>h wrote:

>>>>>> I believe it has to do with the VISA and MasterCard
>>>>>> pre-authorizations
>>>>>> (I'm not sure if this is still the case, but the MasterCard limit per
>>>>>> transaction was set at $75.00).

>>>>> That makes sense. (Even if using a credit card to buy gas doesn't.)

>>>> Makes more sense than ever. I get 3%% off for using the card. 3%% of
>>>> $4 gas is better than 3%% of the $1 gas I was getting when I signed up.
>>>>
>>>> Jim

>>> Not really, you (and everyone else who purchases stuff) is paying for
>>> your "rewards" because the merchant has to charge more.

>>
>> Umm, the rewards are from the credit card issuer, not the merchant. I'm a
>> merchant, and I have no idea who uses a rewards card and who doesn't.
>> Rewards don't affect merchants' costs one bit, unless the merchant is
>> also the issuer of the card (Sears, etc.)

> ...

> Jim Elbrecht wrote:

>> Terri micron.net> wrote:
>>

>>> Paul M. Eldridge wrote in
>>> news:fflr14he7qelmkd9940981fmkafhvgbibp@4ax.com:

>> -snip-

>>>> I believe it has to do with the VISA and MasterCard pre-authorizations
>>>> (I'm not sure if this is still the case, but the MasterCard limit per
>>>> transaction was set at $75.00).

>>> That makes sense. (Even if using a credit card to buy gas doesn't.)

>>
>> Makes more sense than ever. I get 3%% off for using the card. 3%% of
>> $4 gas is better than 3%% of the $1 gas I was getting when I signed up.
>>
>> Jim

> Not really, you (and everyone else who purchases stuff) is paying for your
> "rewards"...

> Jim Elbrecht wrote

>> Terri micron.net> wrote

>>> Paul M. Eldridge wrote

>>>> I believe it has to do with the VISA and MasterCard
>>>> pre-authorizations (I'm not sure if this is still the case, but
>>>> the MasterCard limit per transaction was set at $75.00).

>>> That makes sense. (Even if using a credit card to buy gas doesn't.)

>> Makes more sense than ever. I get 3%% off for using the card. 3%% of $4 gas is better than 3%% of the $1 gas I was
>> getting when I signed up.

> Not really, you (and everyone else who purchases stuff) is paying for your "rewards" because the merchant has to
> charge more.

> "George" wrote in message
> news:Hp-dnWTXFOkqd4DVnZ2dnUVZ_hCdnZ2d@comcast.com...

>> Jim Elbrecht wrote:

>>> Terri micron.net> wrote:
>>>

>>>> Paul M. Eldridge wrote in
>>>> news:fflr14he7qelmkd9940981fmkafhvgbibp@4ax.com:

>>> -snip-

>>>>> I believe it has to do with the VISA and MasterCard pre-authorizations
>>>>> (I'm not sure if this is still the case, but the MasterCard limit per
>>>>> transaction was set at $75.00).

>>>> That makes sense. (Even if using a credit card to buy gas doesn't.)

>>>
>>> Makes more sense than ever. I get 3%% off for using the card. 3%% of
>>> $4 gas is better than 3%% of the $1 gas I was getting when I signed up.
>>>
>>> Jim

>> Not really, you (and everyone else who purchases stuff) is paying for ...

>You have to mark up your prices to cover the costs of credit cards. And
>either by law in some states and typically always in your merchant
>agreement you can't offer a cash discount so all of your customers are
>paying for their "rewards". Thats one reason why I patronize the cash
>only gas station down the road from me. Better price and the megabanks
>don't get to collect another fee.

>Not really, you (and everyone else who purchases stuff) is paying for
>your "rewards" because the merchant has to charge more.

> Why are the mpg's so horrible even in small cars? I had a 1984 5
> speed stick shift Nissan Sentra wagon that got 49 mpg hiway. Why the
> heck can't they make that car today?

>> Why are the mpg's so horrible even in small cars? I had a 1984 5 speed stick shift Nissan Sentra wagon that got 49
>> mpg hiway. Why the heck can't they make that car today?

> Federal regulations adding mass and WEIGHT.

> That, and customers expect even 4-banger engines to produce 200HP or somewhere near there.

> Strip away all the excess weight, drop the cylinders to TWO OR THREE, and tune the engines for fuel economy rather
> than high horsepower and high torque. Then you will see a Nissan Sentra wagon at close to 80MPG highway. But it'll
> never happen. Not in the U.S. anyway.

> A lot of folks are "locked in" to high gas consumption because their
> commutes are long. Even with a 35 mpg car, it adds up quick. Of
> course they could "unlock" themselves, but that would be a big pain in
> the a##, involving moving closer to work (and inviting immediate
> firing or layoff), or quitting current job and getting new job closer
> to home (also a pain : new health insurance, possible loss of health
> ins for 6 months, new job might suck, etc etc)
>
> Small cars are less safe than big cars. Get whacked in a small car
> and have a llifetime of pain. No fun.

> "George" wrote in message
> news:s8idnTbng84UZIDVnZ2dnUVZ_ommnZ2d@comcast.com...

>> h wrote:

>>>>>>> I believe it has to do with the VISA and MasterCard
>>>>>>> pre-authorizations
>>>>>>> (I'm not sure if this is still the case, but the MasterCard limit per
>>>>>>> transaction was set at $75.00).

>>>>>> That makes sense. (Even if using a credit card to buy gas doesn't.)

>>>>> Makes more sense than ever. I get 3%% off for using the card. 3%% of
>>>>> $4 gas is better than 3%% of the $1 gas I was getting when I signed up.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jim

>>>> Not really, you (and everyone else who purchases stuff) is paying for
>>>> your "rewards" because the merchant has to charge more.

>>> Umm, the rewards are from the credit card issuer, not the merchant. I'm a
>>> merchant, and I have no idea who uses a rewards card and who doesn't.
>>> Rewards don't affect merchants' costs one bit, unless the merchant is
>>> also the issuer of the card (Sears, etc.)

>> You have to mark up your prices to cover the costs of credit cards. And ...