Travel
Places to travel and things to see.
464 topics in this forum
-
- 18 replies
- 736 views
-
- 2 replies
- 459 views
-
- 23 replies
- 956 views
-
- 32 replies
- 1,903 views
-
- 3 replies
- 425 views
-
- 4 replies
- 434 views
-
- 0 replies
- 279 views
-
- 7 replies
- 474 views
-
- 10 replies
- 844 views
-
- 3 replies
- 512 views
-
- 9 replies
- 525 views
-
- 4 replies
- 427 views
-
- 3 replies
- 393 views
-
- 4 replies
- 509 views
-
- 2 replies
- 425 views
-
- 11 replies
- 899 views
-
- 18 replies
- 920 views
-
- 16 replies
- 751 views
-
- 3 replies
- 446 views
-
- 3 replies
- 418 views
-
- 23 replies
- 911 views
-
- 27 replies
- 2,276 views
-
- 1 reply
- 394 views
-
- 6 replies
- 699 views
-
- 12 replies
- 785 views
.jpg)
-
Topics
-
-
Posts
-
By WeBeFulltimers · Posted
Yep, really like the Hopper3. No recording conflicts! -
If we follow the logic of those who argue with Daveh's position on the Anderson issue, very little would change in the future and we would likely still be ruled by the Queen of England. Didn't those ruffians in Boston understand that dumping that English tea into the harbor would destroy the businesses that depend on selling tea for their income? Would this not have the exact same effect on the cowboys who work for these ranches that depend on federal grazing? Absolutely I would wonder such and I would never go back to that medical facility if they took no action to remove and punish the doctor involved. But like most of the arguments against punishing Anderson's owner via his business, this has nothing at all to do with it since we are comparing an owner of the company to a key employee of the medical practice. At what point do you think it proper to refuse to do business with a company and risk harming the employees? Such thinking could be taken to just as ridiculous an extreme as the argument to harm Anderson Hitches. Perhaps the Dallas Police Department should be admonished for having closed down a chop-shop last week as it was employing more than 20 workers who now do not have jobs? Do you not care about those workers' now hungry children? -
I enjoyed reading the CG reviews, found the info helpful and enjoyed the pictures. I think the criticism of this posting is a little over done though. Some thoughts: Since the topic has little to do with fulltimeing, I would think the topic would be best served in the travel section of this forum. I also believe the general information about the CG's would be most helpful if you were to add your reviews to RVParkReviews.com. You did say you wish to be helpful to the general RV'ers. Thanks for the info. -
RVparkreviews is the generally accepted place for park reviews. I look at a blog as an item to view of someone's trip to an area I am interested in. It is nice that you put park reviews in your blog but if you additionally update rvparkreviews you would benefit a lot more people. When traveling we generally update rvparkreviews on a daily basis to benefit the rving community. -
Not having the "yikes amount" to budget when we started is the reason that we bought the extended warranty at first. If you read the article, we did not renew that "warranty" at the time that it expired because we had then built up a cushion of funds sufficient to pay the cost of an engine or transmission if we should ever need one. Folks need to understand that the so-called extended warranty is actually a health insurance plan for the RV. I retired from the service business and those are not service contracts (which we did sell) as they do not pay for routine maintenance but are more like home owner's insurance which will pay for a storm-damaged roof but will not pay for one that has worn out from age. If you do fall short of the ability to set aside that 10% fund at the start, and so buy an extended warranty, be very careful in selecting one and don't buy the least costly one. I have long observed that the vast majority of satisfied customers for extended warranties are those who bought the more costly ones. That is because just as you can get really cheap health insurance which is difficult to get to pay anything and then doesn't pay much, that same thing is true for extended warranties. If you buy one get what is called an "inclusionary" one and not the "exclusionary" variety. The difference is that inclusionary covers all items on the RV except those specifically listed as not covered. The exclusionary type only cover the items that are listed on the contract and do not pay for anything not listed. It is a very important difference. The key to operating in the way that Barb advocates is self-discipline. Her plan would work for any and all RV people if they actually do as she suggests but far too often people fool themselves into believing that they will make up the money they don't set aside at a later time and because no major repairs have been needed, they stop setting aside the budgeted money. If you go with Barb's suggested plan you then must make sure that you actually do it every time, even if there have been no expensive repairs. Most people just do not have the discipline to keep putting the money aside. On the other hand, for those who do set aside 10% of the purchase price and add to that fund religiously each year, even though the fund keeps growing and is rarely ever used when the time comes that you need to replace or remodel the RV there is money there to do that. In our case, Pam began to have major health issues and we needed to leave the fulltime lifestyle for medical reasons. Between the money we set aside when we started our travels and the funds built up in the emergency reserve, we were able to buy our present home-base for cash, just as we would have done with an RV if we had stayed on the road. It is wise to always have some type of exit plan while living in an RV and the funds for that plan can easily be combined with the unused maintenance reserves in the event you are forced to change your lifestyle course.
-
