RE: Re: Re: RE: RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[authfriend]

You must have meant more than that, Share. "Overly expensive housing" is 
"unsustainable" for anyone who doesn't have an overly high income. And of 
course it doesn't matter how old you are. Nobody needs to be "convinced" of 
that, nor does anyone even need to have the point made. It's a truism.
 

  Come on, now, you can do it. Give it another try.
 
Share wrote:

 > Judy, I'm not trying to convince anybody of anything. To me my
 > point was obvious when I referred to an aging population. I think
 > overly expensive housing is unsustainable for those living on fixed
 > and low incomes. 
 

 On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 12:43 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
   Nope, that's no good either. Has nothing whatsoever to do with the subject 
at hand.
 
 What is keeping you from addressing the issue here? You must know you're not 
convincing anybody that you're even trying to deal with it. Is it fear? Are you 
afraid that if you do try to deal with it, you'll fail? Are you afraid you'll 
never understand what we're getting at? Is that why you keep tap-dancing away 
from it?
 
 One more time, here's what you said to start with:
 
 "I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as being 
unsustainable, especially for an aging population." 
 Share wrote:
 > Judy, unsustainable as in reliance on fossil fuels because we're running out 
 > of
 > them and they pollute horribly and they're expensive. 
 On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 12:04 PM, "authfriend@..."  
wrote: 
   Share, no, you're still just pulling crap out of your ass instead of dealing 
with what Emily, Ann, and I have been pointing out to you. You do not make 
yourself look clever when you do that, to the contrary. As Emily says, your 
attempts to obfuscate (including this one) are obvious. You aren't fooling 
anybody.
 
 And this isn't that hard to figure out. What will continue (or not)? If you 
can force yourself to think about that question, you may begin to see where the 
problem lies. Ann and Emily and I all gave you good hints.
 Share wrote: > Judy, another angle: to the extent that something is self 
energizing, it will be self sustaining.
 > To the extent it is self sustaining, to that extent it will continue. 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote: As 
I said, that makes no sense in this context. What "will eventually end"? 
 Share wrote:
 > Judy and Ann, I am using the word unsustainable in a very abstract yet 
 > applied
 > way. Any situation or thing or relationship that takes more energy than it
 > generates is IMO unsustainable and will eventually end. 

 
 Share wrote: 
 > Judy, when I say unsustainable I mean something that takes 
 > more energy to continue than it generates. 
 
 No, sorry, that makes no sense. The "something" that we've been talking about 
is areas with high housing costs. And remember, with the term "unsustainable," 
you were making a prediction of some sort.
 
 Now, take some time, think it through, and try to choose words that express 
what you mean rather than just grabbing them at random, throwing them together, 
and hoping they make sense.
 
 Also, try to make an observation that adds to the conversation. We all know 
it's more expensive to live on the coasts than in the interior; that isn't 
anything we need to be told.
 
 Just as a reminder, here's what you said to start with:
 
 "I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as being 
unsustainable, especially for an aging population." 
 On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:21 AM, "authfriend@..."  wrote: 
   As a "slang term," it refers to expensive neighborhoods, which wasn't what 
you were talking about. So it was even the wrong slang term.
 
 And you ignored my question as to what you meant by "unsustainable." Obviously 
the usual meaning of that term doesn't work in this context either (and no, the 
article you linked to doesn't help us here, nor would the one you read "years 
ago").
 
 So I repeat the question: Please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in 
specific terms. What do you expect to happen? 
 Share wrote: > Judy, high rent districts is a slang term and thus not meant to 
be taken literally. 
 I wrote: > > OK, so it isn't "districts," it's cities; and it isn't "high 
rent," it's high housing costs in general. > > Now that we've clarified that, 
please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in specific terms. What do you 
expect to happen?  Share wrote: > I'll do better than that, Judy. Here's a very 
cool website that> compares places cost wise. Comparing FF to Annapolis, MD> 
where my Mom lives, housing is 255% more expensive there.> 
http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5 
http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5 On 
Monday, October 14, 2013 6:11 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:   
Share wrote:  > > > John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly 
inexpensive place like> > > FF. I think of those high rent districts on the 
east and west coa

Re: Re: RE: RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[Share Long]

Judy, I'm not trying to convince anybody of anything. To me my point was 
obvious when I referred to an aging population. I think overly expensive 
housing is unsustainable for those living on fixed and low incomes. 





On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 12:43 PM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" 
 wrote:
 
  
Nope, that's no good either. Has nothing whatsoever to do with the subject at 
hand.

What is keeping you from addressing the issue here? You must know you're not 
convincing anybody that you're even trying to deal with it. Is it fear? Are you 
afraid that if you do try to deal with it, you'll fail? Are you afraid you'll 
never understand what we're getting at? Is that why you keep tap-dancing away 
from it?

One more time, here's what you said to start with:

"I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as being 
unsustainable, especially for an aging population." 

Share wrote:


> Judy, unsustainable as in reliance on fossil fuels because we're running out 
> of
> them and they pollute horribly and they're expensive. 





On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 12:04 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
  
Share, no, you're still just pulling crap out of your ass instead of dealing 
with what Emily, Ann, and I have been pointing out to you. You do not make 
yourself look clever when you do that, to the contrary. As Emily says, your 
attempts to obfuscate (including this one) are obvious. You aren't fooling 
anybody.

And this isn't that hard to figure out. What will continue (or not)? If you can 
force yourself to think about that question, you may begin to see where the 
problem lies. Ann and Emily and I all gave you good hints.

Share wrote:


> Judy, another angle: to the extent that something is self energizing, it will 
> be self sustaining.
> To the extent it is self sustaining, to that extent it will continue. 



---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:


As I said, that makes no sense in this context. What "will eventually end"? 

Share wrote:


> Judy and Ann, I am using the word unsustainable in a very abstract yet applied
 way. Any situation or thing or relationship that takes more energy than it
 generates is IMO unsustainable and will eventually end.
>>>
>>
>>
>>Share wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
 Judy, when I say unsustainable I mean something that takes 
 more energy to continue than it generates.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>No, sorry, that makes no sense. The "something" that we've been talking 
>>>about is areas with high housing costs. And remember, with the term 
>>>"unsustainable," you were making a prediction of some sort.
>>>
>>>
>>>Now, take some time, think it through, and try to choose words that express 
>>>what you mean rather than just grabbing them at random, throwing them 
>>>together, and hoping they make sense.
>>>
>>>
>>>Also, try to make an observation that adds to the conversation. We all know 
>>>it's more expensive to live on the coasts than in the interior; that isn't 
>>>anything we need to be told.
>>>
>>>
>>>Just as a reminder, here's what you said to start with:
>>>
>>>
>>>"I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as being 
>>>unsustainable, especially for an aging population."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:21 AM, "authfriend@..."  
>>>wrote:
>>> 
>>>  
>>>As a "slang term," it refers to expensive neighborhoods, which wasn't what 
>>>you were talking about. So it was even the wrong slang term.
>>>
>>>
>>>And you ignored my question as to what you meant by "unsustainable." 
>>>Obviously the usual meaning of that term doesn't work in this context either 
>>>(and no, the article you linked to doesn't help us here, nor would the one 
>>>you read "years ago").
>>>
>>>
>>>So I repeat the question: Please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in 
>>>specific terms. What do you expect to happen? 
>>>
>>>Share wrote:
>>>
>>>
 Judy, high rent districts is a slang term and thus not meant to be taken 
 literally.
>>>
>>>
>>>I wrote:
>>>
 > OK, so it isn't "districts," it's cities; and it isn't "high rent," it's 
 > high housing costs in general.
>>> > Now that we've clarified that, please explain what you mean 
>>> > by"unsustainable" in specific terms. What do you expect to happen? 
>>
>>>
>>Share wrote:
 I'll do better than
>>>that, Judy. Here's a very cool website
>>>that> compares places cost wise.
>>>Comparing FF to Annapolis, MD> where my Mom lives, housing is
>>>255% more expensive there.> 
>>>http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5
>>>
>>>
>>>On Monday, October
>>>14, 2013 6:11 PM, "authfriend@..."
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Share
>>>wrote:  
 >
 John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly
>>>inexpensive place like> > > FF. I think of
>>>those high rent
>>>districts on the east and west 

RE: Re: RE: RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[authfriend]

Nope, that's no good either. Has nothing whatsoever to do with the subject at 
hand.
 

 What is keeping you from addressing the issue here? You must know you're not 
convincing anybody that you're even trying to deal with it. Is it fear? Are you 
afraid that if you do try to deal with it, you'll fail? Are you afraid you'll 
never understand what we're getting at? Is that why you keep tap-dancing away 
from it?
 

 One more time, here's what you said to start with:
 

 "I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as being 
unsustainable, especially for an aging population." 
 
Share wrote:
 
 > Judy, unsustainable as in reliance on fossil fuels because we're running out 
 > of
 > them and they pollute horribly and they're expensive. 
 

