生粒痣﹐長一智
M: 暢談港美熱門新聞大小事﹐談論美國﹐
H: 灣區矽谷鎖粹生活省錢和須知﹐加州旅遊娛樂小貼士。
Google Ad
5.26.2011
5.03.2011
貓學會用坐廁
3.18.2011
日本大地震喚起處於地震帶的灣區
2.11.2010
Rite Aid (2010/01/31 to 2010/02/06)
Rite Aid - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後不但免費, 另外還賺US$17.18
延伸閱讀: Walgreens(2009/12/09 to 2009/12/12)
12.09.2009
水銀電池
Walgreens(2009/12/09 to 2009/12/12)
Walgreens - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後, 共付US$3.70;
延伸閱讀: Walgreens (Black Friday)
12.02.2009
11.28.2009
Walgreens (Black Friday)
Walgreens - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後, 另外還賺US$3.90
延伸閱讀: Walgreens(2009/11/15 to 2009/11/21)
11.20.2009
Rite Aid, Walgreens(2009/11/15 to 2009/11/21)
Rite Aid - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後不但免費, 另外還賺US$1.21
Walgreens - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後, 共付US$0.96;
以上產品, 合共賺US$0.25
延伸閱讀: Rite Aid, Walgreens(2009/10/25 to 2009/10/31)
11.05.2009
福字伊麵返來了
10.25.2009
Dreyer's 雪糕越來越差﹐Safeway Select牌比Dreyer's好味
比起Dreyer's雪糕﹐Safeway出產的Select雪糕不但價錢比較平﹐份量比較多(仍然是1.75 qt)﹐而且用料原來質素不差﹐最重要的是它比Dreyer's好味 - 味道比較新鮮。例如﹐Dreyer's 和 Safeway 都有出產Almond Fudge。Dreyer's Almond Fudge的杏仁很“淋”/軟(soft)﹐而Safeway Select Almond Fudge的杏仁卻是又脆又香。
看來現在的Dreyer's是單靠多年前打響了的牌子﹐已經沒有真材實料。相反﹐Safeway雪糕好像看不起眼﹐但其實品質不錯﹐是一個好選擇。
Rite Aid, Walgreens(2009/10/25 to 2009/10/31)
Rite Aid - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後, 共付US$0.66;
Walgreens - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後不但免費, 另外還賺US$3.85
以上產品, 合共賺US$3.19
延伸閱讀: Rite Aid, Walgreens (2009/10/18 to 2009/24)
10.24.2009
Safeway, CVS (2009/10/24)
10.18.2009
Rite Aid, Walgreens (2009/10/18 to 2009/24)
Rite Aid - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後不但免費, 另外還賺US$3.15;
Walgreens - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後不但免費, 另外還賺US$1.76
以上產品, 合共賺US$4.91
延伸閱讀: Rite Aid(2009/10/11 to 2009/10/17)
10.13.2009
10.12.2009
Rite Aid(2009/10/11 to 2009/10/17)
Rite Aid - After Rebate及連稅後, 共付US$1.34
延伸閱讀: Rite Aid, Walgreens(2009/09/27 to 2009/10/3)
9.30.2009
Rite Aid, Walgreens(2009/09/27 to 2009/10/3)
