On 6/29/2012 1:12 PM, Atila Iskander wrote:


We like to quote Margaret Thatchers, "The trouble with Socialism is that
eventually you run out of other people's money."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The trouble with capitalism is eventually they grab all the money.

LOL
That's socialism, you fool
And not just that, unlike capitalism, socialism debases the value of the
money they "grab"


I'm confused.

What is it when extremely wealthy Wall Street capitalists take
government money provided by blue collar wage-slave taxpayers?

Yah, yah, I know. We gotta prop up the geniuses cuz they're too ****ing
big to fail!

On 6/29/2012 12:01 PM, harry wrote:
On Jun 29, 2:35 pm, Frank wrote:
On 6/29/2012 2:44 AM, harry wrote:





On Jun 29, 12:11 am, Frank wrote:
On 6/28/2012 3:35 PM, harry wrote:

On Jun 28, 7:19 pm, "Steve B" wrote:
Facetious, obviously, but any homeowner knows that stuff wears out and
has to be replaced. IMHO, estimated payback periods do not consider
this in their calculations.

And, a home powered by solar would cost a chunk of change to power just some
light bulbs, and a small TV. If you want microwave, clothes dryers, ovens,
toasters, and other stuff, you will have to fork out substantially more in
the beginning.

Amortized over time, it is worthless, unless you want to live in a cave with
one small light bulb.

Steve

Talking your usual drivel I see.
I export more power than I consume. I have a solar passive house and I
have no fuel bills at all.
The net financial benefit of my house is almost $6000/year compared
with a standard house.
But we are more advanced in Europe.

Big subsidies are being cut:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...s-subsidy-cuts...

Some might be so crass as to say you are just sponging off the tax payers.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Subsidiea are being cut on new installations.
But it is in line with the cost of the panels so the return is the
same.
The idea of the initial subsidies was to get the industry going.
Half the houses where I live now have a solar array.

We like to quote Margaret Thatchers, "The trouble with Socialism is that
eventually you run out of other people's money."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The trouble with capitalism is eventually they grab all the money.

Spoken like a true Socialist or in your case, Marxist

On 6/29/2012 2:05 PM, Jack wrote:
On 6/29/2012 1:12 PM, Atila Iskander wrote:


We like to quote Margaret Thatchers, "The trouble with Socialism is
that
eventually you run out of other people's money."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The trouble with capitalism is eventually they grab all the money.

LOL
That's socialism, you fool
And not just that, unlike capitalism, socialism debases the value of the
money they "grab"


I'm confused.

What is it when extremely wealthy Wall Street capitalists take
government money provided by blue collar wage-slave taxpayers?

Yah, yah, I know. We gotta prop up the geniuses cuz they're too ****ing
big to fail!

What Socialists do not understand is that if you make government the
font of all money those with the most know how will get it and this
means big business. Government does not belong in the subsidy business.
It is not their purpose nor do they have the competence to do it.

harry ) writes:
On Jun 28, 9:24=A0pm, (M.A. Stewart) wrote:
harry ) writes:
On Jun 28, 7:19=3DA0pm, "Steve B" wrote:
Facetious, obviously, but any homeowner knows that stuff wears out=
an=3D
d
has to be replaced. =3DA0IMHO, estimated payback periods do not co=
nside=3D
r
this in their calculations.

And, a home powered by solar would cost a chunk of change to power jus=
t s=3D
ome
light bulbs, and a small TV. =3DA0If you want microwave, clothes dryer=
s, ov=3D
ens,
toasters, and other stuff, you will have to fork out substantially mor=
e i=3D
n
the beginning.

Amortized over time, it is worthless, unless you want to live in a cav=
e w=3D
ith
one small light bulb.

Steve


Talking your usual drivel I see.
I export more power than I consume. I have a solar passive house and I
have no fuel bills at all.
The net financial benefit of my house is almost $6000/year compared
with a standard house.
But we are more advanced in Europe.


Advanced??? Then why do your automobiles pollute the air?

Fact: 99.999% of automobiles licensed to go on the road in
Europe, since 1970, _HAVE NOT_ been allowed on the roads of
North America. Reason... they don't meet the California/USA/
Canadian emission regulations!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


There a virtually no American cars anywhere but America. Why do you
suppose that is?


Jesus!... this Harry bloke needs a lie down.

I wasn't talking about American cars... I was talking about cars
_ALLOWED_ on the roads of NORTH AMERICA.

On 29 Jun 2012 19:45:47 GMT, (M.A. Stewart)
wrote:

Jesus!... this Harry bloke needs a lie down

harry will changes colors, right in front of you. He recently claimed
that Abe Lincoln had WMDs.

Consider the source. In the UK, they have to cut their steaks with
plastic spoons.

On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 09:00:07 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

On Jun 29, 2:26*pm, "
wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 23:34:55 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:
On Jun 28, 9:24*pm, (M.A. Stewart) wrote:
harry ) writes:
On Jun 28, 7:19=A0pm, "Steve B" wrote:
Facetious, obviously, but any homeowner knows that stuff wears out an=
d
has to be replaced. =A0IMHO, estimated payback periods do not conside=
r
this in their calculations.

And, a home powered by solar would cost a chunk of change to power just s=
ome
light bulbs, and a small TV. =A0If you want microwave, clothes dryers, ov=
ens,
toasters, and other stuff, you will have to fork out substantially more i=
n
the beginning.

Amortized over time, it is worthless, unless you want to live in a cave w=
ith
one small light bulb.

Steve

Talking your usual drivel I see.
I export more power than I consume. I have a solar passive house and I
have no fuel bills at all.
The net financial benefit of my house is almost $6000/year compared
with a standard house.
But we are more advanced in Europe.

Advanced??? Then why do your automobiles pollute the air?

Fact: 99.999% of automobiles licensed to go on the road in
Europe, since 1970, _HAVE NOT_ been allowed on the roads of
North America. Reason... they don't meet the California/USA/
Canadian emission regulations!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

There a virtually no American cars anywhere but America. Why do you
suppose that is?

Really? *You've never seen a Ford or GM car in Europe? *What a liar, you are,
harry.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

All made here.

At least you admit that you're a damned liar.

On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 17:38:06 -0400, Greg wrote:

On 6/28/2012 3:27 PM, harry wrote:


I have a solar array. The payback period is going to be around five
or six years.
This is a better return than leaving the money in the bank these days.
It is supposed to last 25 years minimum.


ROTFLMFAO!

Would you like to buy a toll bridge?

It very likely could last 25 years. It just wont produce any power when
the Sun burns out later this year. This is not *IF* the Sun burns out,
it's just *WHEN*. It's inevitable, and it's coming soon.

