax issues, you all work and pay to. All what they spend your taxes on war issues which is not fair.

Accord European System, the people who don't go work or whatever still get the rights to take care of health issues.

I beg the reader’s indulgence here because I want to bring personal testimony to this court of opinion. As someone born in the United States, allow me to draw attention to the unravelling of that country’s social system: the 40 million Americans without health insurance, the collapsing schools in poor neighbourhoods, the plight of millions of poor people destined to remain forever at the bottom of society. When Hurricane Katrina struck, people in Europe couldn’t believe the pictures they were seeing on television of an America suddenly part of the Third World.
Susan George mounts a spirited defence of social Europe. | October 2006 | New Internationalist

I'm not talking about taking a risk and making a choice not to have health insurance.

I think you misunderstand me. You said that "If I need medical care, and god forbid if something serious happens to me, I have to pay out of pocket". I said that it's your risk and choice if you don't want to join health insurance volunatarly.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

So you think that my mum should not have been given government money? She did try to find work. She really did but nobody was willing to employ her. Would you see us all starve on the streets like in some 3rd world countries where the unemployed have to fend for themselves?

I would MUCH prefere tax money went towards families that couldn't find work then other things such as warfare, susidising farmers, subsidising animal research etc etc...

*A*M*E*N*