Rite Aid - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後, 共付US$0.25;
Walgreens - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後, 共付US$0.44
以上九件產品, 合共付US$0.69
延伸閱讀: Walgreens(2009/03/15 to 2009/03/21)
9.23.2009
批評"援交"的人說錯了
(雖然港男港女均可援交﹐但因為援交以港女為多﹐所以在此主要談論港女。首先聲明﹐本人討厭港女的程度絕不會比大多數香港人小﹐但相比起那些虛偽的"講道德"機構和主流宗教團體﹐港女的討厭程度就比較低了。)
以下是本人接觸過的批評援交的理由和本人的回應。
社會說﹕援交即是賣淫。援交與賣淫沒有分別。兩者當然有分別。沒有分別的話就不會用兩個不同詞語來形容。說成"援交與賣淫的分別不大"正確得多﹐亦較容易接受。如果說援交等於賣淫是因為涉及金錢的性交易就是賣淫﹐那麼男女拍拖時港女要男友支付娛樂飲食費用後發生性行為不也是賣淫嗎﹖結婚時女家收取禮金﹐女家父母是不是操縱和教唆女性賣淫﹖結婚後離婚時﹐法庭判贍養費給女方﹐ 是不是政府強迫男方操縱女性賣淫﹖標準是什麼﹖是出於何時交收金錢嗎﹖性交易後要等多久交收金錢才不是賣淫﹖一星期﹖三個月﹖一年﹖三十年﹖
社會不能接受援交這種淫蕩的行為。行為的淫蕩性是真正的理由嗎﹖社會現時極力打擊援交﹐但似乎對一夜情視而不見。難道一夜情真的比援交純潔嗎﹖試問是每月援交三次的港女淫蕩﹐還是每晚一夜情的港女淫蕩﹖是每晚與一名援交客性交的港女淫蕩﹐還是每晚與幾位不同男士免費性交的港女淫蕩﹖
有些港女會在援交後覺得後悔﹐骯髒﹐錯﹐所以援交是錯事。這感覺不是來自援交本身。相反﹐這感覺是社會帶給港女的。假如社會歌頌援交而打擊琴棋書畫﹐港女在援交後便不會覺得後悔--後悔的將會是那些學習琴棋書畫的人。覺得社會不可能會歌頌援交而打擊琴棋書畫﹖想一想﹐曾幾何時﹐美國社會歌頌那些負責捉拿在逃黑奴的人而指責和打擊幫助黑奴逃亡的人。港女的"援後感"是源於社會那群卑鄙的道德一族和他們鬼祟的"自我實現預言" (self-fulfilling prophecy)。
援交是不勞而獲﹐是歪風。這理由說不通。援交不是不勞而獲﹐不是沒有犧牲。上網找客﹐化濃妝扮公主﹐拋媚弄眼不需要時間體力嗎﹖失去貞操不是犧牲嗎﹖
人應該努力工作﹐不應該找快錢。炒房地產和炒股票也是找快錢。為何不被政府和社會同樣地窮追猛打﹖再說﹐援交賺來的快錢來得再快再容易也不夠生在豪門得到的來得快和容易。假如社會真的覺得找快錢不應該﹐看來它真正的目標不是援交﹐而是重徵利得稅﹐遺產稅﹐贈品稅。
援交港女不知道將會招待的是什麼人﹐有可能是變態狂徒﹐對港女性命和安全有危險。無錯﹐近期有一名變態兇徒肢解援交港女﹐但我們不應該用這例子來一概而論。變態兇徒肢解援交港女雖然值得關注﹐但肯定是少數。每份職業﹐每件選擇﹐都有本身的風險。同樣地﹐我們不應該因為近期有警員在警局強姦報案人而解散警處或不准市民進入警局。我們亦不應該因為近期有女藝人在街頭被非禮而對女藝人在街上行走的權利趕盡殺絕。
在"新聞透視-援交自白"聽到有人形容援交的禍害為"溫水煮蛙"。意思是起初不覺得有什麼問題﹐知道有危險時已經太遲。說得很漂亮﹐但太容易一竹竿打一船人﹐打中所有過了試用期後簽上長約的上班一族。想深一層﹐做援交比這些上班一族自由得多了--至少援交不用簽約﹐決定不再援交時不用負上法律責任。
"用身體(身軀/軀體)賺錢"是不道德和不正確的價值觀。這說法太不清晰。試問有什麼職業不是用身體的。身在大學辦公室的哲學家或政府總部的高官工作時尚且不能不用身體﹐服務和勞動等行業的人士就更加不在話下。與其因為怕尷尬而用"身體/身軀/軀體"等字眼來形容援交﹐不如直接了當地說她們用"性器官"賺錢。要處理問題首先要正視問題。社會批評的不是用"身體"賺錢的人﹐而是用"性器官"賺錢的人。清晰的說明總比模糊的好。
說到底﹐援交也可以說是一份職業。一方得到金錢﹐另一方得到服務﹐不是職業是什麼﹖正當與否﹐見仁見智。用一些容易被反駁和推翻的理由來批評援交只會弄巧成拙。因為一旦理由被攻破﹐再大義凜然的意見也站不住腳。看來道德一族應該用以下這個無械可擊的理由才是上策: "援交是錯的﹐因為我們的社會不想﹐因為我們的社會不准。" 效果會如何﹖不知道。但至少是一句誠實的話。
在美國﹐與自己的BB影出浴照會淪為性罪犯
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2009/09/22/pn.bathtime.photos.cnn
Naked bath pics child porn?