Rather than deveolping solar cells, they need to be developing lunar
cells. The Moon may still shine after the Sun is dead. Of course no
one really knows.

On Jun 29, 6:12*pm, "Atila Iskander" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...





On Jun 29, 2:35 pm, Frank wrote:
On 6/29/2012 2:44 AM, harry wrote:

On Jun 29, 12:11 am, Frank wrote:
On 6/28/2012 3:35 PM, harry wrote:

On Jun 28, 7:19 pm, "Steve B" wrote:
Facetious, obviously, but any homeowner knows that stuff wears
out and
has to be replaced. *IMHO, estimated payback periods do not
consider
this in their calculations.

And, a home powered by solar would cost a chunk of change to power
just some
light bulbs, and a small TV. *If you want microwave, clothes dryers,
ovens,
toasters, and other stuff, you will have to fork out substantially
more in
the beginning.

Amortized over time, it is worthless, unless you want to live in a
cave with
one small light bulb.

Steve

Talking your usual drivel I see.
I export more power than I consume. I have a solar passive house and
I
have no fuel bills at all.
The net financial benefit of my house is almost $6000/year compared
with a standard house.
But we are more advanced in Europe.

Big subsidies are being cut:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...s-subsidy-cuts...

Some might be so crass as to say you are just sponging off the tax
payers.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Subsidiea are being cut on new installations.
But it is in line with the cost of the *panels so the return is the
same.
The idea of the initial subsidies was to get the industry going.
Half the houses where I live now have a solar array.

We like to quote Margaret Thatchers, "The trouble with Socialism is that
eventually you run out of other people's money."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The trouble with capitalism is eventually they grab all the money.

LOL
That's socialism, you fool
And not just that, unlike capitalism, socialism debases the value of the
money they "grab"- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

We've all seen the benefits of capitalism of late. Or do you live on
Venus?

On Jun 29, 7:05*pm, Jack wrote:
On 6/29/2012 1:12 PM, Atila Iskander wrote:



We like to quote Margaret Thatchers, "The trouble with Socialism is that
eventually you run out of other people's money."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The trouble with capitalism is eventually they grab all the money.

LOL
That's socialism, you fool
And not just that, unlike capitalism, socialism debases the value of the
money they "grab"

I'm confused.

What is it when extremely wealthy Wall Street capitalists take
government money provided by blue collar wage-slave taxpayers?

Yah, yah, I know. We gotta prop up the geniuses cuz they're too ****ing
big to fail!

If there was capitalism is America, all these failed banks would have
gone bust.
But no,they expect the working man's tax $/£ to bail them out.
Hey, isn't that socialism?

On Jun 29, 7:46*pm, Frank wrote:
On 6/29/2012 12:01 PM, harry wrote:



On Jun 29, 2:35 pm, Frank wrote:
On 6/29/2012 2:44 AM, harry wrote:

On Jun 29, 12:11 am, Frank wrote:
On 6/28/2012 3:35 PM, harry wrote:

On Jun 28, 7:19 pm, "Steve B" wrote:
Facetious, obviously, but any homeowner knows that stuff wears out and
has to be replaced. *IMHO, estimated payback periods do not consider
this in their calculations.

And, a home powered by solar would cost a chunk of change to power just some
light bulbs, and a small TV. *If you want microwave, clothes dryers, ovens,
toasters, and other stuff, you will have to fork out substantially more in
the beginning.

Amortized over time, it is worthless, unless you want to live in a cave with
one small light bulb.

Steve

Talking your usual drivel I see.
I export more power than I consume. I have a solar passive house and I
have no fuel bills at all.
The net financial benefit of my house is almost $6000/year compared
with a standard house.
But we are more advanced in Europe.

Big subsidies are being cut:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...s-subsidy-cuts....

Some might be so crass as to say you are just sponging off the tax payers.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Subsidiea are being cut on new installations.
But it is in line with the cost of the *panels so the return is the
same.
The idea of the initial subsidies was to get the industry going.
Half the houses where I live now have a solar array.

We like to quote Margaret Thatchers, "The trouble with Socialism is that
eventually you run out of other people's money."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The trouble with capitalism is eventually they grab all the money.

Spoken like a true Socialist or in your case, Marxist - Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So when the banks grab taxpayers money to fund their errors, greed and
incompetance how is that capitalism?
Oh and who handed this money over to them? Musta been a socialist.
Govermint Motors..............Govermint Banks. True capitalism, Heh
Heh.

Or was it a capitaist stealling tqxpayer's $ to help his friends out?
And are they grateful? No, they award themselves higher rewards and
become yet bigger crooks.

You need a proper revolution over there you serfs.

On Jun 29, 7:50*pm, Frank wrote:
On 6/29/2012 2:05 PM, Jack wrote:





On 6/29/2012 1:12 PM, Atila Iskander wrote:

We like to quote Margaret Thatchers, "The trouble with Socialism is
that
eventually you run out of other people's money."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The trouble with capitalism is eventually they grab all the money.

LOL
That's socialism, you fool
And not just that, unlike capitalism, socialism debases the value of the
money they "grab"

I'm confused.

What is it when extremely wealthy Wall Street capitalists take
government money provided by blue collar wage-slave taxpayers?

Yah, yah, I know. We gotta prop up the geniuses cuz they're too ****ing
big to fail!

What Socialists do not understand is that if you make government the
font of all money those with the most know how will get it and this
means big business. *Government does not belong in the subsidy business..
It is not their purpose nor do they have the competence to do it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Tch. You are a thicko. The government is subsidising the banks.
Why aren't they subsidisng people who ar elosing their houses/jobs?
It's their tax $ after all.

On Jun 29, 9:06*pm, Oren wrote:
On 29 Jun 2012 19:45:47 GMT, (M.A. Stewart)
wrote:

Jesus!... this Harry bloke needs a lie down

harry will changes colors, right in front of you. *He recently claimed
that Abe Lincoln had WMDs.

Consider the source. *In the UK, they have to cut their steaks with
plastic spoons.

You weren't able to deny it.
And he was worse than Saddam Hussein in that he killed more of his own
countrymen..
Yet Yanks think he's a big hero for some reason.

On Jun 30, 12:16*am, "
wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 09:00:07 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:
On Jun 29, 2:26*pm, "
wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 23:34:55 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:
On Jun 28, 9:24*pm, (M.A. Stewart) wrote:
harry ) writes:
On Jun 28, 7:19=A0pm, "Steve B" wrote:
Facetious, obviously, but any homeowner knows that stuff wears out an=
d
has to be replaced. =A0IMHO, estimated payback periods do not conside=
r
this in their calculations.