 
 
 On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 12:04 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
   Share, no, you're still just pulling crap out of your ass instead of dealing 
with what Emily, Ann, and I have been pointing out to you. You do not make 
yourself look clever when you do that, to the contrary. As Emily says, your 
attempts to obfuscate (including this one) are obvious. You aren't fooling 
anybody.
 
 And this isn't that hard to figure out. What will continue (or not)? If you 
can force yourself to think about that question, you may begin to see where the 
problem lies. Ann and Emily and I all gave you good hints.
 Share wrote: > Judy, another angle: to the extent that something is self 
energizing, it will be self sustaining.
 > To the extent it is self sustaining, to that extent it will continue. 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote: As 
I said, that makes no sense in this context. What "will eventually end"? 
 Share wrote:
 > Judy and Ann, I am using the word unsustainable in a very abstract yet 
 > applied
 > way. Any situation or thing or relationship that takes more energy than it
 > generates is IMO unsustainable and will eventually end. 

 
 Share wrote: 
 > Judy, when I say unsustainable I mean something that takes 
 > more energy to continue than it generates. 
 
 No, sorry, that makes no sense. The "something" that we've been talking about 
is areas with high housing costs. And remember, with the term "unsustainable," 
you were making a prediction of some sort.
 
 Now, take some time, think it through, and try to choose words that express 
what you mean rather than just grabbing them at random, throwing them together, 
and hoping they make sense.
 
 Also, try to make an observation that adds to the conversation. We all know 
it's more expensive to live on the coasts than in the interior; that isn't 
anything we need to be told.
 
 Just as a reminder, here's what you said to start with:
 
 "I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as being 
unsustainable, especially for an aging population." 
 On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:21 AM, "authfriend@..."  wrote: 
   As a "slang term," it refers to expensive neighborhoods, which wasn't what 
you were talking about. So it was even the wrong slang term.
 
 And you ignored my question as to what you meant by "unsustainable." Obviously 
the usual meaning of that term doesn't work in this context either (and no, the 
article you linked to doesn't help us here, nor would the one you read "years 
ago").
 
 So I repeat the question: Please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in 
specific terms. What do you expect to happen? 
 Share wrote: > Judy, high rent districts is a slang term and thus not meant to 
be taken literally. 
 I wrote: > > OK, so it isn't "districts," it's cities; and it isn't "high 
rent," it's high housing costs in general. > > Now that we've clarified that, 
please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in specific terms. What do you 
expect to happen?  Share wrote: > I'll do better than that, Judy. Here's a very 
cool website that> compares places cost wise. Comparing FF to Annapolis, MD> 
where my Mom lives, housing is 255% more expensive there.> 
http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5 
http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5 On 
Monday, October 14, 2013 6:11 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:   
Share wrote:  > > > John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly 
inexpensive place like> > > FF. I think of those high rent districts on the 
east and west coasts as> > > being unsustainable, especially for an aging 
population.>> What, pray tell, do you mean by "high rent districts"? Give us an 
East Coast > example, please. 

 
 

 

 
 
 
 
 



 
 

 

 
 
 
 
 





 
 

 
 



 
 
 
 

Re: RE: RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[Share Long]

Judy, unsustainable as in reliance on fossil fuels because we're running out of 
them and they pollute horribly and they're expensive. 





On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 12:04 PM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" 
 wrote:
 
  
Share, no, you're still just pulling crap out of your ass instead of dealing 
with what Emily, Ann, and I have been pointing out to you. You do not make 
yourself look clever when you do that, to the contrary. As Emily says, your 
attempts to obfuscate (including this one) are obvious. You aren't fooling 
anybody.

And this isn't that hard to figure out. What will continue (or not)? If you can 
force yourself to think about that question, you may begin to see where the 
problem lies. Ann and Emily and I all gave you good hints.

Share wrote:


> Judy, another angle: to the extent that something is self energizing, it will 
> be self sustaining.
> To the extent it is self sustaining, to that extent it will continue. 



---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:


As I said, that makes no sense in this context. What "will eventually end"? 

Share wrote:


> Judy and Ann, I am using the word unsustainable in a very abstract yet applied
>>> way. Any situation or thing or relationship that takes more energy than it
>>> generates is IMO unsustainable and will eventually end.
>>
>
>
>Share wrote:
>
>
>>
>>> Judy, when I say unsustainable I mean something that takes 
>>> more energy to continue than it generates.
>>
>>
>>
>>No, sorry, that makes no sense. The "something" that we've been talking about 
>>is areas with high housing costs. And remember, with the term 
>>"unsustainable," you were making a prediction of some sort.
>>
>>
>>Now, take some time, think it through, and try to choose words that express 
>>what you mean rather than just grabbing them at random, throwing them 
>>together, and hoping they make sense.
>>
>>
>>Also, try to make an observation that adds to the conversation. We all know 
>>it's more expensive to live on the coasts than in the interior; that isn't 
>>anything we need to be told.
>>
>>
>>Just as a reminder, here's what you said to start with:
>>
>>
>>"I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as being 
>>unsustainable, especially for an aging population."
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:21 AM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
>> 
>>  
>>As a "slang term," it refers to expensive neighborhoods, which wasn't what 
>>you were talking about. So it was even the wrong slang term.
>>
>>
>>And you ignored my question as to what you meant by "unsustainable." 
>>Obviously the usual meaning of that term doesn't work in this context either 
>>(and no, the article you linked to doesn't help us here, nor would the one 
>>you read "years ago").
>>
>>
>>So I repeat the question: Please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in 
>>specific terms. What do you expect to happen? 
>>
>>Share wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Judy, high rent districts is a slang term and thus not meant to be taken 
>>> literally.
>>
>>
>>I wrote:
>>
>>> > OK, so it isn't "districts," it's cities; and it isn't "high rent," it's 
>>> > high housing costs in general.
>> > Now that we've clarified that, please explain what you mean 
>> > by"unsustainable" in specific terms. What do you expect to happen? 
>
>>
>Share wrote:
>>> I'll do better than
>>that, Judy. Here's a very cool website
>>that> compares places cost wise.
>>Comparing FF to Annapolis, MD> where my Mom lives, housing is
>>255% more expensive there.> 
>>http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5
>>
>>
>>On Monday, October
>>14, 2013 6:11 PM, "authfriend@..."
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Share
>>wrote:  
>>> >
>>> John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly
>>inexpensive place like> > > FF. I think of
>>those high rent
>>districts on the east and west coasts
>>as> > > being
>>unsustainable, especially for an aging
>>population.>> What, pray
>>tell, do you mean by "high rent districts"? Give
>>us an East Coast > example,
>>please. 
>>
>>
>>
>>

RE: RE: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[doctordumbass]

Made ya look!
  
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 Share, you replied to the wrong conversation here.  Oh yes, you know this 
don't you?  Sharester, in general, as an observation, your attempts to 
obfuscate are obvious.  Check it out!   
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 shucks, I thought Dale Evans had joined FFL and was sharing our antics with 
her hubby Roy (-:
 

 
 
 On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 10:51 AM, "emilymaenot@..."  
wrote:
 
   Share: Hint, try explaining what you meant in a way that could be 
interpreted at face value.  This..["Any situation or thing or relationship 
that takes more energy than it generates is IMO unsustainable and will 
eventually end", especially for an aging population] makes no sense whatsoever. 
 You made a pretty simple statement; you don't need to try and pretend it was 
rooted in "scientific" principle.  Just explain what you were thinking at face 
value. Smile.  
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote: 
Judy and Ann, I am using the word unsustainable in a very abstract yet applied 
way. Any situation or thing or relationship that takes more energy than it 
generates is IMO unsustainable and will eventually end. 
 On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 10:08 AM, "authfriend@..."  
wrote: 
   Share wrote:
 
 > Judy, when I say unsustainable I mean something that takes 
 > more energy to continue than it generates. 
 
 No, sorry, that makes no sense. The "something" that we've been talking about 
is areas with high housing costs. And remember, with the term "unsustainable," 
you were making a prediction of some sort.
 
 Now, take some time, think it through, and try to choose words that express 
what you mean rather than just grabbing them at random, throwing them together, 
and hoping they make sense.
 
 Also, try to make an observation that adds to the conversation. We all know 
it's more expensive to live on the coasts than in the interior; that isn't 
anything we need to be told.
 
 Just as a reminder, here's what you said to start with:
 
 "I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as being 
unsustainable, especially for an aging population." 
 On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:21 AM, "authfriend@..."  wrote: 
   As a "slang term," it refers to expensive neighborhoods, which wasn't what 
you were talking about. So it was even the wrong slang term.
 
 And you ignored my question as to what you meant by "unsustainable." Obviously 
the usual meaning of that term doesn't work in this context either (and no, the 
article you linked to doesn't help us here, nor would the one you read "years 
ago").
 
