Save On Your Energy Bill and Make a Separate Donation to the Republican Party

October 1, 2012 at 11:44 am (Cost Cutting, Energy Supplier, Just Energy, Money, Savings, Trel)

We thought this was the perfect business opportunity for our readers, a majority of whom are clearly Republicans or conservatives.

I’m not very good at sales pitches, but I did want to alert my friends to a company that is willing cut commercial energy bills, by offering a free, no-hassle energy audit.  And if the business owner switches energy suppliers, they will not only see substantial savings in their energy costs, but the company will also make a sizable donation to the Republican party in that person’s name for doing so.
Below is further information on the company.  If you own a business, or if you know anybody who does and could use some cost-cutting on their energy bills, then please contact Trel at Trel@DevNewBiz.com and tell him you heard about the company from the Mental Recession.
If you know of anyone else who would benefit from such a program, please pass this along to them as well.
Here is the information…
Just Energy is a multi-billion dollar, multi-national company, which is listed on the NY Stock Exchange under JE.  They’ve been around since 1997.
 
The states are as follows : CA – FL – GA – IL – IN – MD – MA – MI – OH – PA – NJ – NY – TX (You may know a client, or two in Canada – we do the whole country)
A link to the company website – www.JustEnergy.com
 
To recap – – Just Energy separates themselves from a Broker, in that they own the majority of the energy they sell and even fund some of the projects that actually create the energy.  Furthermore, if they do in fact buy the energy versus creating it, their buying power allows them to purchase the energy years in advance, which allows them to treat it as a commodity.  Therefore, their pricing is significantly cheaper than a broker over the long run, since they can lock a price in for up to 5 years, whereas a broker makes a “vig” (up charge) over what an energy supplier, such as Just Energy, charges.  Basically, via Just Energy, the client buys it direct from the source. 
 
Important factoid – If the business/property owner states they are already in a contract – fine – we can sign them up on the spot and it goes active the day their existing contract ends.  We can sign someone up to one year prior to their contract expiration date.  Why would they want to do that?  Lock in a low rate now – power is only going up in price.
 
Important factoid – The client’s utility company never changes – the guys who own/run the infrastructure still supply the energy – Con Edison is Con Edison – National Grid is National Grid, regardless of who supplies the energy – Companies such as Con Edison and National Grid delivers the energy, regardless of who supplies it.
 
The business doesn’t have to change a thing.  Many businesses have been “Flipped” and don’t even know it… Your bill doesn’t even look different in most cases, just the supplier name changes and obviously, hopefully the rate.  No equipment/hardware changes are needed.  No hoops to jump through.
 
In order to price a contract, I need a current bill.  I do electric and gas in most areas.  If the owner has two separate bills, I’ll need both.  They can lock in for as little as a year, but energy prices are only going up, so most business choose to lock in for as long as possible.  Our prices are great – where we shine?  Locking your price in – flat rate for an extended period of time.  Locking down a flat rate could save a large company well in to the 6 figures over 5 years, depending on where they’re currently getting the energy from.  Lastly – They have a green energy service, which allows companies/organizations to purchase only green energy and offset environmental obligations.  This last service can be huge for public organizations and municipalities, or some larger corporations looking for positive PR.  Offsetting carbon credits and/or buying green energy is a big thing now, as I’m sure you’re aware of.
 
Companies and organizations that can use us – Basically any company that uses Natural Gas and/or Electric is a client : Landlords, apartment buildings, co-ops, warehouses, office buildings, malls, churches, schools, libraries, hotels, municipalities, banks, hospitals, gyms (The larger the better), to a lesser extent, but still much desired – restaurants, bars, laundry mats, dry cleaners, store fronts, etc…  In addition – Fast Food Chains… You’d be surprised how much energy a Burger King expends – furthermore, there’s a good chance that a person who owns one Burger King, may own 10. 
 