And, a home powered by solar would cost a chunk of change to power just s=
ome
light bulbs, and a small TV. =A0If you want microwave, clothes dryers, ov=
ens,
toasters, and other stuff, you will have to fork out substantially more i=
n
the beginning.

Amortized over time, it is worthless, unless you want to live in a cave w=
ith
one small light bulb.

Steve

Talking your usual drivel I see.
I export more power than I consume. I have a solar passive house and I
have no fuel bills at all.
The net financial benefit of my house is almost $6000/year compared
with a standard house.
But we are more advanced in Europe.

Advanced??? Then why do your automobiles pollute the air?

Fact: 99.999% of automobiles licensed to go on the road in
Europe, since 1970, _HAVE NOT_ been allowed on the roads of
North America. Reason... they don't meet the California/USA/
Canadian emission regulations!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

There a virtually no American cars anywhere but America. Why do you
suppose that is?

Really? *You've never seen a Ford or GM car in Europe? *What a liar, you are,
harry.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

All made here.

At least you admit that you're a damned liar.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

There are almost zero American made Ford or GM cars in Europe.

On Jun 29, 8:45*pm, (M.A. Stewart) wrote:
harry ) writes:
On Jun 28, 9:24=A0pm, (M.A. Stewart) wrote:
harry ) writes:
On Jun 28, 7:19=3DA0pm, "Steve B" wrote:
Facetious, obviously, but any homeowner knows that stuff wears out=
*an=3D
d
has to be replaced. =3DA0IMHO, estimated payback periods do not co=
nside=3D
r
this in their calculations.

And, a home powered by solar would cost a chunk of change to power jus=
t s=3D
ome
light bulbs, and a small TV. =3DA0If you want microwave, clothes dryer=
s, ov=3D
ens,
toasters, and other stuff, you will have to fork out substantially mor=
e i=3D
n
the beginning.

Amortized over time, it is worthless, unless you want to live in a cav=
e w=3D
ith
one small light bulb.

Steve

Talking your usual drivel I see.
I export more power than I consume. I have a solar passive house and I
have no fuel bills at all.
The net financial benefit of my house is almost $6000/year compared
with a standard house.
But we are more advanced in Europe.

Advanced??? Then why do your automobiles pollute the air?

Fact: 99.999% of automobiles licensed to go on the road in
Europe, since 1970, _HAVE NOT_ been allowed on the roads of
North America. Reason... they don't meet the California/USA/
Canadian emission regulations!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

There a virtually no American cars anywhere but America. Why do you
suppose that is?

Jesus!... this Harry bloke needs a lie down.

I wasn't talking about American cars... I was talking about cars
_ALLOWED_ on the roads of NORTH AMERICA.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I was talking about no-one WANTS American cars. Not even Americans.
The pollution regulations were a feeble attempt to keep foreign
imports out of America.
There's nothing more polluting that stupid inefficient American cars
which have squandered the world's oil.

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Jun 29, 6:12 pm, "Atila Iskander" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...





On Jun 29, 2:35 pm, Frank wrote:
On 6/29/2012 2:44 AM, harry wrote:

On Jun 29, 12:11 am, Frank wrote:
On 6/28/2012 3:35 PM, harry wrote:

On Jun 28, 7:19 pm, "Steve B" wrote:
Facetious, obviously, but any homeowner knows that stuff wears
out and
has to be replaced. IMHO, estimated payback periods do not
consider
this in their calculations.

And, a home powered by solar would cost a chunk of change to
power
just some
light bulbs, and a small TV. If you want microwave, clothes
dryers,
ovens,
toasters, and other stuff, you will have to fork out
substantially
more in
the beginning.

Amortized over time, it is worthless, unless you want to live in
a
cave with
one small light bulb.

Steve

Talking your usual drivel I see.
I export more power than I consume. I have a solar passive house
and
I
have no fuel bills at all.
The net financial benefit of my house is almost $6000/year
compared
with a standard house.
But we are more advanced in Europe.

Big subsidies are being cut:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...s-subsidy-cuts...

Some might be so crass as to say you are just sponging off the tax
payers.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Subsidiea are being cut on new installations.
But it is in line with the cost of the panels so the return is the
same.
The idea of the initial subsidies was to get the industry going.
Half the houses where I live now have a solar array.

We like to quote Margaret Thatchers, "The trouble with Socialism is
that
eventually you run out of other people's money."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The trouble with capitalism is eventually they grab all the money.

LOL
That's socialism, you fool
And not just that, unlike capitalism, socialism debases the value of the
money they "grab"- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

We've all seen the benefits of capitalism of late. Or do you live on
Venus?


The benefits of "capitalism" are the unchanged
What stupid socialists do is blame capitalism for the misbehavior of
individuals, which has NOTHING to do with capitalism
Your statement above is a PRIME example of that.

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Jun 29, 7:05 pm, Jack wrote:
On 6/29/2012 1:12 PM, Atila Iskander wrote:



We like to quote Margaret Thatchers, "The trouble with Socialism is
that
eventually you run out of other people's money."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The trouble with capitalism is eventually they grab all the money.

LOL
That's socialism, you fool
And not just that, unlike capitalism, socialism debases the value of
the
money they "grab"

I'm confused.

What is it when extremely wealthy Wall Street capitalists take
government money provided by blue collar wage-slave taxpayers?

Yah, yah, I know. We gotta prop up the geniuses cuz they're too ****ing
big to fail!

If there was capitalism is America, all these failed banks would have
gone bust.

That's right
Except for the implication that the US economy is pure capitalism
Which is a false imputation.

Guess what is to blame for the fact that the failed banks were not allowed
to close as they should have ?
Socialism and it's mindset that the nanny-state should "save" failed
banks.


But no,they expect the working man's tax $/£ to bail them out.
Hey, isn't that socialism?

You see
You got some thing right after all.

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Jun 29, 7:46 pm, Frank wrote:
On 6/29/2012 12:01 PM, harry wrote:



On Jun 29, 2:35 pm, Frank wrote:
On 6/29/2012 2:44 AM, harry wrote:

On Jun 29, 12:11 am, Frank wrote:
On 6/28/2012 3:35 PM, harry wrote:

On Jun 28, 7:19 pm, "Steve B" wrote:
Facetious, obviously, but any homeowner knows that stuff wears
out and
has to be replaced. IMHO, estimated payback periods do not
consider
this in their calculations.

And, a home powered by solar would cost a chunk of change to power
just some
light bulbs, and a small TV. If you want microwave, clothes
dryers, ovens,
toasters, and other stuff, you will have to fork out substantially
more in
the beginning.

Amortized over time, it is worthless, unless you want to live in a
cave with
one small light bulb.