 So I repeat the question: Please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in 
specific terms. What do you expect to happen? 
 Share wrote: > Judy, high rent districts is a slang term and thus not meant to 
be taken literally. 
 I wrote: > > OK, so it isn't "districts," it's cities; and it isn't "high 
rent," it's high housing costs in general. > > Now that we've clarified that, 
please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in specific terms. What do you 
expect to happen?  Share wrote: > I'll do better than that, Judy. Here's a very 
cool website that> compares places cost wise. Comparing FF to Annapolis, MD> 
where my Mom lives, housing is 255% more expensive there.> 
http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5 
http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5 On 
Monday, October 14, 2013 6:11 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:   
Share wrote:  > > > John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly 
inexpensive place like> > > FF. I think of those high rent districts on the 
east and west coasts as> > > being unsustainable, especially for an aging 
population.>> What, pray tell, do you mean by "high rent districts"? Give us an 
East Coast > example, please. 

 
 

 

 
 
 
 
 



 
 

 

 
 
 
 
 



 
 

 
 



 
 
 
 

RE: RE: RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[authfriend]

Share, no, you're still just pulling crap out of your ass instead of dealing 
with what Emily, Ann, and I have been pointing out to you. You do not make 
yourself look clever when you do that, to the contrary. As Emily says, your 
attempts to obfuscate (including this one) are obvious. You aren't fooling 
anybody.
 

 And this isn't that hard to figure out. What will continue (or not)? If you 
can force yourself to think about that question, you may begin to see where the 
problem lies. Ann and Emily and I all gave you good hints.
 
Share wrote:

 > Judy, another angle: to the extent that something is self energizing, it 
 > will be self sustaining.
 > To the extent it is self sustaining, to that extent it will continue. 

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 As I said, that makes no sense in this context. What "will eventually end"? 
 
Share wrote:
 
 > Judy and Ann, I am using the word unsustainable in a very abstract yet 
 > applied
 > way. Any situation or thing or relationship that takes more energy than it
 > generates is IMO unsustainable and will eventually end.
 

 

 Share wrote:
 
 > Judy, when I say unsustainable I mean something that takes 
 > more energy to continue than it generates. 
 
 No, sorry, that makes no sense. The "something" that we've been talking about 
is areas with high housing costs. And remember, with the term "unsustainable," 
you were making a prediction of some sort.
 
 Now, take some time, think it through, and try to choose words that express 
what you mean rather than just grabbing them at random, throwing them together, 
and hoping they make sense.
 
 Also, try to make an observation that adds to the conversation. We all know 
it's more expensive to live on the coasts than in the interior; that isn't 
anything we need to be told.
 
 Just as a reminder, here's what you said to start with:
 
 "I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as being 
unsustainable, especially for an aging population." 
 On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:21 AM, "authfriend@..."  wrote: 
   As a "slang term," it refers to expensive neighborhoods, which wasn't what 
you were talking about. So it was even the wrong slang term.
 
 And you ignored my question as to what you meant by "unsustainable." Obviously 
the usual meaning of that term doesn't work in this context either (and no, the 
article you linked to doesn't help us here, nor would the one you read "years 
ago").
 
 So I repeat the question: Please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in 
specific terms. What do you expect to happen? 
 Share wrote: > Judy, high rent districts is a slang term and thus not meant to 
be taken literally. 
 I wrote: > > OK, so it isn't "districts," it's cities; and it isn't "high 
rent," it's high housing costs in general. > > Now that we've clarified that, 
please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in specific terms. What do you 
expect to happen?  Share wrote: > I'll do better than that, Judy. Here's a very 
cool website that> compares places cost wise. Comparing FF to Annapolis, MD> 
where my Mom lives, housing is 255% more expensive there.> 
http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5 
http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5 On 
Monday, October 14, 2013 6:11 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:   
Share wrote:  > > > John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly 
inexpensive place like> > > FF. I think of those high rent districts on the 
east and west coasts as> > > being unsustainable, especially for an aging 
population.>> What, pray tell, do you mean by "high rent districts"? Give us an 
East Coast > example, please. 

 
 

 

 
 
 
 
 



 
 

 
 



 
 
 
 

RE: RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[sharelong60]

Judy, another angle: to the extent that something is self energizing, it will 
be self sustaining. To the extent it is self sustaining, to that extent it will 
continue. 

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 As I said, that makes no sense in this context. What "will eventually end"? 
 
Share wrote:
 
 > Judy and Ann, I am using the word unsustainable in a very abstract yet 
 > applied
 > way. Any situation or thing or relationship that takes more energy than it
 > generates is IMO unsustainable and will eventually end.
 

 

 Share wrote:
 
 > Judy, when I say unsustainable I mean something that takes 
 > more energy to continue than it generates. 
 
 No, sorry, that makes no sense. The "something" that we've been talking about 
is areas with high housing costs. And remember, with the term "unsustainable," 
you were making a prediction of some sort.
 
 Now, take some time, think it through, and try to choose words that express 
what you mean rather than just grabbing them at random, throwing them together, 
and hoping they make sense.
 
 Also, try to make an observation that adds to the conversation. We all know 
it's more expensive to live on the coasts than in the interior; that isn't 
anything we need to be told.
 
 Just as a reminder, here's what you said to start with:
 
 "I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as being 
unsustainable, especially for an aging population." 
 On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:21 AM, "authfriend@..."  wrote: 
   As a "slang term," it refers to expensive neighborhoods, which wasn't what 
you were talking about. So it was even the wrong slang term.
 
 And you ignored my question as to what you meant by "unsustainable." Obviously 
the usual meaning of that term doesn't work in this context either (and no, the 
article you linked to doesn't help us here, nor would the one you read "years 
ago").
 
 So I repeat the question: Please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in 
specific terms. What do you expect to happen? 
 Share wrote: > Judy, high rent districts is a slang term and thus not meant to 
be taken literally. 
 I wrote: > > OK, so it isn't "districts," it's cities; and it isn't "high 
rent," it's high housing costs in general. > > Now that we've clarified that, 
please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in specific terms. What do you 
expect to happen?  Share wrote: > I'll do better than that, Judy. Here's a very 
cool website that> compares places cost wise. Comparing FF to Annapolis, MD> 
where my Mom lives, housing is 255% more expensive there.> 
http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5 
http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5 On 
Monday, October 14, 2013 6:11 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:   
Share wrote:  > > > John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly 
inexpensive place like> > > FF. I think of those high rent districts on the 
east and west coasts as> > > being unsustainable, especially for an aging 
population.>> What, pray tell, do you mean by "high rent districts"? Give us an 
East Coast > example, please. 

 
 

 

 
 
 
 
 



 
 

 
 



 
 
 
 

RE: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[emilymaenot]

Share, you replied to the wrong conversation here.  Oh yes, you know this don't 
you?  Sharester, in general, as an observation, your attempts to obfuscate are 
obvious.  Check it out!   
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 shucks, I thought Dale Evans had joined FFL and was sharing our antics with 
her hubby Roy (-:
 

 
 
 On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 10:51 AM, "emilymaenot@..."  
wrote:
 
   Share: Hint, try explaining what you meant in a way that could be 
interpreted at face value.  This..["Any situation or thing or relationship 
that takes more energy than it generates is IMO unsustainable and will 
eventually end", especially for an aging population] makes no sense whatsoever. 
 You made a pretty simple statement; you don't need to try and pretend it was 
rooted in "scientific" principle.  Just explain what you were thinking at face 
value. Smile.  
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote: 
Judy and Ann, I am using the word unsustainable in a very abstract yet applied 
way. Any situation or thing or relationship that takes more energy than it 
generates is IMO unsustainable and will eventually end. 
 On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 10:08 AM, "authfriend@..."  
wrote: 
   Share wrote:
 
 > Judy, when I say unsustainable I mean something that takes 
 > more energy to continue than it generates. 
 
 No, sorry, that makes no sense. The "something" that we've been talking about 
is areas with high housing costs. And remember, with the term "unsustainable," 
you were making a prediction of some sort.
 
 Now, take some time, think it through, and try to choose words that express 
what you mean rather than just grabbing them at random, throwing them together, 
and hoping they make sense.
 
 Also, try to make an observation that adds to the conversation. We all know 
it's more expensive to live on the coasts than in the interior; that isn't 
anything we need to be told.
 
 Just as a reminder, here's what you said to start with:
 
 "I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as being 
unsustainable, especially for an aging population." 
 On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:21 AM, "authfriend@..."  wrote: 
   As a "slang term," it refers to expensive neighborhoods, which wasn't what 
you were talking about. So it was even the wrong slang term.
 
 And you ignored my question as to what you meant by "unsustainable." Obviously 
the usual meaning of that term doesn't work in this context either (and no, the 
article you linked to doesn't help us here, nor would the one you read "years 
ago").
 