If the client supplies me with a bill, I’ll supply them with a rate – quote.  If it works for a client, great.  If not, I won’t high pressure anyone.  It either works, or it doesn’t… kind of thing.
Please contact Trel at Trel@DevNewBiz for further details, and start saving money today.
Advertisements

Permalink Leave a Comment

GOP Congressman Tells Women to Give Their Money to Democrats

March 23, 2012 at 10:00 am (Congress, Daily Kos, Democrats, Donate, Money, New York, Republicans, Richard Hanna, War on Children, War on Women, Women's Rights)

Look, we know it’s annoying to be constantly falsely accused of conducting a ‘War on Women’, but aren’t you overcompensating just a touch?

From the Huffington Post:

As the only Republican Congressman at a rally for the Equal Rights Amendment on Thursday, Rep. Richard Hanna (R-N.Y.) gave women an unexpected piece of advice: Give your money to Democrats.
“I think these are very precarious times for women, it seems. So many of your rights are under assault,” he told the crowd of mostly women. “I’ll tell you this: Contribute your money to people who speak out on your behalf, because the other side — my side — has a lot of it. And you need to send your own message. You need to remind people that you vote, you matter, and that they can’t succeed without your help.”

Hanna is a pro-choice Republican, making him a pro-abortion, government funded contraception hawk, and thusly a man in the front lines in a ‘War on Children’.

You know you’ve been marching in the lunatic parade when you garner a quote from the Daily Kos.  Kaili Joy Gray, a far-left kook who frequently refers to conservatives as ‘tea baggers’ had this to say:

“Words I never thought I’d say, but this Republican member of Congress speaks for me.”

Congratulations Richard Hanna, you speak for loons, that must make you so proud.

When HuffPost asked Hanna after the rally whether he was bucking his party by encouraging women to give their money to “the other side,” he said that he wasn’t.

“I’m trying to help [the GOP],” he said. “I think it’s the appropriate thing to do.”

If your strategy to help the GOP is to feed into the ridiculous fear-mongering being perpetuated by the left, and validating the falsehoods they constantly spew, then yea…

Permalink Leave a Comment

Video – Geithner on the Amount of Money Needed to Cover Future Obligations: "It Would Make You Uncomfortable"

March 22, 2012 at 7:00 am (Borrowing, Debt, Debt Ceiling, Money, South Carolina, Tim Geithner, Treasury Secretary, Trey Gowdy, Trillion)

More uncomfortable than we already are with the Obama economy?

Here is an exchange between Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner (The following exchange happened over a few minutes of back and forth. This is a condensed version.):

Gowdy: “If this were the last debt ceiling request you could ask for…the final one and you had to make it large enough for all current and future obligations, what would the request need to be?”
Geithner: “That I’d have to get to you in writing, I can’t do it in my head though.”
Gowdy: “How about a round number?”
Geithner: “No idea….
Gowdy: “$20 trillion?”
Geithner: “I just can’t do it in my head.”
Gowdy: “$50 trillion?”
Geithner: “I don’t know”
Gowdy: “A lot? Can we agree it would be a lot?”
Geithner: “It would be a lot. It would make you uncomfortable.”

The exchange begins at the 2:20ish mark…

Permalink Leave a Comment

Are You Kidding? Guantanamo Inmates Get New $750,000 Soccer Field

February 29, 2012 at 12:47 pm (Campaign, Election, Field, Gitmo, Guantanamo Bay, Money, Osama Bin laden, President Obama, Soccer, Waste)

Most schools don’t have nearly $1 million dollar soccer fields, but terrorists captured on the battlefield now have that luxury.

Via Fox News:

At a time of record deficits, a new soccer field for detainees at Camp 6 in Guantanamo Bay is just getting the finishing touches — at a cost of $750,000 to taxpayers.

The project was the highlight of a tour Tuesday of the detention camp for reporters at the facility covering the arraignment in a military court of Majid Khan, a former Baltimore resident and the the only legal U.S. resident on trial at Guantanamo.