Steve

Talking your usual drivel I see.
I export more power than I consume. I have a solar passive house
and I
have no fuel bills at all.
The net financial benefit of my house is almost $6000/year compared
with a standard house.
But we are more advanced in Europe.

Big subsidies are being cut:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...s-subsidy-cuts...

Some might be so crass as to say you are just sponging off the tax
payers.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Subsidiea are being cut on new installations.
But it is in line with the cost of the panels so the return is the
same.
The idea of the initial subsidies was to get the industry going.
Half the houses where I live now have a solar array.

We like to quote Margaret Thatchers, "The trouble with Socialism is
that
eventually you run out of other people's money."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The trouble with capitalism is eventually they grab all the money.

Spoken like a true Socialist or in your case, Marxist - Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

So when the banks grab taxpayers money to fund their errors, greed and
incompetance how is that capitalism?

It isn't
And only idiots like you try to claim it was


Oh and who handed this money over to them? Musta been a socialist.
Govermint Motors..............Govermint Banks. True capitalism, Heh
Heh.


Still missing the point as usual

Or was it a capitaist stealling tqxpayer's $ to help his friends out?
And are they grateful? No, they award themselves higher rewards and
become yet bigger crooks.


There you go demonstrating again your stupidity by implying that capitalism
will somehow be crook-free...



You need a proper revolution over there you serfs.

You on the other hand need a proper education

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Jun 29, 7:50 pm, Frank wrote:
On 6/29/2012 2:05 PM, Jack wrote:





On 6/29/2012 1:12 PM, Atila Iskander wrote:

We like to quote Margaret Thatchers, "The trouble with Socialism is
that
eventually you run out of other people's money."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The trouble with capitalism is eventually they grab all the money.

LOL
That's socialism, you fool
And not just that, unlike capitalism, socialism debases the value of
the
money they "grab"

I'm confused.

What is it when extremely wealthy Wall Street capitalists take
government money provided by blue collar wage-slave taxpayers?

Yah, yah, I know. We gotta prop up the geniuses cuz they're too ****ing
big to fail!

What Socialists do not understand is that if you make government the
font of all money those with the most know how will get it and this
means big business. Government does not belong in the subsidy business.
It is not their purpose nor do they have the competence to do it.- Hide
quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Tch. You are a thicko. The government is subsidising the banks.

And as he wrote they shouldn't be

Why aren't they subsidisng people who ar elosing their houses/jobs?
It's their tax $ after all.

Because they shouldn't be doing that either..

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Jun 29, 9:06 pm, Oren wrote:
On 29 Jun 2012 19:45:47 GMT, (M.A. Stewart)
wrote:

Jesus!... this Harry bloke needs a lie down

harry will changes colors, right in front of you. He recently claimed
that Abe Lincoln had WMDs.

Consider the source. In the UK, they have to cut their steaks with
plastic spoons.

You weren't able to deny it.
And he was worse than Saddam Hussein in that he killed more of his own
countrymen..
Yet Yanks think he's a big hero for some reason.

That's because most of them are not as ignorant as you. and don't believe
nonsense like you

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Jun 30, 12:16 am, "
wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 09:00:07 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:
On Jun 29, 2:26 pm, "
wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 23:34:55 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:

There a virtually no American cars anywhere but America. Why do you
suppose that is?

Really? You've never seen a Ford or GM car in Europe? What a liar,
you are,
harry]



All made here.

At least you admit that you're a damned liar.-


There are almost zero American made Ford or GM cars in Europe.


LOL
Almost Zero = 100,000 for Ford alone.
With plants in Belgium, France, Spain , Germany, Romania, Russia, Turkey and
the U.K.
http://www.romania-insider.com/ford-...ia-safe/56478/

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Jun 29, 8:45 pm, (M.A. Stewart) wrote:
harry ) writes:
On Jun 28, 9:24=A0pm, (M.A. Stewart) wrote:
harry ) writes:
On Jun 28, 7:19=3DA0pm, "Steve B" wrote:
Facetious, obviously, but any homeowner knows that stuff wears
out=
an=3D
d
has to be replaced. =3DA0IMHO, estimated payback periods do not
co=
nside=3D
r
this in their calculations.

And, a home powered by solar would cost a chunk of change to power
jus=
t s=3D
ome
light bulbs, and a small TV. =3DA0If you want microwave, clothes
dryer=
s, ov=3D
ens,
toasters, and other stuff, you will have to fork out substantially
mor=
e i=3D
n
the beginning.

Amortized over time, it is worthless, unless you want to live in a
cav=
e w=3D
ith
one small light bulb.

Steve

Talking your usual drivel I see.
I export more power than I consume. I have a solar passive house and
I
have no fuel bills at all.
The net financial benefit of my house is almost $6000/year compared
with a standard house.
But we are more advanced in Europe.

Advanced??? Then why do your automobiles pollute the air?

Fact: 99.999% of automobiles licensed to go on the road in
Europe, since 1970, _HAVE NOT_ been allowed on the roads of
North America. Reason... they don't meet the California/USA/
Canadian emission regulations!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

There a virtually no American cars anywhere but America. Why do you
suppose that is?

Jesus!... this Harry bloke needs a lie down.

I wasn't talking about American cars... I was talking about cars
_ALLOWED_ on the roads of NORTH AMERICA.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I was talking about no-one WANTS American cars. Not even Americans.
The pollution regulations were a feeble attempt to keep foreign
imports out of America.
There's nothing more polluting that stupid inefficient American cars
which have squandered the world's oil.

Nah
You're just blowing chunks as usual

On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 22:09:47 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

On Jun 30, 12:16*am, "
wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 09:00:07 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:
On Jun 29, 2:26*pm, "
wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 23:34:55 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:
On Jun 28, 9:24*pm, (M.A. Stewart) wrote:
harry ) writes:
On Jun 28, 7:19=A0pm, "Steve B" wrote:
Facetious, obviously, but any homeowner knows that stuff wears out an=
d
has to be replaced. =A0IMHO, estimated payback periods do not conside=
r
this in their calculations.

And, a home powered by solar would cost a chunk of change to power just s=
ome
light bulbs, and a small TV. =A0If you want microwave, clothes dryers, ov=
ens,
toasters, and other stuff, you will have to fork out substantially more i=
n
the beginning.

Amortized over time, it is worthless, unless you want to live in a cave w=
ith
one small light bulb.

Steve

Talking your usual drivel I see.
I export more power than I consume. I have a solar passive house and I
have no fuel bills at all.
The net financial benefit of my house is almost $6000/year compared
with a standard house.
But we are more advanced in Europe.

Advanced??? Then why do your automobiles pollute the air?