 So I repeat the question: Please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in 
specific terms. What do you expect to happen? 
 Share wrote: > Judy, high rent districts is a slang term and thus not meant to 
be taken literally. 
 I wrote: > > OK, so it isn't "districts," it's cities; and it isn't "high 
rent," it's high housing costs in general. > > Now that we've clarified that, 
please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in specific terms. What do you 
expect to happen?  Share wrote: > I'll do better than that, Judy. Here's a very 
cool website that> compares places cost wise. Comparing FF to Annapolis, MD> 
where my Mom lives, housing is 255% more expensive there.> 
http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5 
http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5 On 
Monday, October 14, 2013 6:11 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:   
Share wrote:  > > > John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly 
inexpensive place like> > > FF. I think of those high rent districts on the 
east and west coasts as> > > being unsustainable, especially for an aging 
population.>> What, pray tell, do you mean by "high rent districts"? Give us an 
East Coast > example, please. 

 
 

 

 
 
 
 
 



 
 

 

 
 
 
 
 



 
 

 
 



 
 
 
 

Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[Share Long]

shucks, I thought Dale Evans had joined FFL and was sharing our antics with her 
hubby Roy (-:





On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 10:51 AM, "emilymae...@yahoo.com" 
 wrote:
 
  
Share: Hint, try explaining what you meant in a way that could be interpreted 
at face value.  This..["Any situation or thing or relationship that takes 
more energy than it generates is IMO unsustainable and will eventually end", 
especially for an aging population] makes no sense whatsoever.  You made a 
pretty simple statement; you don't need to try and pretend it was rooted in 
"scientific" principle.  Just explain what you were thinking at face value. 
Smile.  


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:


Judy and Ann, I am using the word unsustainable in a very abstract yet applied 
way. Any situation or thing or relationship that takes more energy than it 
generates is IMO unsustainable and will eventually end.





On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 10:08 AM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
  
Share wrote:

> Judy, when I say unsustainable I mean something that takes 
> more energy to continue than it generates.


No, sorry, that makes no sense. The "something" that we've been talking about 
is areas with high housing costs. And remember, with the term "unsustainable," 
you were making a prediction of some sort.

Now, take some time, think it through, and try to choose words that express 
what you mean rather than just grabbing them at random, throwing them together, 
and hoping they make sense.

Also, try to make an observation that adds to the conversation. We all know 
it's more expensive to live on the coasts than in the interior; that isn't 
anything we need to be told.

Just as a reminder, here's what you said to start with:

"I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as being 
unsustainable, especially for an aging population."




On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:21 AM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
  
As a "slang term," it refers to expensive neighborhoods, which wasn't what you 
were talking about. So it was even the wrong slang term.

And you ignored my question as to what you meant by "unsustainable." Obviously 
the usual meaning of that term doesn't work in this context either (and no, the 
article you linked to doesn't help us here, nor would the one you read "years 
ago").

So I repeat the question: Please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in 
specific terms. What do you expect to happen? 

Share wrote:


> Judy, high rent districts is a slang term and thus not meant to be taken 
> literally.


I wrote:

> > OK, so it isn't "districts," it's cities; and it isn't "high rent," it's 
> > high housing costs in general.
>>> > Now that we've clarified that, please explain what you mean 
>>> > by"unsustainable" in specific terms. What do you expect to happen? 
>>
>>>
>>Share wrote:
 I'll do better than
>>>that, Judy. Here's a very cool website
>>>that> compares places cost wise.
>>>Comparing FF to Annapolis, MD> where my Mom lives, housing is
>>>255% more expensive there.> 
>>>http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5
>>>
>>>
>>>On Monday, October
>>>14, 2013 6:11 PM, "authfriend@..."
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Share
>>>wrote:  
 >
 John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly
>>>inexpensive place like> > > FF. I think of
>>>those high rent
>>>districts on the east and west coasts
>>>as> > > being
>>>unsustainable, especially for an aging
>>>population.>> What, pray
>>>tell, do you mean by "high rent districts"? Give
>>>us an East Coast > example,
>>>please. 

RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[emilymaenot]

Share: Hint, try explaining what you meant in a way that could be interpreted 
at face value.  This..["Any situation or thing or relationship that takes 
more energy than it generates is IMO unsustainable and will eventually end", 
especially for an aging population] makes no sense whatsoever.  You made a 
pretty simple statement; you don't need to try and pretend it was rooted in 
"scientific" principle.  Just explain what you were thinking at face value. 
Smile.  
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 Judy and Ann, I am using the word unsustainable in a very abstract yet applied 
way. Any situation or thing or relationship that takes more energy than it 
generates is IMO unsustainable and will eventually end.
 

 
 
 On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 10:08 AM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
   Share wrote:
 
 > Judy, when I say unsustainable I mean something that takes 
 > more energy to continue than it generates. 
 
 No, sorry, that makes no sense. The "something" that we've been talking about 
is areas with high housing costs. And remember, with the term "unsustainable," 
you were making a prediction of some sort.
 
 Now, take some time, think it through, and try to choose words that express 
what you mean rather than just grabbing them at random, throwing them together, 
and hoping they make sense.
 
 Also, try to make an observation that adds to the conversation. We all know 
it's more expensive to live on the coasts than in the interior; that isn't 
anything we need to be told.
 
 Just as a reminder, here's what you said to start with:
 
 "I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as being 
unsustainable, especially for an aging population." 
 On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:21 AM, "authfriend@..."  wrote: 
   As a "slang term," it refers to expensive neighborhoods, which wasn't what 
you were talking about. So it was even the wrong slang term.
 
 And you ignored my question as to what you meant by "unsustainable." Obviously 
the usual meaning of that term doesn't work in this context either (and no, the 
article you linked to doesn't help us here, nor would the one you read "years 
ago").
 
 So I repeat the question: Please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in 
specific terms. What do you expect to happen? 
 Share wrote: > Judy, high rent districts is a slang term and thus not meant to 
be taken literally. 
 I wrote: > > OK, so it isn't "districts," it's cities; and it isn't "high 
rent," it's high housing costs in general. > > Now that we've clarified that, 
please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in specific terms. What do you 
expect to happen?  Share wrote: > I'll do better than that, Judy. Here's a very 
cool website that> compares places cost wise. Comparing FF to Annapolis, MD> 
where my Mom lives, housing is 255% more expensive there.> 
http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5 
http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5 On 
Monday, October 14, 2013 6:11 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:   
Share wrote:  > > > John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly 
inexpensive place like> > > FF. I think of those high rent districts on the 
east and west coasts as> > > being unsustainable, especially for an aging 
population.>> What, pray tell, do you mean by "high rent districts"? Give us an 
East Coast > example, please. 

 
 

 

 
 
 
 
 



 
 

 
 



 
 
 
 

RE: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[authfriend]

As I said, that makes no sense in this context. What "will eventually end"? 
 
Share wrote:
 
 > Judy and Ann, I am using the word unsustainable in a very abstract yet 
 > applied
 > way. Any situation or thing or relationship that takes more energy than it
 > generates is IMO unsustainable and will eventually end.
 

 Share wrote:
 
 > Judy, when I say unsustainable I mean something that takes 
 > more energy to continue than it generates. 
 
 No, sorry, that makes no sense. The "something" that we've been talking about 
is areas with high housing costs. And remember, with the term "unsustainable," 
you were making a prediction of some sort.
 
 Now, take some time, think it through, and try to choose words that express 
what you mean rather than just grabbing them at random, throwing them together, 
and hoping they make sense.
 
 Also, try to make an observation that adds to the conversation. We all know 
it's more expensive to live on the coasts than in the interior; that isn't 
anything we need to be told.
 
 Just as a reminder, here's what you said to start with:
 
 "I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as being 
unsustainable, especially for an aging population." 
 On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:21 AM, "authfriend@..."  wrote: 
   As a "slang term," it refers to expensive neighborhoods, which wasn't what 
you were talking about. So it was even the wrong slang term.
 
 And you ignored my question as to what you meant by "unsustainable." Obviously 
the usual meaning of that term doesn't work in this context either (and no, the 
article you linked to doesn't help us here, nor would the one you read "years 
ago").
 
 So I repeat the question: Please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in 
specific terms. What do you expect to happen? 
 Share wrote: > Judy, high rent districts is a slang term and thus not meant to 
be taken literally. 
 I wrote: > > OK, so it isn't "districts," it's cities; and it isn't "high 
rent," it's high housing costs in general. > > Now that we've clarified that, 
please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in specific terms. What do you 
expect to happen?  Share wrote: > I'll do better than that, Judy. Here's a very 
cool website that> compares places cost wise. Comparing FF to Annapolis, MD> 
where my Mom lives, housing is 255% more expensive there.> 
http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5 
http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5 On 
Monday, October 14, 2013 6:11 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:   
Share wrote:  > > > John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly 
inexpensive place like> > > FF. I think of those high rent districts on the 
east and west coasts as> > > being unsustainable, especially for an aging 
population.>> What, pray tell, do you mean by "high rent districts"? Give us an 
East Coast > example, please. 

