The scam is that when people search for a product and add the word "review", this site comes up pretty high. However, they do not hide the fact that they will put YOUR product as the BEST product if you pay them. I found this out when I fell for their supposed "review" of anti-virus software, but then caught on when the little known "Bullet" anti-virus supposedly beat out Norton, McAffee, Trend Micro, and all the others. I then researched further to find they did this with many 'lesser known' products who would not be as noticed for using such a scam site to push their product. They then try to add in a few 'legit" bits of news, etc, to make the site look legit. But even then, the videos are amatuer, with mispellings, and forced acting. Do not trust this site, they do not review for your benifit. Go to CNet.com or similar to get unbiased reviews.in reference to: TopTenREVIEWS Expert Product Reviews (view on Google Sidewiki)
Monday, December 7, 2009
Since the original post, I have researched and found that Dan's information is and has been freely available through out the Internet. Simply Google the phrase "cascading debt". But unlike my original post, I will reveal here the concept, which I am still employing, and will be out of all debt, including a 90k mortgage, 75k student loans, and 10k remaining car loan, in 7 years.
Here's how it works:
First, as stated before, the "more debts the better" is true, but only if you are making even just a slight bit more on the minimum payments. Again, if you are barely scraping by, and some debts are going unpaid, this is still doable, but more difficult to get started. Therefore, I will write this with the assumption that you are making at least the minimum payments on your debts, and even better if you are paying $5 or more ABOVE the minimum on some or all of your debts. if you are only paying the minimum, you can still do this just as effectively if you can find $50 to $250 in your monthly budget somewhere else. Such as, canceling a NetFlix account, or ordering one less pizza per week.
Now, take an inventory of all those individual monthly payments, and put them in a column list. Now, next to each individual payment, write what the minimum payment is. Then in a third column beside that, write what the difference is between the two numbers, which will be what you are over paying on that debt. Like this:
Credit Card 1: $35 min pymnt. $40 monthly payment. $5 overage.
Credit card 2.: $22 min pymnt. $25 monthly payment. $2 overage.
Credit card 3: $53 min pymnt $60 monthly payment $7 overage.
Car loan : $210 min pymnt $240 monthly payment $30 overage.
Ad so on, listing all dents that gain interest, NOT fees you have to pay anyway each month (like condo fees, water bill, etc). Again, though, it you are only playing minimums, you can still try and find $50-$200 extra in your monthly outgo that you can apply to this system.
So then you add up all the "over payments" and write that number down. That is your "seed" money that will be all you need to get out of debt.
Now, you stop paying what you have been paying, and just pay the minimum on all the debts. Then you pick one debt, perhaps the lowest balance debt just so you can see it disappear so fast. You could choose the highest Interest debt, but honestly, if this system is employed, you will wipe that debt out so fast later on, the Interest you pay above smaller debts will be minimal...therefore, the smaller debts first approach may serve you better psychologically.
Then you apply your 'seed' money to the minimum payment of your chosen debt to pay off first. So let's say you have $40 in 'seed' money, and apply it to the minimum payment of $20 on your chosen debt.
You are now making a $60 payment on the debt. Let's assume it was a low debt of $180. Before, you'd to have paid it off in roughly 14 to 18 months after interest fees are calculated. But now you'll pay almost all of it 3 months, with a 4th month payment of just a few dollars, and you have changed nothing about your life style. You can still continue to eat out, go on trips, order pizza, if you had before. But it gets better.
After that 3rd or 4th month, you then take the seed money of $60, plus the min. pymt of your first card of $20, and now your new seed money is $80.
Now put that $80 toward your next lowest debt, say, a $1200 debt with a min. pymt of $35, and now you are paying $115 and paying it off in about 10-11 months as opposed to the 48 to 60 months it would have taken. Again, you still get to play if you prefer, and are not paying out any more than you did before.
This goes on to each debt. In my case, by the time I get to my car payment, I will be adding $170 to my already minimum payment of $260, which makes a $430/month payment. Wow! And again, I still haven’t changed anything about the way I play with my extra $200-400 per month. When I get to my mortgage, I will be paying $2200 per month on a $510 condo payment (my condo payment is actually higher, but the portion that is actually the interest bearing debt is $510). I will then pay off my 30 year mortgage within the next 4 years.
All of this is assuming I do not get any raises, and do not put any more money toward my seed money.
However, I will tell you that my seed money starting out was $230, and when I played with the numbers, increasing it by $10 or $20 made little difference in the final payoff date.