Fact: 99.999% of automobiles licensed to go on the road in
Europe, since 1970, _HAVE NOT_ been allowed on the roads of
North America. Reason... they don't meet the California/USA/
Canadian emission regulations!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

There a virtually no American cars anywhere but America. Why do you
suppose that is?

Really? *You've never seen a Ford or GM car in Europe? *What a liar, you are,
harry.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

All made here.

At least you admit that you're a damned liar.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

There are almost zero American made Ford or GM cars in Europe.

Why don't you move the goalposts some more, liar?

On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 22:08:11 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

On Jun 29, 9:06*pm, Oren wrote:
On 29 Jun 2012 19:45:47 GMT, (M.A. Stewart)
wrote:

Jesus!... this Harry bloke needs a lie down

harry will changes colors, right in front of you. *He recently claimed
that Abe Lincoln had WMDs.

Consider the source. *In the UK, they have to cut their steaks with
plastic spoons.

You weren't able to deny it.

You're a liar. He did deny it, as did every sane person here.

And he was worse than Saddam Hussein in that he killed more of his own
countrymen..

Wrong, as usual.

Yet Yanks think he's a big hero for some reason.

Yanks certainly do but Rebs, not so much.

On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 22:10:28 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

On Jun 29, 8:45*pm, (M.A. Stewart) wrote:
harry ) writes:
On Jun 28, 9:24=A0pm, (M.A. Stewart) wrote:
harry ) writes:
On Jun 28, 7:19=3DA0pm, "Steve B" wrote:
Facetious, obviously, but any homeowner knows that stuff wears out=
*an=3D
d
has to be replaced. =3DA0IMHO, estimated payback periods do not co=
nside=3D
r
this in their calculations.

And, a home powered by solar would cost a chunk of change to power jus=
t s=3D
ome
light bulbs, and a small TV. =3DA0If you want microwave, clothes dryer=
s, ov=3D
ens,
toasters, and other stuff, you will have to fork out substantially mor=
e i=3D
n
the beginning.

Amortized over time, it is worthless, unless you want to live in a cav=
e w=3D
ith
one small light bulb.

Steve

Talking your usual drivel I see.
I export more power than I consume. I have a solar passive house and I
have no fuel bills at all.
The net financial benefit of my house is almost $6000/year compared
with a standard house.
But we are more advanced in Europe.

Advanced??? Then why do your automobiles pollute the air?

Fact: 99.999% of automobiles licensed to go on the road in
Europe, since 1970, _HAVE NOT_ been allowed on the roads of
North America. Reason... they don't meet the California/USA/
Canadian emission regulations!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

There a virtually no American cars anywhere but America. Why do you
suppose that is?

Jesus!... this Harry bloke needs a lie down.

I wasn't talking about American cars... I was talking about cars
_ALLOWED_ on the roads of NORTH AMERICA.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I was talking about no-one WANTS American cars. Not even Americans.

We were all talking about how stupid you really are, too.

The pollution regulations were a feeble attempt to keep foreign
imports out of America.

Of course you would come up with more lies.

There's nothing more polluting that stupid inefficient American cars
which have squandered the world's oil.

Who wouldn't have expected one more lie, from harry?

On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 09:01:08 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

On Jun 29, 2:35*pm, Frank wrote:
On 6/29/2012 2:44 AM, harry wrote:





On Jun 29, 12:11 am, Frank wrote:
On 6/28/2012 3:35 PM, harry wrote:

On Jun 28, 7:19 pm, "Steve B" wrote:
Facetious, obviously, but any homeowner knows that stuff wears out and
has to be replaced. *IMHO, estimated payback periods do not consider
this in their calculations.

And, a home powered by solar would cost a chunk of change to power just some
light bulbs, and a small TV. *If you want microwave, clothes dryers, ovens,
toasters, and other stuff, you will have to fork out substantially more in
the beginning.

Amortized over time, it is worthless, unless you want to live in a cave with
one small light bulb.

Steve

Talking your usual drivel I see.
I export more power than I consume. I have a solar passive house and I
have no fuel bills at all.
The net financial benefit of my house is almost $6000/year compared
with a standard house.
But we are more advanced in Europe.

Big subsidies are being cut:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...s-subsidy-cuts...

Some might be so crass as to say you are just sponging off the tax payers.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Subsidiea are being cut on new installations.
But it is in line with the cost of the *panels so the return is the
same.
The idea of the initial subsidies was to get the industry going.
Half the houses where I live now have a solar array.

We like to quote Margaret Thatchers, "The trouble with Socialism is that
eventually you run out of other people's money."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The trouble with capitalism is eventually they grab all the money.

Good grief, that's a stupid statement, even for you!

On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 11:38:21 -0400, "
wrote:

Jesus!... this Harry bloke needs a lie down

harry will changes colors, right in front of you. *He recently claimed
that Abe Lincoln had WMDs.

Consider the source. *In the UK, they have to cut their steaks with
plastic spoons.

You weren't able to deny it.

You're a liar. He did deny it, as did every sane person here.

As I said here before, harry makes up lies to cover up his other lies.
...."weapons of mass destruction" was not coined until 1937. Of all
places - the London Times.

On Jun 30, 1:05*pm, "Atila Iskander" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...





On Jun 29, 6:12 pm, "Atila Iskander" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

....

On Jun 29, 2:35 pm, Frank wrote:
On 6/29/2012 2:44 AM, harry wrote:

On Jun 29, 12:11 am, Frank wrote:
On 6/28/2012 3:35 PM, harry wrote:

On Jun 28, 7:19 pm, "Steve B" wrote:
Facetious, obviously, but any homeowner knows that stuff wears
out and
has to be replaced. *IMHO, estimated payback periods do not
consider
this in their calculations.

And, a home powered by solar would cost a chunk of change to
power
just some
light bulbs, and a small TV. *If you want microwave, clothes
dryers,
ovens,
toasters, and other stuff, you will have to fork out
substantially
more in
the beginning.

Amortized over time, it is worthless, unless you want to live in
a
cave with
one small light bulb.

Steve

Talking your usual drivel I see.
I export more power than I consume. I have a solar passive house
and
I
have no fuel bills at all.
The net financial benefit of my house is almost $6000/year
compared
with a standard house.
But we are more advanced in Europe.

Big subsidies are being cut:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...s-subsidy-cuts...

Some might be so crass as to say you are just sponging off the tax
payers.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Subsidiea are being cut on new installations.
But it is in line with the cost of the *panels so the return is the
same.
The idea of the initial subsidies was to get the industry going.
Half the houses where I live now have a solar array.

We like to quote Margaret Thatchers, "The trouble with Socialism is
that
eventually you run out of other people's money."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The trouble with capitalism is eventually they grab all the money.