 
 

 

 
 
 
 
 



 
 

 
 



 
 
 
 

Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[Share Long]

Judy and Ann, I am using the word unsustainable in a very abstract yet applied 
way. Any situation or thing or relationship that takes more energy than it 
generates is IMO unsustainable and will eventually end.





On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 10:08 AM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" 
 wrote:
 
  
Share wrote:

> Judy, when I say unsustainable I mean something that takes 
> more energy to continue than it generates.


No, sorry, that makes no sense. The "something" that we've been talking about 
is areas with high housing costs. And remember, with the term "unsustainable," 
you were making a prediction of some sort.

Now, take some time, think it through, and try to choose words that express 
what you mean rather than just grabbing them at random, throwing them together, 
and hoping they make sense.

Also, try to make an observation that adds to the conversation. We all know 
it's more expensive to live on the coasts than in the interior; that isn't 
anything we need to be told.

Just as a reminder, here's what you said to start with:

"I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as being 
unsustainable, especially for an aging population."




On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:21 AM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
  
As a "slang term," it refers to expensive neighborhoods, which wasn't what you 
were talking about. So it was even the wrong slang term.

And you ignored my question as to what you meant by "unsustainable." Obviously 
the usual meaning of that term doesn't work in this context either (and no, the 
article you linked to doesn't help us here, nor would the one you read "years 
ago").

So I repeat the question: Please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in 
specific terms. What do you expect to happen? 

Share wrote:


> Judy, high rent districts is a slang term and thus not meant to be taken 
> literally.


I wrote:

> > OK, so it isn't "districts," it's cities; and it isn't "high rent," it's 
> > high housing costs in general.
>> > Now that we've clarified that, please explain what you mean 
>> > by"unsustainable" in specific terms. What do you expect to happen? 
>
>>
>Share wrote:
>>> I'll do better than
>>that, Judy. Here's a very cool website
>>that> compares places cost wise.
>>Comparing FF to Annapolis, MD> where my Mom lives, housing is
>>255% more expensive there.> 
>>http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5
>>
>>
>>On Monday, October
>>14, 2013 6:11 PM, "authfriend@..."
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Share
>>wrote:  
>>> >
>>> John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly
>>inexpensive place like> > > FF. I think of
>>those high rent
>>districts on the east and west coasts
>>as> > > being
>>unsustainable, especially for an aging
>>population.>> What, pray
>>tell, do you mean by "high rent districts"? Give
>>us an East Coast > example,
>>please. 

Re: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[Ann Woelfle Bater]

Now I am curious about this. A "high rent" district is unsustainable because it 
"takes more energy to continue than it generates"? I would have thought you 
might have meant the high cost of living in these expensive neighborhoods that 
seem to be, according to you, on the East and West Coasts of the USA were 
unsustainable because people were not going to be able to afford them soon. If 
that had been what you meant (and apparently it was not based on your post 
above) then I only would like to add that there will always be those who can 
afford expensive things. There will always be rich people who can maintain a 
lifestyle that includes multiple houses, expensive cars, expensive horses and 
lavish holidays. I really don't see the final days of expensive real estate or 
those who can afford to live there.



On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 7:33:30 AM, Share Long  
wrote:
 
  
Judy, when I say unsustainable I mean something that takes more energy to 
continue than it generates.





On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:21 AM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" 
 wrote:
 
  
As a "slang term," it refers to expensive neighborhoods, which wasn't what you 
were talking about. So it was even the wrong slang term.

And you ignored my question as to what you meant by "unsustainable." Obviously 
the usual meaning of that term doesn't work in this context either (and no, the 
article you linked to doesn't help us here, nor would the one you read "years 
ago").

So I repeat the question: Please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in 
specific terms. What do you expect to happen? 

Share wrote:


> Judy, high rent districts is a slang term and thus not meant to be taken 
> literally.


I wrote:

> > OK, so it isn't "districts," it's cities; and it isn't "high rent," it's 
> > high housing costs in general.
> > Now that we've clarified that, please explain what you mean 
> > by"unsustainable" in specific terms. What do you expect to happen? 

>
Share wrote:
>> I'll do better than
>that, Judy. Here's a very cool website
>that> compares places cost wise.
>Comparing FF to Annapolis, MD> where my Mom lives, housing is
>255% more expensive there.> 
>http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5
>
>
>On Monday, October
>14, 2013 6:11 PM, "authfriend@..."
> wrote:
>
>
> 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Share
>wrote:  
>> >
>> John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly
>inexpensive place like> > > FF. I think of
>those high rent
>districts on the east and west coasts
>as> > > being
>unsustainable, especially for an aging
>population.>> What, pray
>tell, do you mean by "high rent districts"? Give
>us an East Coast > example,
>please. 

RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[authfriend]

Share wrote:
 

 > Judy, when I say unsustainable I mean something that takes 
 > more energy to continue than it generates. 
 

 No, sorry, that makes no sense. The "something" that we've been talking about 
is areas with high housing costs. And remember, with the term "unsustainable," 
you were making a prediction of some sort.
 

 Now, take some time, think it through, and try to choose words that express 
what you mean rather than just grabbing them at random, throwing them together, 
and hoping they make sense.
 

 Also, try to make an observation that adds to the conversation. We all know 
it's more expensive to live on the coasts than in the interior; that isn't 
anything we need to be told.
 

 Just as a reminder, here's what you said to start with:
 

 "I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as being 
unsustainable, especially for an aging population."

 

 On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:21 AM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
   As a "slang term," it refers to expensive neighborhoods, which wasn't what 
you were talking about. So it was even the wrong slang term.
 
 And you ignored my question as to what you meant by "unsustainable." Obviously 
the usual meaning of that term doesn't work in this context either (and no, the 
article you linked to doesn't help us here, nor would the one you read "years 
ago").
 
 So I repeat the question: Please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in 
specific terms. What do you expect to happen? 
 Share wrote: > Judy, high rent districts is a slang term and thus not meant to 
be taken literally. 
 I wrote: > > OK, so it isn't "districts," it's cities; and it isn't "high 
rent," it's high housing costs in general. > > Now that we've clarified that, 
please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in specific terms. What do you 
expect to happen?  Share wrote: > I'll do better than that, Judy. Here's a very 
cool website that> compares places cost wise. Comparing FF to Annapolis, MD> 
where my Mom lives, housing is 255% more expensive there.> 
http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5 
http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5 On 
Monday, October 14, 2013 6:11 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:   
Share wrote:  > > > John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly 
inexpensive place like> > > FF. I think of those high rent districts on the 
east and west coasts as> > > being unsustainable, especially for an aging 
population.>> What, pray tell, do you mean by "high rent districts"? Give us an 
East Coast > example, please. 

 
 

 
 



 
 
 
 

Re: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[Share Long]

Judy, when I say unsustainable I mean something that takes more energy to 
continue than it generates.





On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 9:21 AM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" 
 wrote:
 
  
As a "slang term," it refers to expensive neighborhoods, which wasn't what you 
were talking about. So it was even the wrong slang term.

And you ignored my question as to what you meant by "unsustainable." Obviously 
the usual meaning of that term doesn't work in this context either (and no, the 
article you linked to doesn't help us here, nor would the one you read "years 
ago").

So I repeat the question: Please explain what you mean by"unsustainable" in 
specific terms. What do you expect to happen? 

Share wrote:


> Judy, high rent districts is a slang term and thus not meant to be taken 
> literally.


I wrote:

> > OK, so it isn't "districts," it's cities; and it isn't "high rent," it's 
> > high housing costs in general.
> > Now that we've clarified that, please explain what you mean 
> > by"unsustainable" in specific terms. What do you expect to happen? 

>
Share wrote:
>> I'll do better than
>that, Judy. Here's a very cool website
>that> compares places cost wise.
>Comparing FF to Annapolis, MD> where my Mom lives, housing is
>255% more expensive there.> 
>http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5
>
>
>On Monday, October
>14, 2013 6:11 PM, "authfriend@..."
> wrote:
>
>
> 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Share
>wrote:  
>> >
>> John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly
>inexpensive place like> > > FF. I think of
>those high rent
>districts on the east and west coasts
>as> > > being
>unsustainable, especially for an aging
>population.>> What, pray
>tell, do you mean by "high rent districts"? Give
>us an East Coast > example,
>please. 

Re: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[Share Long]

Judy, this isn't the article I read years ago about migration from the coasts, 
but conveys the same idea: 
http://www.newgeography.com/content/002362-moving-coast





On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 6:19 AM, Share Long  wrote:
 
Judy, high rent districts is a slang term and thus not meant to be taken 
literally.