A couple sues after temporarily losing custody of their kids because a Wal-mart employee turned in their bathtime photos.
3.16.2009
Walgreens(2009/03/15 to 2009/03/21)
Walgreens - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後, 共付US$0.74.
延伸閱讀: Walgreens(2009/03/08 to 2009/03/14)
3.08.2009
Walgreens(2009/03/08 to 2009/03/14)
Walgreens - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後, 共付US$1.3.
延伸閱讀: Rite Aid, Walgreens(2009/03/01 to 2009/03/07)
3.01.2009
Rite Aid, Walgreens(2009/03/01 to 2009/03/07)
Rite Aid- After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後不但免費, 另外還賺US$2.38
Walgreens - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後不但免費, 另外還賺US$3.87
以上九件產品, 合共賺US$6.25
延伸閱讀: Longs Drugs, Rite Aid, Walgreens(2009/02/22 to 2009/02/28)
2.23.2009
Longs Drugs, Rite Aid, Walgreens(2009/02/22 to 2009/02/28)
Longs Drugs - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後, 共付US$5.47;
Rite Aid- After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後不但免費, 另外還賺US$9.35;
Walgreens - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後, 共付US$2.73.
以上三件產品, 合共賺US$1.15.
延伸閱讀: Longs Drugs, Rite Aid, Walgreens(2009/02/08 to 2009/02/14)
2.11.2009
Made in Occupied Japan時期的瓷器
最近經過Garage Sale前去逛一逛, 看到一套零星不齊的古舊瓷器, 原來有名堂--Made in Occupied Japan, 這些碗碟於日本被美軍佔據時期製造, 即1945至1953年左右製造.
Made in Japan我們見得多, Made in Occupied Japan從未見聞. 初時還以為假, 後來上網瀏覽相關資料, 才得知有這些產品的存在, 以瓷器物品居多. 有飾物擺設, 杯碟餐具和花瓶; 也有銀器銅器.
我們持有的瓷器碗碟雖然稱不上價值連城, 但這些物品是歷史遺留下來的見證. 給我們略知當時他們對擺設和餐具的素質和要求. 有的圖案花紋細緻;有的表面光滑; 有的顏色鮮艷; 也有的質素略顯粗糙.
Fairmont by Jyoto china, Made in Occupied Japan:
Kanedai, Made in Occupied Japan:
Red and White (other):Geneva, Johnson Brothers England:
Silverdale, Made between 1900-1947:H&K Tunstall, Made in England:Ravenna:
Edwin M. Knowles, Made in U.S.A.:Virginia Rose by Homer Laughlin:Vintage Trellis L:
2.09.2009
Longs Drugs, Rite Aid, Walgreens(2009/02/08 to 2009/02/14)
Longs Drugs - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後不但免費, 另外還賺US$0.75;
Rite Aid - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後不但免費, 另外還賺US$0.75;
Walgreens - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後, 共付US$1.16.
以上三件產品, 合共賺US$1.34.
延伸閱讀: Walgreens(2009/02/01 to 2009/02/07)
2.02.2009
Walgreens(2009/02/01 to 2009/02/07)
Walgreens - 以上五件產品 After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後不但免費, 另外還賺US$2.12.
延伸閱讀: Longs Drugs, Rite Aid, Walgreens(2009/01/18 to 2009/01/24)
1.21.2009
Dreyer's 的Free Coupon
1.19.2009
Longs Drugs, Rite Aid, Walgreens(2009/01/18 to 2009/01/24)
Rite Aid - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後, 共付US$1.91;
Walgreens - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後, 共付US$3.89.
以上二十三件產品, 合共付US$2.80.
延伸閱讀: Longs Drugs, Rite Aid, Walgreens(2009/01/02 to 2009/01/09)
1.04.2009
Longs Drugs, Rite Aid, Walgreens(2009/01/02 to 2009/01/09)
Longs Drugs - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後不但免費, 另外還賺US$0.75;
Rite Aid - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後不但免費, 另外還賺US$2.75;
Walgreens - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後, 共付US$2.57.