So, that’s the process. Again, the discipline is in not spending the extra money you find yourself having when you pay off each debt one by one. You simply roll-over the minimum payment you were paying on it to the next debt, plus your seed money. But imagine yourself debt free in 8 years. Is the discipline really that hard? Not for me.
It is important to realize that this is a common very unethical false claim that the majority of Christians do not agree with. They make this claim to give the reader the impression that there are a large percentage of scientists who disagree with the robust theory of evolution. When pressed, they *may* be forced to give you the real figure of 5% of scientists in the U.S. support Creationism over Evolutionary Theory. That's 50 out of 1000 scientists. That is quite paltry. Now, that figure includes ALL scientists, which means any one in a 'science' field, such as engineers, and others who are not educated in the field of life sciences. So, when you look at those scientists who are educated in Life Sciences, you'll find the number to be even more minuscule, which is 0.15 %. That's 1.5 people per 1000.
And hopefully most people not knowing the difference between Creationist's claims and the science of evolution will recognize that anyone can make any claim. Creationism sites over-use this unethical tactic by saying things like "this proves evolution is wrong". That is an example of how anyone can make any claim, as they should be allowed to do. However, many people do not know how to investigate claims, or know how to apply critical thinking to information, research sources, validate sources, and all the other processes that are necessary to determine the truthfulness of a claim. Creationism sites take full advantage of these people. If you do have those tools to thoroughly investigate the validity of any claim, it is not only welcomed, but required by true scientific sites that report the facts and theories of evolution. You will never see a true scientific site disable or censor your dissenting views (as long as you are polite and respectful) but you will often find creationism sites will not allow comments, or will censor or disable any dissenting views other than the 'straw-man' supposed dissenting views they made up. They will censor these dissenting views even if the dissenter is polite and respectful. If anyone knows of any Creationist sites that allow and does not censor dissenting views, please post a reply. I am all for it, and will use them as an example to creationists how to be confident of your information, and that is to allow dissenting comments.
""Do you think the theory of evolution is a fact accepted by ALL scientists? Think again!"
- Creation vs. Evolution Sites - Links (view on Google Sidewiki)
I especially love that now sites that give misleading information or even scams, that horridly misrepresent science, or ignore science, can be commented on. Creationism sites come to mind, where they disable comments on their horrid pseudo-science articles when merely a disagreement is written. This should be a great way to get the correct RESEARCHABLE information beside horrid psuedo-science. Only one issue I can see is that the hordes of creationist can vote your comments down. Not sure how that works, unless it simply lets people choose not to see comments below a certain rating. If that's true, I'm all for it as people can go to sites that are controversial and opt to see the low ranking comments in the order they were written. Therefore, valid comments that are rated low by sheer masses of blind followers can virtually be 'highlighted' by ther every act of low ranking them, when someone clicks to see low ranked comments.in reference to: Google Sidewiki (view on Google Sidewiki)
Sunday, December 6, 2009
It is thoroughly irresponsible for Nancy Grace to be covering this like she is. Tiger has proven himself to be a very nice, toughtful guy and nancy is effectively sensationalizizing a non-story. It's effective because of viewers who think they are SUPPOSED to pass judgement on someone else's private matters, when the opposite is true... they are jejune and should be embarrassed for themselves for thinking they should be meddling in his private business. Because Tiger has been such a great guy, and will continue to be, he has earned the priviledge of being left alone. Save your attacks for preachers or televangelists who are on record chastising others for their transgressions. But last I knew, Tiger has never attacked anyone else for their PRIVATE transgressions.in reference to:
"The squeaky clean image that Tiger Woods has managed to maintain"
- Tiger Woods Crash: What really happened? – Nancy Grace - CNN.com Blogs (view on Google Sidewiki)
Given that they are charging as much as they are, it is liekly they are selling the higher quality model than the cheaper $50 models sold eslewhere. However, make sure you check around to see if they are truly showing 640x480, as many of these spy cam sites claims 640x480, but many are actually somewhat less than that. Still, though, I can't help but think I'd rather buy three $50 almost-as-good models than one slightly better model.in reference to:
"3) Reliability: Depending on where a vendor buy from, defective rate can be from 1% to 30%. We guaranty our pen cameras for 1 year. Don't get stuck with a cheap model!"
- Pen Cameras - Spy Pen / Body Worn Camera - Hidden Camera Pen Style Camcorders (view on Google Sidewiki)