On Mon, 10/14/13, authfri...@yahoo.com  wrote:


Subject: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the 
Debt-Ceiling Crisis
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, October 14, 2013, 8:20 PM
















 



  


    
      
      
       OK, so it isn't "districts,"
it's cities; and it isn't "high rent,"
it's high housing costs in general.
Now
that we've clarified that, please explain what you mean
by "unsustainable" in specific terms. What do you
expect to happen? 
Share wrote:
> I'll do better than
that, Judy. Here's a very cool website
that> compares places cost wise.
Comparing FF to Annapolis, MD> where my Mom lives, housing is
255% more expensive there.> 
http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5
  
  
      On Monday, October
14, 2013 6:11 PM, "authfriend@..."
 wrote:

    
 



  


    
      
      
       Share
wrote:  
> >
> John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly
inexpensive place like> > > FF. I think of
those high rent
districts on the east and west coasts
as> > > being
unsustainable, especially for an aging
population.>> What, pray
tell, do you mean by "high rent districts"? Give
us an East Coast > example,
please.
      


    
      

    
     

RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[Share Long]

Judy, high rent districts is a slang term and thus not meant to be taken 
literally.

On Mon, 10/14/13, authfri...@yahoo.com  wrote:

 Subject: RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the 
Debt-Ceiling Crisis
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Monday, October 14, 2013, 8:20 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
   
   
   OK, so it isn't "districts,"
 it's cities; and it isn't "high rent,"
 it's high housing costs in general.
 Now
 that we've clarified that, please explain what you mean
 by "unsustainable" in specific terms. What do you
 expect to happen? 
 Share wrote:
 > I'll do better than
 that, Judy. Here's a very cool website
 that> compares places cost wise.
 Comparing FF to Annapolis, MD> where my Mom lives, housing is
 255% more expensive there.> 
http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5
  
  
  On Monday, October
 14, 2013 6:11 PM, "authfriend@..."
  wrote:
 
 
  
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
   
   
   Share
 wrote:  
 > >
 > John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly
 inexpensive place like> > > FF. I think of
 those high rent
 districts on the east and west coasts
 as> > > being
 unsustainable, especially for an aging
 population.>> What, pray
 tell, do you mean by "high rent districts"? Give
 us an East Coast > example,
 please.
  
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[jr_esq]

I was living in Seattle then.  But I usually spent my Christmas in San 
Francisco to spend the holidays with my parents when they were still alive.  It 
was also my way of getting away from the cold weather.
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 Here's why:
 http://www.komonews.com/home/video/36413989.html 
http://www.komonews.com/home/video/36413989.html
 
 The next day I booked a room at the Holiday Inn because the morning of the 
20th I was to fly down to the Bay Area.  So I didn't want a follow-up storm 
(which did happen) make me miss my flight.
 
 On 10/14/2013 07:12 PM, jr_esq@... mailto:jr_esq@... wrote:
 
   Bhairitu,
 
 
 When I was living in Seattle, I noticed that a thin layer of snow would just 
about shut down the entire city.  My old boss, back then, would let us go home 
when it started to snow.  I thought that was very reasonable.  Better be safe 
than sorry.
 
 
  
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
 mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote:
 
 And when I lived in Seattle and it snowed, I and other Subaru owners were 
about the only ones on the road. Front wheel drive.  My Forester is All Wheel 
Drive but that axle costs mileage due to its weight.  I can only think of one 
time the AWD came in handy and that was turning around on a road when I had to 
go off into mud and the Forester cut right through it like it wasn't even there.
 
 
 On 10/14/2013 03:18 PM, jr_esq@... mailto:jr_esq@... wrote:
 
Share,
 
 
 We technically have four seasons over here.  But it doesn't snow over here 
during the winter--which is just fine with me.  
 
 
 When I was in Seattle, WA, I used to live on a hilly road.  During the winter, 
the road became frozen with ice.   And, I foolishly drove my car down the hill 
knowing that the car won't stop even if you put the brakes on.  Luckily, I 
never got into an accident using that maneuver.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
 mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote:
 
 John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly inexpensive place like FF. 
I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as being 
unsustainable, especially for an aging population. And I do like 4 seasons. Do 
you all have four seasons? 
 
 
 
 
 On Monday, October 14, 2013 1:50 PM, "jr_esq@..." mailto:jr_esq@... 
 mailto:jr_esq@... wrote:
 
   Share,
 
 That Zone sounds pretty cool.  Everyone is welcome to move over here.  We 
already have vastu houses in San Diego.  But I don't know of anyone who has 
built one in the northern California area. 
 ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, 
 mailto:sharelong60@... wrote: And he's going to build a yaqui 
vastu house. Maybe he and Rita will invite you over so you can sit in the Zone 
of Tranquility (-: 
 On Monday, October 14, 2013 11:18 AM, Bhairitu  
mailto:noozguru@... wrote: 
   
 Probably the best thing to happen is for the US to collapse into one big dung 
heap.  It's old and broken down.  It's suffering a bad hangover from an 
artificial boom made to steal property from the middle class.  It should break 
up into several countries with California combined with western Washington and 
Oregon one of them.  We don't get the money we pay to the feds back anyway.  
The Red states are getting our money.  Watching Jerry Brown he seems to be 
gearing up to the first Prime Minister of Ecotopia. And. we're getting 
Willy moving here! On 10/14/2013 08:20 AM, jr_esq@... mailto:jr_esq@... wrote: 
   This article shows the complicated way for this to happen.  But it appears 
that it's going to take a long time for the process to be completed.  In the 
meantime, the federal government would default on its obligations and the 
economy would collapse.
 
 IMO, the best way to solve this crisis is to toss a coin.  Head means pass a 
CR and raise the debt ceiling for one year, with Obamacare.  Tail means pass a 
CR and reaise the debt ceiling for one year, without Obamacare.
 
 
http://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-resolve-debt-ceiling-crisis-103405149--politics.html
 
http://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-resolve-debt-ceiling-crisis-103405149--politics.html
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[dmevans365]

Reminds me of the year Seattle refused to salt the roads in an effort to be 
green and create "pack"...ha ha...idealism at its finest; the potholes created 
that winter were the best ever.
 

 http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2008551284_snowcleanup23m.html  
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2008551284_snowcleanup23m.html 
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 Bhairitu,
 

 When I was living in Seattle, I noticed that a thin layer of snow would just 
about shut down the entire city.  My old boss, back then, would let us go home 
when it started to snow.  I thought that was very reasonable.  Better be safe 
than sorry.
 

  
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 And when I lived in Seattle and it snowed, I and other Subaru owners were 
about the only ones on the road. Front wheel drive.  My Forester is All Wheel 
Drive but that axle costs mileage due to its weight.  I can only think of one 
time the AWD came in handy and that was turning around on a road when I had to 
go off into mud and the Forester cut right through it like it wasn't even there.
 
 
 On 10/14/2013 03:18 PM, jr_esq@... mailto:jr_esq@... wrote:
 
Share,
 
 
 We technically have four seasons over here.  But it doesn't snow over here 
during the winter--which is just fine with me.  
 
 
 When I was in Seattle, WA, I used to live on a hilly road.  During the winter, 
the road became frozen with ice.   And, I foolishly drove my car down the hill 
knowing that the car won't stop even if you put the brakes on.  Luckily, I 
never got into an accident using that maneuver.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
 mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote:
 
 John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly inexpensive place like FF. 
I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as being 
unsustainable, especially for an aging population. And I do like 4 seasons. Do 
you all have four seasons? 
 
 
 
 
 On Monday, October 14, 2013 1:50 PM, "jr_esq@..." mailto:jr_esq@... 
 mailto:jr_esq@... wrote:
 
   Share,
 
 That Zone sounds pretty cool.  Everyone is welcome to move over here.  We 
already have vastu houses in San Diego.  But I don't know of anyone who has 
built one in the northern California area. 
 ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, 
 mailto:sharelong60@... wrote: And he's going to build a yaqui 
vastu house. Maybe he and Rita will invite you over so you can sit in the Zone 
of Tranquility (-: 
 On Monday, October 14, 2013 11:18 AM, Bhairitu  
mailto:noozguru@... wrote: 
   
 Probably the best thing to happen is for the US to collapse into one big dung 
heap.  It's old and broken down.  It's suffering a bad hangover from an 
artificial boom made to steal property from the middle class.  It should break 
up into several countries with California combined with western Washington and 
Oregon one of them.  We don't get the money we pay to the feds back anyway.  
The Red states are getting our money.  Watching Jerry Brown he seems to be 
gearing up to the first Prime Minister of Ecotopia. And. we're getting 
Willy moving here! On 10/14/2013 08:20 AM, jr_esq@... mailto:jr_esq@... wrote: 
   This article shows the complicated way for this to happen.  But it appears 
that it's going to take a long time for the process to be completed.  In the 
meantime, the federal government would default on its obligations and the 
economy would collapse.
 
 IMO, the best way to solve this crisis is to toss a coin.  Head means pass a 
CR and raise the debt ceiling for one year, with Obamacare.  Tail means pass a 
CR and reaise the debt ceiling for one year, without Obamacare.
 
 
http://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-resolve-debt-ceiling-crisis-103405149--politics.html
 
http://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-resolve-debt-ceiling-crisis-103405149--politics.html
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[Bhairitu]

Here's why:
http://www.komonews.com/home/video/36413989.html

The next day I booked a room at the Holiday Inn because the morning of 
the 20th I was to fly down to the Bay Area.  So I didn't want a 
follow-up storm (which did happen) make me miss my flight.