以上十六件產品, 合共賺US$0.93.
延伸閱讀: Walgreens (2008/12/21 to 2008/12/27)
12.31.2008
Walgreens (2008/12/21 to 2008/12/27)
Walgreens - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後不但免費, 另外還賺US$1.58.
延伸閱讀: Longs Drugs, Rite Aid, Walgreens (2008/12/21 to 2008/12/27)
12.22.2008
Longs Drugs, Rite Aid, Walgreens (2008/12/21 to 2008/12/27)
Longs Drugs - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後不但免費, 另外還賺US$0.75;
Rite Aid - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後不但免費, 另外還賺US$0.46;
Walgreens - After Rebate和使用Coupons及連稅後, 共付US$0.83.
以上四十八件產品, 合共賺US$0.38.
延伸閱讀: Longs Drugs, Rite Aid, Walgreens (2008/11/30 to 2008/12/06)
明愛醫院女職員和高層﹐也許他們都是從美國加州回流香港﹖
"好心着雷劈"在美國絕不罕見。以下是一個近期美國加州的"好心人"個案。A小姐撞了車。B小姐嘗試把A小姐救出﹐但不幸地把A小姐弄到癱了。A小姐控告B小姐﹐要B小姐賠償。B小姐以為"好心人"法例會保障好心人。但美國加州最高法院幾天前裁定好心人法例不保障B小姐﹔A小姐可以控告B小姐。法院判辭說﹕人沒有責任幫助其他人﹐假如自行幫助他人的話﹐要自己承擔所有後果和責任。
看來不但港元和美元掛鈎﹐香港的人性和法律思想也開始和美國掛鈎了。看來在不久的將來﹐港人會像"責任思想"的美國人一樣﹕看到有人撞車,連報警也不會--裝作看不見就是了。
Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081218/ap_on_re_us/samaritan_protection
LOS ANGELES – Proving that no good deed goes unpunished, the state's high court on Thursday said a would-be Good Samaritan accused of rendering her friend paraplegic by pulling her from a wrecked car "like a rag doll" can be sued.
California's Supreme Court ruled that the state's Good Samaritan law only protects people from liability if the are administering emergency medical care, and that Lisa Torti's attempted rescue of her friend didn't qualify.
Justice Carlos Moreno wrote for a unanimous court that a person is not obligated to come to someone's aid.
"If, however, a person elects to come to someone's aid, he or she has a duty to exercise due care," he wrote.
Torti had argued that she should still be protected from a lawsuit because she was giving "medical care" when she pulled her friend from a car wreck.
Alexandra Van Horn was in the front passenger seat of a car that slammed into a light pole at 45 mph on Nov. 1, 2004, according to her negligence lawsuit.
Torti was a passenger in a car that was following behind the vehicle and stopped after the crash. Torti said when she came across the wreck she feared the car was going to explode and pulled Van Horn out. Van Horn testified that Torti pulled her out of the wreckage "like a rag doll." Van Horn blamed her friend for her paralysis.
Whether Torti is ultimately liable is still to be determined, but Van Horn's lawsuit can go forward, the Supreme Court ruled.
Beverly Hills lawyer Robert Hutchinson, who represented Van Horn, said he's pleased with the ruling.
Torti's attorney, Ronald Kent, of Los Angeles didn't immediately return a telephone call.
--------------
A Good Samaritan whose well-meaning but careless rescue effort injures an accident victim can be sued for damages, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
The court said California's shield against liability for emergency help applies only to people trying to provide medical help.
The 4-3 ruling allows a 27-year-old Los Angeles woman to go to trial in her suit against a friend who pulled her out of a wrecked car and, in the process, allegedly caused injuries that left her permanently paralyzed. The friend, Lisa Torti, said she had seen smoke and thought the car was about to explode, but other witnesses said they had seen no signs of danger.
The court majority said the law Torti cited to try to dismiss the lawsuit was intended only to encourage people to learn first aid and use it in emergencies, not to give Good Samaritans blanket immunity when they act negligently. Dissenting justices said the ruling would discourage people from trying to save lives.