LOL
That's socialism, you fool
And not just that, unlike capitalism, socialism debases the value of the
money they "grab"- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

We've all seen the benefits of capitalism of late. Or do you live on
Venus?

The benefits of "capitalism" are the unchanged
What stupid socialists do is blame capitalism for the misbehavior of
individuals, which has NOTHING to do with capitalism
* * Your statement above is a PRIME example of that.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


So these guy weren't capitalists?
Capitalism is all about individuals. Trampling the majority down so
they can hog all the wealth.

Fooling the stupid "blue collar workers" with spurious lies about the
"American Dream".

Heh Heh. Nobody as gullible as Americans.

Why do Americans wear collars?
So they can be easily led.

On Jun 30, 1:10*pm, "Atila Iskander" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...





On Jun 29, 7:46 pm, Frank wrote:
On 6/29/2012 12:01 PM, harry wrote:

On Jun 29, 2:35 pm, Frank wrote:
On 6/29/2012 2:44 AM, harry wrote:

On Jun 29, 12:11 am, Frank wrote:
On 6/28/2012 3:35 PM, harry wrote:

On Jun 28, 7:19 pm, "Steve B" wrote:
Facetious, obviously, but any homeowner knows that stuff wears
out and
has to be replaced. *IMHO, estimated payback periods do not
consider
this in their calculations.

And, a home powered by solar would cost a chunk of change to power
just some
light bulbs, and a small TV. *If you want microwave, clothes
dryers, ovens,
toasters, and other stuff, you will have to fork out substantially
more in
the beginning.

Amortized over time, it is worthless, unless you want to live in a
cave with
one small light bulb.

Steve

Talking your usual drivel I see.
I export more power than I consume. I have a solar passive house
and I
have no fuel bills at all.
The net financial benefit of my house is almost $6000/year compared
with a standard house.
But we are more advanced in Europe.

Big subsidies are being cut:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...s-subsidy-cuts...

Some might be so crass as to say you are just sponging off the tax
payers.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Subsidiea are being cut on new installations.
But it is in line with the cost of the *panels so the return is the
same.
The idea of the initial subsidies was to get the industry going.
Half the houses where I live now have a solar array.

We like to quote Margaret Thatchers, "The trouble with Socialism is
that
eventually you run out of other people's money."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The trouble with capitalism is eventually they grab all the money.

Spoken like a true Socialist or in your case, Marxist - Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

So when the banks grab taxpayers money to fund their errors, greed and
incompetance how is that capitalism?

It isn't
And only idiots like you try to claim it was

Oh and who handed this money over to them? *Musta been a socialist.
Govermint Motors..............Govermint Banks. True capitalism, Heh
Heh.

Still missing the point as usual

Or was it a capitaist stealling tqxpayer's *$ to help his friends out?
And are they grateful? *No, they award themselves higher rewards and
become yet bigger crooks.

There you go demonstrating again your stupidity by implying that capitalism
will somehow be crook-free...

You need a proper revolution over there you serfs.

You on the other hand need a proper education- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Capitalism can never be crook free.
Sucessful capitalists are all crooks.
But you're too dopy toseeit.

On Jun 30, 1:26*pm, "Atila Iskander" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...





On Jun 30, 12:16 am, "
wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 09:00:07 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:
On Jun 29, 2:26 pm, "
wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 23:34:55 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:

There a virtually no American cars anywhere but America. Why do you
suppose that is?

Really? *You've never seen a Ford or GM car in Europe? *What a liar,
you are,
harry]

All made here.

At least you admit that you're a damned liar.-

There are almost zero American made Ford or GM cars in Europe.

LOL
Almost Zero = *100,000 for Ford alone.
With plants in Belgium, France, Spain , Germany, Romania, Russia, Turkey and
the U.K.
* *http://www.romania-insider.com/ford-...-base-in-e...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

None of building **** American designed cars.

On Jun 30, 5:52*pm, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 11:38:21 -0400, "

wrote:
Jesus!... this Harry bloke needs a lie down

harry will changes colors, right in front of you. *He recently claimed
that Abe Lincoln had WMDs.

Consider the source. *In the UK, they have to cut their steaks with
plastic spoons.

You weren't able to deny it.

You're a liar. *He did deny it, as did every sane person here.

As I said here before, harry makes up lies to cover up his other lies.
..."weapons of mass destruction" was not coined until 1937. Of all
places - the London Times.

They existed long before someone dreamt up the term. WW1 poison gas.
US civil war, Submarines.

On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 10:55:25 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

On Jun 30, 1:10*pm, "Atila Iskander" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...





On Jun 29, 7:46 pm, Frank wrote:
On 6/29/2012 12:01 PM, harry wrote:

On Jun 29, 2:35 pm, Frank wrote:
On 6/29/2012 2:44 AM, harry wrote:

On Jun 29, 12:11 am, Frank wrote:
On 6/28/2012 3:35 PM, harry wrote:

On Jun 28, 7:19 pm, "Steve B" wrote:
Facetious, obviously, but any homeowner knows that stuff wears
out and
has to be replaced. *IMHO, estimated payback periods do not
consider
this in their calculations.

And, a home powered by solar would cost a chunk of change to power
just some
light bulbs, and a small TV. *If you want microwave, clothes
dryers, ovens,
toasters, and other stuff, you will have to fork out substantially
more in
the beginning.

Amortized over time, it is worthless, unless you want to live in a
cave with
one small light bulb.

Steve

Talking your usual drivel I see.
I export more power than I consume. I have a solar passive house
and I
have no fuel bills at all.
The net financial benefit of my house is almost $6000/year compared
with a standard house.
But we are more advanced in Europe.

Big subsidies are being cut:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...s-subsidy-cuts...

Some might be so crass as to say you are just sponging off the tax
payers.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Subsidiea are being cut on new installations.
But it is in line with the cost of the *panels so the return is the
same.
The idea of the initial subsidies was to get the industry going.
Half the houses where I live now have a solar array.

We like to quote Margaret Thatchers, "The trouble with Socialism is
that
eventually you run out of other people's money."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The trouble with capitalism is eventually they grab all the money.

Spoken like a true Socialist or in your case, Marxist - Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

So when the banks grab taxpayers money to fund their errors, greed and
incompetance how is that capitalism?

It isn't
And only idiots like you try to claim it was

Oh and who handed this money over to them? *Musta been a socialist.
Govermint Motors..............Govermint Banks. True capitalism, Heh
Heh.

Still missing the point as usual

Or was it a capitaist stealling tqxpayer's *$ to help his friends out?
And are they grateful? *No, they award themselves higher rewards and
become yet bigger crooks.