On 10/14/2013 07:12 PM, jr_...@yahoo.com wrote:


Bhairitu,


When I was living in Seattle, I noticed that a thin layer of snow 
would just about shut down the entire city.  My old boss, back then, 
would let us go home when it started to snow.  I thought that was very 
reasonable.  Better be safe than sorry.





---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  
wrote:


And when I lived in Seattle and it snowed, I and other Subaru owners 
were about the only ones on the road. Front wheel drive.  My Forester 
is All Wheel Drive but that axle costs mileage due to its weight.  I 
can only think of one time the AWD came in handy and that was turning 
around on a road when I had to go off into mud and the Forester cut 
right through it like it wasn't even there.



On 10/14/2013 03:18 PM, jr_esq@...  wrote:


 Share,


We technically have four seasons over here.  But it doesn't snow over 
here during the winter--which is just fine with me.



When I was in Seattle, WA, I used to live on a hilly road.  During 
the winter, the road became frozen with ice.   And, I foolishly drove 
my car down the hill knowing that the car won't stop even if you put 
the brakes on.  Luckily, I never got into an accident using that 
maneuver.






---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
, 
 
 wrote:


John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly inexpensive place 
like FF. I think of those high rent districts on the east and west 
coasts as being unsustainable, especially for an aging population. 
And I do like 4 seasons. Do you all have four seasons?




On Monday, October 14, 2013 1:50 PM, "jr_esq@..."  
  wrote:

Share,

That Zone sounds pretty cool.  Everyone is welcome to move over here. 
 We already have vastu houses in San Diego.  But I don't know of 
anyone who has built one in the northern California area.



---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com 
,  
 wrote:


And he's going to build a yaqui vastu house. Maybe he and Rita will 
invite you over so you can sit in the Zone of Tranquility(-:




On Monday, October 14, 2013 11:18 AM, Bhairitu  
 wrote:
Probably the best thing to happen is for the US to collapse into one 
big dung heap.  It's old and broken down.  It's suffering a bad 
hangover from an artificial boom made to steal property from the 
middle class. It should break up into several countries with 
California combined with western Washington and Oregon one of them.  
We don't get the money we pay to the feds back anyway. The Red states 
are getting our money. Watching Jerry Brown he seems to be gearing up 
to the first Prime Minister of Ecotopia.


And. we're getting Willy moving here!

On 10/14/2013 08:20 AM, jr_esq@...  wrote:

This article shows the complicated way for this to happen.  But it 
appears that it's going to take a long time for the process to be 
completed.  In the meantime, the federal government would default on 
its obligations and the economy would collapse.


IMO, the best way to solve this crisis is to toss a coin.  Head 
means pass a CR and raise the debt ceiling for one year, with 
Obamacare.  Tail means pass a CR and reaise the debt ceiling for one 
year, without Obamacare.


http://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-resolve-debt-ceiling-crisis-103405149--politics.html

RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[jr_esq]

Bhairitu,
 

 When I was living in Seattle, I noticed that a thin layer of snow would just 
about shut down the entire city.  My old boss, back then, would let us go home 
when it started to snow.  I thought that was very reasonable.  Better be safe 
than sorry.
 

  
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 And when I lived in Seattle and it snowed, I and other Subaru owners were 
about the only ones on the road. Front wheel drive.  My Forester is All Wheel 
Drive but that axle costs mileage due to its weight.  I can only think of one 
time the AWD came in handy and that was turning around on a road when I had to 
go off into mud and the Forester cut right through it like it wasn't even there.
 
 
 On 10/14/2013 03:18 PM, jr_esq@... mailto:jr_esq@... wrote:
 
Share,
 
 
 We technically have four seasons over here.  But it doesn't snow over here 
during the winter--which is just fine with me.  
 
 
 When I was in Seattle, WA, I used to live on a hilly road.  During the winter, 
the road became frozen with ice.   And, I foolishly drove my car down the hill 
knowing that the car won't stop even if you put the brakes on.  Luckily, I 
never got into an accident using that maneuver.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
 mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote:
 
 John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly inexpensive place like FF. 
I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as being 
unsustainable, especially for an aging population. And I do like 4 seasons. Do 
you all have four seasons? 
 
 
 
 
 On Monday, October 14, 2013 1:50 PM, "jr_esq@..." mailto:jr_esq@... 
 mailto:jr_esq@... wrote:
 
   Share,
 
 That Zone sounds pretty cool.  Everyone is welcome to move over here.  We 
already have vastu houses in San Diego.  But I don't know of anyone who has 
built one in the northern California area. 
 ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, 
 mailto:sharelong60@... wrote: And he's going to build a yaqui 
vastu house. Maybe he and Rita will invite you over so you can sit in the Zone 
of Tranquility (-: 
 On Monday, October 14, 2013 11:18 AM, Bhairitu  
mailto:noozguru@... wrote: 
   
 Probably the best thing to happen is for the US to collapse into one big dung 
heap.  It's old and broken down.  It's suffering a bad hangover from an 
artificial boom made to steal property from the middle class.  It should break 
up into several countries with California combined with western Washington and 
Oregon one of them.  We don't get the money we pay to the feds back anyway.  
The Red states are getting our money.  Watching Jerry Brown he seems to be 
gearing up to the first Prime Minister of Ecotopia. And. we're getting 
Willy moving here! On 10/14/2013 08:20 AM, jr_esq@... mailto:jr_esq@... wrote: 
   This article shows the complicated way for this to happen.  But it appears 
that it's going to take a long time for the process to be completed.  In the 
meantime, the federal government would default on its obligations and the 
economy would collapse.
 
 IMO, the best way to solve this crisis is to toss a coin.  Head means pass a 
CR and raise the debt ceiling for one year, with Obamacare.  Tail means pass a 
CR and reaise the debt ceiling for one year, without Obamacare.
 
 
http://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-resolve-debt-ceiling-crisis-103405149--politics.html
 
http://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-resolve-debt-ceiling-crisis-103405149--politics.html
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

RE: Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[authfriend]

OK, so it isn't "districts," it's cities; and it isn't "high rent," it's high 
housing costs in general.
 

 Now that we've clarified that, please explain what you mean by "unsustainable" 
in specific terms. What do you expect to happen?
 

 Share wrote:
> I'll do better than that, Judy. Here's a very cool website that
 > compares places cost wise. Comparing FF to Annapolis, MD
 > where my Mom lives, housing is 255% more expensive there.
 > http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5 

 
 
 On Monday, October 14, 2013 6:11 PM, "authfriend@..."  wrote:
 
   Share wrote: 
 > > > John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly inexpensive place 
 > > > like
 > > > FF. I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as
 > > > being unsustainable, especially for an aging population.
 >
 > What, pray tell, do you mean by "high rent districts"? Give us an East Coast 
 > example, please.
 






 
 
 
 

Re: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[Share Long]

I'll do better than that, Judy. Here's a very cool website that compares places 
cost wise. Comparing FF to Annapolis, MD where my Mom lives, housing is 255% 
more expensive there.
http://www.bestplaces.net/cost-of-living/fairfield-ia/annapolis-md/5





On Monday, October 14, 2013 6:11 PM, "authfri...@yahoo.com" 
 wrote:
 
  
Share wrote: 

> John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly inexpensive place like
> FF. I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as
> being unsustainable, especially for an aging population.

What, pray tell, do you mean by "high rent districts"? Give us an East Coast 
example, please.

RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[authfriend]

Share wrote: 
 
> John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly inexpensive place like
 > FF. I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as
 > being unsustainable, especially for an aging population.
 

 What, pray tell, do you mean by "high rent districts"? Give us an East Coast 
example, please.
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[Bhairitu]

And when I lived in Seattle and it snowed, I and other Subaru owners 
were about the only ones on the road. Front wheel drive.  My Forester is 
All Wheel Drive but that axle costs mileage due to its weight.  I can 
only think of one time the AWD came in handy and that was turning around 
on a road when I had to go off into mud and the Forester cut right 
through it like it wasn't even there.



On 10/14/2013 03:18 PM, jr_...@yahoo.com wrote:


 Share,


We technically have four seasons over here.  But it doesn't snow over 
here during the winter--which is just fine with me.



When I was in Seattle, WA, I used to live on a hilly road.  During the 
winter, the road became frozen with ice. And, I foolishly drove my car 
down the hill knowing that the car won't stop even if you put the 
brakes on.  Luckily, I never got into an accident using that maneuver.






---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  
wrote:


John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly inexpensive place 
like FF. I think of those high rent districts on the east and west 
coasts as being unsustainable, especially for an aging population. And 
I do like 4 seasons. Do you all have four seasons?