The case dates from 2004, when a group of friends including Torti and Alexandra Van Horn left a bar in suburban Chatsworth (Los Angeles County) in two cars after a Halloween party.
The car in which Van Horn was a passenger went out of control and hit a light pole. Torti, in the other car, pulled Van Horn out just before emergency crews arrived to take her to the hospital, where she underwent surgery for a spinal cord injury and a lacerated liver.
Torti testified that she had carried her friend out carefully, with one arm under her legs and one behind her back. But Van Horn said Torti had grabbed her by the arm and yanked her out.
Other witnesses said Torti had set Van Horn down next to the car, despite Torti's testimony that she was worried the vehicle would blow up.
Torti sought to dismiss the suit under a 1980 state law that bars damage suits against anyone who "in good faith, and not for compensation, renders emergency care at the scene of an emergency" - even for negligent acts that injure the victim.
Although the law does not distinguish between types of emergency care, the court majority said the context shows it was meant to be limited to medical care. The law was part of a package of legislation on emergency medical services, Justice Carlos Moreno said in the majority opinion.
--------------
Source: http://www.mingpaonews.com/20081222/gaa2.htm
【明報專訊】有心臟病人在醫院門外疑 失救死亡,明愛醫院昨日為事件解畫時承認,一名心臟病人前日在醫院正門外暈倒後,其家屬即時走入醫院向一名職員求助,職員建議家屬自行致電999報警而沒 代向急症室求援,最後令該名病人在院外百米之處折騰26分鐘後才送抵醫院,經搶救後死亡。該院行政總監馬學章坦言醫院職員未有即時通知急症室是有不足之 處,但堅稱死者位處不在醫院範圍內,故有關職員「已盡了力」及「跟足指引做」。院方全程未有承認犯錯及道歉。
病人互助組織聯盟主席張德喜炮轟明愛的指引僵化,批評前線職員抱覑「少做少錯」心態辦事,病人「未入到醫院就不理,完全不能接受」。立法會衛生事務委員會主席李國麟、委員何秀蘭認為感情上,明愛這樣僵化處理在醫院門外昏倒的市民於情不合,要求食物及衛生局長周一嶽在立法會交代事件。
事發後,有輿論直指明愛「見死不救」,至昨日下午,明愛行政總監馬學章與明愛醫院急症室主管吳奎,在醫管局質 素及安全總監梁聣賢等人陪同下會見記者交代事件始末。馬學章指死者家屬在前日下午2時43分,曾走入醫院向一名女職員求助,該職員即按醫院指引,建議事主 致電999求助,而沒有通知急症室或任何醫護人員。其間,明愛一名姓韋醫生路經事發地點,發現病人已無脈搏,即時為病人急救,但急症室就沒有派醫護前往。
新指引:對面街也要報警
馬學章解釋,女職員當時在詢問處內看不到病人,加上報警時要正確說出地點、病人狀,所以當時的做法是「最正確」。他指根據醫院指引,職員面對求助事故時應叫對方致電999,但如何處理醫院範圍外的突發事故就無清晰指引給員工。明愛醫院昨晚回覆本報查詢時補充,該院10月才檢討處理有關事故的指引,若有市民在醫院外一街之隔求救,職員應建議事主報警。馬又為該職員辯護,指該職員從未遇過同類事故,事發後4分鐘發現救傷車未到,已通知消防處救護組駐該院聯絡主任,她現時受到很大壓力及困擾。
明愛醫院急症室主管吳奎解釋,當時急症室沒派員前往救援,是因為當時已知道消防處先遣急救員已到達,在急症室為接收該病人作準備會更合適。他強調,消防處先遣隊有輕便的「心臟除顫機」,可盡快救治病人,醫院大堂並沒有這類儀器,將來有可能加裝。
歸咎醫院路牌指示不足
他又將事件歸咎於醫院附近的路牌指示不足,致病人親屬去錯門口,延誤病情。馬學章表示,該處有3條道路通往急症室,「很不幸司機不知道,以為駛至醫院門口便可得到治理,其實醫院範圍內有足夠指引指示急症室位置」,但就承認醫院附近路口指示不足,將與當局檢討考慮加裝路牌。