There you go demonstrating again your stupidity by implying that capitalism
will somehow be crook-free...

You need a proper revolution over there you serfs.

You on the other hand need a proper education- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Capitalism can never be crook free.

Obviously, you putz. Humanity can never be crook-free.

Sucessful capitalists are all crooks.

Successful socialists are far worse.

But you're too dopy toseeit.

You're to dopey to even spell it. ...but you've always been a dumb limey
dope, harry.

On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 20:12:55 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 17:38:06 -0400, Greg wrote:

On 6/28/2012 3:27 PM, harry wrote:


I have a solar array. The payback period is going to be around five
or six years.
This is a better return than leaving the money in the bank these days.
It is supposed to last 25 years minimum.


ROTFLMFAO!

Would you like to buy a toll bridge?

It very likely could last 25 years. It just wont produce any power when
the Sun burns out later this year. This is not *IF* the Sun burns out,
it's just *WHEN*. It's inevitable, and it's coming soon.

Rather than deveolping solar cells, they need to be developing lunar
cells. The Moon may still shine after the Sun is dead. Of course no
one really knows.

Of course it won't still shine. However, when that happens, moonshine may be
quite valuable, for a short time, anyway.

On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 11:04:24 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

On Jun 30, 5:52*pm, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 11:38:21 -0400, "

wrote:
Jesus!... this Harry bloke needs a lie down

harry will changes colors, right in front of you. *He recently claimed
that Abe Lincoln had WMDs.

Consider the source. *In the UK, they have to cut their steaks with
plastic spoons.

You weren't able to deny it.

You're a liar. *He did deny it, as did every sane person here.

As I said here before, harry makes up lies to cover up his other lies.
..."weapons of mass destruction" was not coined until 1937. Of all
places - the London Times.

They existed long before someone dreamt up the term. WW1 poison gas.
US civil war, Submarines.

Submarines as a WMD? You are one dumb *******, harry.

On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 15:00:02 -0400, "
wrote:

Jesus!... this Harry bloke needs a lie down

harry will changes colors, right in front of you. *He recently claimed
that Abe Lincoln had WMDs.

Consider the source. *In the UK, they have to cut their steaks with
plastic spoons.

You weren't able to deny it.

You're a liar. *He did deny it, as did every sane person here.

As I said here before, harry makes up lies to cover up his other lies.
..."weapons of mass destruction" was not coined until 1937. Of all
places - the London Times.

They existed long before someone dreamt up the term. WW1 poison gas.
US civil war, Submarines.

Submarines as a WMD? You are one dumb *******, harry.

Yep, he is. The only two submarines in the Civil War fought just one
battle. They were not even submerged...

harry is even a poor liar.

On Jun 30, 7:23*pm, "
wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 10:55:25 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:
On Jun 30, 1:10*pm, "Atila Iskander" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

....

On Jun 29, 7:46 pm, Frank wrote:
On 6/29/2012 12:01 PM, harry wrote:

On Jun 29, 2:35 pm, Frank wrote:
On 6/29/2012 2:44 AM, harry wrote:

On Jun 29, 12:11 am, Frank wrote:
On 6/28/2012 3:35 PM, harry wrote:

On Jun 28, 7:19 pm, "Steve B" wrote:
Facetious, obviously, but any homeowner knows that stuff wears
out and
has to be replaced. *IMHO, estimated payback periods do not
consider
this in their calculations.

And, a home powered by solar would cost a chunk of change to power
just some
light bulbs, and a small TV. *If you want microwave, clothes
dryers, ovens,
toasters, and other stuff, you will have to fork out substantially
more in
the beginning.

Amortized over time, it is worthless, unless you want to live in a
cave with
one small light bulb.

Steve

Talking your usual drivel I see.
I export more power than I consume. I have a solar passive house
and I
have no fuel bills at all.
The net financial benefit of my house is almost $6000/year compared
with a standard house.
But we are more advanced in Europe.

Big subsidies are being cut:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...s-subsidy-cuts...

Some might be so crass as to say you are just sponging off the tax
payers.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Subsidiea are being cut on new installations.
But it is in line with the cost of the *panels so the return is the
same.
The idea of the initial subsidies was to get the industry going..
Half the houses where I live now have a solar array.

We like to quote Margaret Thatchers, "The trouble with Socialism is
that
eventually you run out of other people's money."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The trouble with capitalism is eventually they grab all the money..

Spoken like a true Socialist or in your case, Marxist - Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

So when the banks grab taxpayers money to fund their errors, greed and
incompetance how is that capitalism?

It isn't
And only idiots like you try to claim it was

Oh and who handed this money over to them? *Musta been a socialist..
Govermint Motors..............Govermint Banks. True capitalism, Heh
Heh.

Still missing the point as usual

Or was it a capitaist stealling tqxpayer's *$ to help his friends out?
And are they grateful? *No, they award themselves higher rewards and
become yet bigger crooks.

There you go demonstrating again your stupidity by implying that capitalism
will somehow be crook-free...

You need a proper revolution over there you serfs.

You on the other hand need a proper education- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Capitalism can never be crook free.

Obviously, you putz. *Humanity can never be crook-free.

Sucessful capitalists are all crooks.

Successful socialists are far worse.

But you're too dopy toseeit.

You're to dopey to even spell it. *...but you've always been a dumb limey
dope, harry.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Successful socialists?

On Jun 30, 8:14*pm, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 15:00:02 -0400, "





wrote:
Jesus!... this Harry bloke needs a lie down

harry will changes colors, right in front of you. *He recently claimed
that Abe Lincoln had WMDs.

Consider the source. *In the UK, they have to cut their steaks with
plastic spoons.

You weren't able to deny it.

You're a liar. *He did deny it, as did every sane person here.

As I said here before, harry makes up lies to cover up his other lies..
..."weapons of mass destruction" was not coined until 1937. Of all
places - the London Times.

They existed long before someone dreamt up the term. *WW1 poison gas.
US civil war, Submarines.

Submarines as a WMD? *You are one dumb *******, harry.

Yep, he is. *The only two submarines in the Civil War fought just one
battle. They were not even submerged...

harry is even a poor liar.-

And your are a ingnorant dumb yank.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submari...ican_Civil_War

On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 22:07:51 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

On Jun 30, 8:14*pm, Oren wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 15:00:02 -0400, "





wrote:
Jesus!... this Harry bloke needs a lie down

harry will changes colors, right in front of you. *He recently claimed
that Abe Lincoln had WMDs.

Consider the source. *In the UK, they have to cut their steaks with
plastic spoons.

You weren't able to deny it.

You're a liar. *He did deny it, as did every sane person here.