On Monday, October 14, 2013 1:50 PM, "jr_esq@..."  wrote:
Share,

That Zone sounds pretty cool.  Everyone is welcome to move over here. 
 We already have vastu houses in San Diego.  But I don't know of 
anyone who has built one in the northern California area.



---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

And he's going to build a yaqui vastu house. Maybe he and Rita will 
invite you over so you can sit in the Zone of Tranquility(-:




On Monday, October 14, 2013 11:18 AM, Bhairitu  wrote:
Probably the best thing to happen is for the US to collapse into one 
big dung heap.  It's old and broken down.  It's suffering a bad 
hangover from an artificial boom made to steal property from the 
middle class. It should break up into several countries with 
California combined with western Washington and Oregon one of them.  
We don't get the money we pay to the feds back anyway. The Red states 
are getting our money. Watching Jerry Brown he seems to be gearing up 
to the first Prime Minister of Ecotopia.


And. we're getting Willy moving here!

On 10/14/2013 08:20 AM, jr_esq@...  wrote:

This article shows the complicated way for this to happen.  But it 
appears that it's going to take a long time for the process to be 
completed.  In the meantime, the federal government would default on 
its obligations and the economy would collapse.


IMO, the best way to solve this crisis is to toss a coin.  Head means 
pass a CR and raise the debt ceiling for one year, with Obamacare. 
 Tail means pass a CR and reaise the debt ceiling for one year, 
without Obamacare.


http://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-resolve-debt-ceiling-crisis-103405149--politics.html

RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[jr_esq]

 Share,
 

 We technically have four seasons over here.  But it doesn't snow over here 
during the winter--which is just fine with me.  
 

 When I was in Seattle, WA, I used to live on a hilly road.  During the winter, 
the road became frozen with ice.   And, I foolishly drove my car down the hill 
knowing that the car won't stop even if you put the brakes on.  Luckily, I 
never got into an accident using that maneuver.
 

 

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

 John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly inexpensive place like FF. 
I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as being 
unsustainable, especially for an aging population. And I do like 4 seasons. Do 
you all have four seasons? 
 

 
 
 On Monday, October 14, 2013 1:50 PM, "jr_esq@..."  wrote:
 
   Share,
 
 That Zone sounds pretty cool.  Everyone is welcome to move over here.  We 
already have vastu houses in San Diego.  But I don't know of anyone who has 
built one in the northern California area. 
 ---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote: And he's going 
to build a yaqui vastu house. Maybe he and Rita will invite you over so you can 
sit in the Zone of Tranquility (-: 
 On Monday, October 14, 2013 11:18 AM, Bhairitu  wrote: 
   
 Probably the best thing to happen is for the US to collapse into one big dung 
heap.  It's old and broken down.  It's suffering a bad hangover from an 
artificial boom made to steal property from the middle class.  It should break 
up into several countries with California combined with western Washington and 
Oregon one of them.  We don't get the money we pay to the feds back anyway.  
The Red states are getting our money.  Watching Jerry Brown he seems to be 
gearing up to the first Prime Minister of Ecotopia. And. we're getting 
Willy moving here! On 10/14/2013 08:20 AM, jr_esq@... mailto:jr_esq@... wrote: 
   This article shows the complicated way for this to happen.  But it appears 
that it's going to take a long time for the process to be completed.  In the 
meantime, the federal government would default on its obligations and the 
economy would collapse.
 
 IMO, the best way to solve this crisis is to toss a coin.  Head means pass a 
CR and raise the debt ceiling for one year, with Obamacare.  Tail means pass a 
CR and reaise the debt ceiling for one year, without Obamacare.
 
 
http://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-resolve-debt-ceiling-crisis-103405149--politics.html
 
http://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-resolve-debt-ceiling-crisis-103405149--politics.html
 
 
 
 
 

 
 

 
 
 
 
 



 
 
 

 
 



 
 
 
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[Bhairitu]

If the US collapses then there is no Constitution nor 14th Amendment.  
No copyright laws either.


BTW, "Ecotopia" is the name of a 1970s book.  It is about a high school 
student who accidentally develops a high kilowatt solar panel and has 
energy company goons trying to steal it and assassinate here.


On 10/14/2013 11:12 AM, jr_...@yahoo.com wrote:


Ecotopia has a ring to it.  But I don't believe the 14th Amendment to 
the Constitution can allow any states from seceding from the Union.



It appears that our politicians are blinded by their own ideologies. 
 But time is running out.  The solution is really very simple. 
 They're just too blind to see.




---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

Probably the best thing to happen is for the US to collapse into one 
big dung heap.  It's old and broken down. It's suffering a bad 
hangover from an artificial boom made to steal property from the 
middle class.  It should break up into several countries with 
California combined with western Washington and Oregon one of them.  
We don't get the money we pay to the feds back anyway.  The Red states 
are getting our money. Watching Jerry Brown he seems to be gearing up 
to the first Prime Minister of Ecotopia.


And. we're getting Willy moving here!

On 10/14/2013 08:20 AM, jr_esq@...  wrote:

This article shows the complicated way for this to happen.  But it 
appears that it's going to take a long time for the process to be 
completed.  In the meantime, the federal government would default on 
its obligations and the economy would collapse.



IMO, the best way to solve this crisis is to toss a coin.  Head means 
pass a CR and raise the debt ceiling for one year, with Obamacare. 
 Tail means pass a CR and reaise the debt ceiling for one year, 
without Obamacare.


http://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-resolve-debt-ceiling-crisis-103405149--politics.html

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[Bhairitu]

Back in the 1990s I was invited to a friend's party in Berkeley.  It was 
held at his business partner's house and it was built vastu style.  I 
didn't get a chance to ask the owner about it though.


On 10/14/2013 11:27 AM, jr_...@yahoo.com wrote:


Share,


That Zone sounds pretty cool.  Everyone is welcome to move over here. 
 We already have vastu houses in San Diego.  But I don't know of 
anyone who has built one in the northern California area.




---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:

And he's going to build a yaqui vastu house. Maybe he and Rita will 
invite you over so you can sit in the Zone of Tranquility(-:




On Monday, October 14, 2013 11:18 AM, Bhairitu  wrote:
Probably the best thing to happen is for the US to collapse into one 
big dung heap.  It's old and broken down.  It's suffering a bad 
hangover from an artificial boom made to steal property from the 
middle class.  It should break up into several countries with 
California combined with western Washington and Oregon one of them.  
We don't get the money we pay to the feds back anyway.  The Red states 
are getting our money. Watching Jerry Brown he seems to be gearing up 
to the first Prime Minister of Ecotopia.


And. we're getting Willy moving here!

On 10/14/2013 08:20 AM, jr_esq@...  wrote:

This article shows the complicated way for this to happen.  But it 
appears that it's going to take a long time for the process to be 
completed.  In the meantime, the federal government would default on 
its obligations and the economy would collapse.


IMO, the best way to solve this crisis is to toss a coin.  Head means 
pass a CR and raise the debt ceiling for one year, with Obamacare. 
 Tail means pass a CR and reaise the debt ceiling for one year, 
without Obamacare.


http://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-resolve-debt-ceiling-crisis-103405149--politics.html

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: How the Supreme Court Resolve the Debt-Ceiling Crisis

[Share Long]

John, I've gotten pretty spoiled living in a fairly inexpensive place like FF. 
I think of those high rent districts on the east and west coasts as being 
unsustainable, especially for an aging population. And I do like 4 seasons. Do 
you all have four seasons? 





On Monday, October 14, 2013 1:50 PM, "jr_...@yahoo.com"  
wrote:
 
  
Share,

That Zone sounds pretty cool.  Everyone is welcome to move over here.  We 
already have vastu houses in San Diego.  But I don't know of anyone who has 
built one in the northern California area. 


---In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:


And he's going to build a yaqui vastu house. Maybe he and Rita will invite you 
over so you can sit in the Zone of Tranquility(-:





On Monday, October 14, 2013 11:18 AM, Bhairitu  wrote:
 
  
Probably the best thing to happen is for the US to collapse into one big dung 
heap.  It's old and broken down.  It's suffering a bad hangover from an 
artificial boom made to steal property from the middle class.  It should break 
up into several countries with California combined with western Washington and 
Oregon one of them.  We don't get the money we pay to the feds back anyway.  
The Red states are getting our money.  Watching Jerry Brown he seems to be 
gearing up to the first Prime Minister of Ecotopia.

And. we're getting Willy moving here!


On 10/14/2013 08:20 AM, jr_esq@... wrote:
>
  
>This article shows the complicated way for this to happen.  But it appears 
>that it's going to take a long time for the process to be completed.  In the 
>meantime, the federal government would default on its obligations and the 
>economy would collapse.
>
>
>IMO, the best way to solve this crisis is to toss a coin.  Head means pass a 
>CR and raise the debt ceiling for one year, with Obamacare.  Tail means pass a 
>CR and reaise the debt ceiling for one year, without Obamacare.
>
>
>http://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-resolve-debt-ceiling-crisis-103405149--politics.html
>