The project began in April 2011 and is due to finish this spring. The detainees will now have three recreation facilities at Camp 6, which is home to “highly compliant” detainees who live in a communal setting.

The same report indicates that Obama is granting sweetheart deals to detainees, in an anxious effort to close the camp. 

Could this be another election play?  It wouldn’t be too far fetched for the President to brag about Gitmo’s closure, even though he ordered it closed one year after his first day in office.

The report reads:

Even some of President Obama’s most ardent supporters suggest the administration seems eager to close the camps and reduce the detainee population, and plea agreements with minimal jail time are a sweetheart deal for all involved.

Detainees like Usama bin Laden’s personal cook and his driver are spending less time in prison than American citizens prosecuted in federal courts on lesser charges.

Cutting deals with detainees, and providing them a plush soccer resort to play on in between their video games and cable TV.

This is appalling to say the least.

Permalink Leave a Comment

Mitt Wins, Newt Flails in Nevada

February 5, 2012 at 9:03 am (Florida, GOP, Mitt Romney, Money, Mormon, Nevada, Newt Gingrich, President Obama, Primary, Rick Santorum, Ron Paul)

Mitt Romney has now won two states in a row, the first time we’ve seen that during the GOP primaries.  It appears Gingrich will come in second, followed by Paul and then Santorum.

Via CNN:

Declaring victory in Nevada’s Republican presidential caucuses on Saturday, Mitt Romney again turned away from his GOP rivals and toward President Barack Obama.

CNN projected that Mitt Romney will win the Nevada Republican presidential caucuses based on results and entrance polling.

With 43% of the vote in, Romney held about 43% of the vote while former House Speaker Newt Gingrich had 25% and Rep. Ron Paul had 19%. Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, who had largely bypassed the state, had 12% of the vote. Those numbers were gathered from vote counters at caucus sites across the state and the state’s Republican Party.

Romney thanked supporters at his campaign headquarters in Las Vegas, telling them that, “This isn’t the first time you gave me your vote of confidence, but this time I’m going to take it to the White House,” alluding to his win in Nevada in 2008.

While it is no surprise that Romney has done well in Florida and Nevada, it is a surprise that the former Speaker of the House keeps getting baited into petty squabbling every time he seems to be making a move.  Newt is flailing right now, and he needs to stop blaming everybody and everything for his losses – including Mormons and money this time.

Hey, it’s one thing for bloggers to speculate the reasons for Gingrich’s loss in Nevada (I had mentioned previously that Nevada has a heavy Mormon population), but it’s another for Newt to analyze it in this manner.  It shows an immaturity in his campaigning – surprising for a man in the political game for most of his life – and it shows voters how he would act toward adversity in the Presidential campaign, or even as President.

At one point, Newt complained about being outspent by Romney at a rate of 5-1, and then turned around and said Romney would struggle in the general election because he’d be unable to outspend Obama at that rate.

Look within, Newt.  By that reasoning, if you can’t beat Romney because of his money, then you have even less of a chance going up against Obama.

The Other McCain writes:

Gingrich is neither helping himself nor hurting Romney with these attacks, and Romney is ignoring Newt the nuisance: “In three campaign appearances Friday, Romney did not even mention Newt Gingrich.” 

He is also dead on in this analysis:

Every candidate believes he is best qualified to defeat Obama, or else he wouldn’t be running. There are surely Republicans out there who believe that the GOP lost its best chance to beat Obama when Michele Bachmann or Rick Perry dropped out. But public doomsaying by candidates during the primary campaign is best avoided.

Gingrich has surged every time he has focused his attacks either on Obama, or Obama’s cohorts in the liberal media.  But it is disconcerting to see that Gingrich is so easily led off message every time he faces adversity.

There’s something to be said for looking Presidential.  And right now, Mitt fits the role.

Photo credit – AP via ABC News

Permalink Leave a Comment