As I said here before, harry makes up lies to cover up his other lies.
..."weapons of mass destruction" was not coined until 1937. Of all
places - the London Times.

They existed long before someone dreamt up the term. *WW1 poison gas.
US civil war, Submarines.

Submarines as a WMD? *You are one dumb *******, harry.

Yep, he is. *The only two submarines in the Civil War fought just one
battle. They were not even submerged...

harry is even a poor liar.-

And your are a ingnorant dumb yank
^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^

[..../]
IRONY

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submari...ican_Civil_War


Hardly WMDs, you dumbass limey liar.

On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 22:06:49 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

On Jun 30, 7:23*pm, "
wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 10:55:25 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:
On Jun 30, 1:10*pm, "Atila Iskander" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...

On Jun 29, 7:46 pm, Frank wrote:
On 6/29/2012 12:01 PM, harry wrote:

On Jun 29, 2:35 pm, Frank wrote:
On 6/29/2012 2:44 AM, harry wrote:

On Jun 29, 12:11 am, Frank wrote:
On 6/28/2012 3:35 PM, harry wrote:

On Jun 28, 7:19 pm, "Steve B" wrote:
Facetious, obviously, but any homeowner knows that stuff wears
out and
has to be replaced. *IMHO, estimated payback periods do not
consider
this in their calculations.

And, a home powered by solar would cost a chunk of change to power
just some
light bulbs, and a small TV. *If you want microwave, clothes
dryers, ovens,
toasters, and other stuff, you will have to fork out substantially
more in
the beginning.

Amortized over time, it is worthless, unless you want to live in a
cave with
one small light bulb.

Steve

Talking your usual drivel I see.
I export more power than I consume. I have a solar passive house
and I
have no fuel bills at all.
The net financial benefit of my house is almost $6000/year compared
with a standard house.
But we are more advanced in Europe.

Big subsidies are being cut:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...s-subsidy-cuts...

Some might be so crass as to say you are just sponging off the tax
payers.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Subsidiea are being cut on new installations.
But it is in line with the cost of the *panels so the return is the
same.
The idea of the initial subsidies was to get the industry going.
Half the houses where I live now have a solar array.

We like to quote Margaret Thatchers, "The trouble with Socialism is
that
eventually you run out of other people's money."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The trouble with capitalism is eventually they grab all the money.

Spoken like a true Socialist or in your case, Marxist - Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

So when the banks grab taxpayers money to fund their errors, greed and
incompetance how is that capitalism?

It isn't
And only idiots like you try to claim it was

Oh and who handed this money over to them? *Musta been a socialist.
Govermint Motors..............Govermint Banks. True capitalism, Heh
Heh.

Still missing the point as usual

Or was it a capitaist stealling tqxpayer's *$ to help his friends out?
And are they grateful? *No, they award themselves higher rewards and
become yet bigger crooks.

There you go demonstrating again your stupidity by implying that capitalism
will somehow be crook-free...

You need a proper revolution over there you serfs.

You on the other hand need a proper education- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Capitalism can never be crook free.

Obviously, you putz. *Humanity can never be crook-free.

Sucessful capitalists are all crooks.

Successful socialists are far worse.

But you're too dopy toseeit.

You're to dopey to even spell it. *...but you've always been a dumb limey
dope, harry.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Successful socialists?

"dopy toseeit", you dumbass limey liar.

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Jun 30, 1:10 pm, "Atila Iskander" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...





On Jun 29, 7:46 pm, Frank wrote:
On 6/29/2012 12:01 PM, harry wrote:

On Jun 29, 2:35 pm, Frank wrote:
On 6/29/2012 2:44 AM, harry wrote:

On Jun 29, 12:11 am, Frank wrote:
On 6/28/2012 3:35 PM, harry wrote:

On Jun 28, 7:19 pm, "Steve B" wrote:
Facetious, obviously, but any homeowner knows that stuff
wears
out and
has to be replaced. IMHO, estimated payback periods do not
consider
this in their calculations.

And, a home powered by solar would cost a chunk of change to
power
just some
light bulbs, and a small TV. If you want microwave, clothes
dryers, ovens,
toasters, and other stuff, you will have to fork out
substantially
more in
the beginning.

Amortized over time, it is worthless, unless you want to live
in a
cave with
one small light bulb.

Steve

Talking your usual drivel I see.
I export more power than I consume. I have a solar passive house
and I
have no fuel bills at all.
The net financial benefit of my house is almost $6000/year
compared
with a standard house.
But we are more advanced in Europe.

Big subsidies are being cut:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...s-subsidy-cuts...

Some might be so crass as to say you are just sponging off the
tax
payers.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Subsidiea are being cut on new installations.
But it is in line with the cost of the panels so the return is
the
same.
The idea of the initial subsidies was to get the industry going.
Half the houses where I live now have a solar array.

We like to quote Margaret Thatchers, "The trouble with Socialism is
that
eventually you run out of other people's money."- Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

The trouble with capitalism is eventually they grab all the money.

Spoken like a true Socialist or in your case, Marxist - Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

So when the banks grab taxpayers money to fund their errors, greed and
incompetance how is that capitalism?

It isn't
And only idiots like you try to claim it was

Oh and who handed this money over to them? Musta been a socialist.
Govermint Motors..............Govermint Banks. True capitalism, Heh
Heh.

Still missing the point as usual

Or was it a capitaist stealling tqxpayer's $ to help his friends out?
And are they grateful? No, they award themselves higher rewards and
become yet bigger crooks.

There you go demonstrating again your stupidity by implying that
capitalism
will somehow be crook-free...

You need a proper revolution over there you serfs.

You on the other hand need a proper education- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Capitalism can never be crook free.

Nothing human can be "crook free"


Sucessful capitalists are all crooks.

Feel free to prove that claim

But you're too dopy toseeit.

Whatever harry
Prove your second statement if you want credibility

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Jun 30, 1:26 pm, "Atila Iskander" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...





On Jun 30, 12:16 am, "
wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 09:00:07 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:
On Jun 29, 2:26 pm, "
wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 23:34:55 -0700 (PDT), harry

wrote:

There a virtually no American cars anywhere but America. Why do
you
suppose that is?

Really? You've never seen a Ford or GM car in Europe? What a
liar,
you are,
harry]

All made here.

At least you admit that you're a damned liar.-

There are almost zero American made Ford or GM cars in Europe.

LOL
Almost Zero = 100,000 for Ford alone.
With plants in Belgium, France, Spain , Germany, Romania, Russia, Turkey
and
the U.K.

http://www.romania-insider.com/ford-...-base-in-e...-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

None of building **** American designed cars.

Another ignorant claim for the brit village idiot