Mmmmm

I just wanted the facts, but maybe facts are lost in opinion, no matter how well intentioned.

Sadly the rest of the world is tied to the USA economy, at the moment, and we would like informed unbiased information about what is happening.

To put it in perspective from my life, my wife's nursing home fees in Australia are affected by the American economy, so I do have a need to understand.
I cannot afford her fees, I need to move investments to manage that, sadly my ability to do that is affected by arguments in USA politics about the T party (that I have no understanding of) and Obamacare that I also do not understand, and I do not understand the links.

To put it bluntly my ability to keep my wife alive in a nursing home in Australia is linked to women being allowed contraception in the USA. I don't understand this.

I do not know why it should affect me (financially), but it does, very much so.

I almost had to cancel buying a wheelchair in Australia because some f***er in the USA has a problem with a bible passage.

Yes I'm annoyed so I will shut up.

Quote from: Cindy on October 18, 2013, 04:48:27 AM
Mmmmm

I just wanted the facts, but maybe facts are lost in opinion, no matter how well intentioned.

[...]

Sorry if this gets anyone mad. I'm trying to be as apolitical as possible.

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/faq.html

The problem is that the facts are really pretty simple, the solution is complex.

The USA is in a lot of debt for a lot of reasons. Most of it was incurred over the last ~30 years. Just over 20% of the debt is internationally sourced.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_debt_ceiling

The debt ceiling is a legislative limit on the total amount of debt the US can incur. If we hit that cap our national credit rating goes down. If there's no further way to pay debts, we default and that credit rating goes way down. These things are directly tied to the gov't shutdowns.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_federal_budget

The current deficit is about T$1. That means we go one trillion dollars into more debt per year. It is very difficult to reduce this and (currently) almost impossible for it to go negative. Reducing the budget significantly, all at once, would also have profound world economic effects.


This should be a very omni-partisan effort... but politics gets in the way.

Quote from: kabit on October 18, 2013, 06:48:55 AM
The current deficit is about T$1. That means we go one trillion dollars into more debt per year.

The U.S. pays an average of 2.4% interest on its debt of 17 trillion. Citation here ...

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101062461

It will be catastrophic for the rate to rise for us. No way could we afford say a 10% rate, that would be 1.7 trillion in interest per year.

You should factor in that the federal reserve prints 85 billion per month so that trillion we borrow is printed money, we are not being lent any actual money. Lenders do roll-over their existing debt however.

Citation here ...http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/19/federal-reserve-bond-buying_n_3467097.html

Quote from: Tessa James on October 18, 2013, 01:26:19 AM
Political theatre anyone?

Please let's not posture or OMG define someone you do not really know.  I do not tolerate misgendering or someone speaking about me with disrespect without comment.  I do not work for the democratic party but I am a member and i do work as a volunteer and unpaid elected official in several capacities for the good of my community and our constituents.  I have Pmd you to make peace but your factual misrepresentation seems personally belligerent rather than enlightening.  Anyone can have a passionate opinion but we do well not to confuse that with the facts.

The people of this community are my boss girlfriend and I never forget it.  Believe it Honey, they voted for me for the last 20 years and they can vote me out too.

And yes I last ran as Tessa James on the ballot.

Thanks for giving me a chance to plug civic engagement and being involved to make a real difference.  Be the change you want to see!

Exactly, you work for the democrats and are directly involved with their politics. You are not an apolitical source of info. I don't know why you're so offended by that, it's just the truth.

Don't send me any more creepy pm's either, "honey."

Quote from: TiffanyT on October 18, 2013, 12:12:24 PM
Exactly, you work for the democrats and are directly involved with their politics. You are not an apolitical source of info. I don't know why you're so offended by that, it's just the truth.

Don't send me any more creepy pm's either, "honey."

(No subject)
« Sent to: TiffanyT on: September 22, 2013, 01:29:47 pm » ReplyQuoteDelete
Good morning Tiffany,

I feel concerned that you may be taking our political theatre personally and want you to know I respect your admirable intellect and research on the issues at hand.  I can be opinionated and have no interest in hurting you vs trying to understand how others view the world.  I make mistakes and want to be forgiven and continue to make friends here.

My guess is that you are a strong and determined person who may have plenty of experience with sticking up for yourself?

I used to pride myself on being able to debate the people who would readily seek me out at work to argue about everything (sex, politics, religion) as I was known as something of an out liberal.

Some of that debate ended up feeling hurtful and I began to preface an engagement with a question about expectations.  "Is there anything you or I can say that will change our minds about sex, politics or religion?"  Most often the answer from them was "no way" and then we can take it a little lighter about landing figurative punches.

I would much rather be your friend and supporter in this venue.

Can we kiss and make up please?

Tessa

Tiffany beauty is, once again, in the eyes of the beholder . If you find the above PM to you "creepy" then you own that "truth" but really, opinions are not "just the truth."  Politics can be hardball but effective parliamentarians seek the common ground and the common good.
As respectful dialogue with you has failed to this point I will respect your "friendly" request.

Much like you believe you are an effective parliamentarian seeking common ground when really you're an extreme liberal political hack. Is there anything else I can help you with?

Okay, folks. I'm going to step in here, in an official capacity.

Let's try to steer away from making this more personal than it needs to be, okay? I get the strength, and difference of opinion on these matters, but... if we could try and stay on the subject of the thread rather than focusing on individual people's views of such and the people themselves.

Thanks.

~Seph.

Forgive me folds, i wasnt trying to create anu drama here.

The point was with the discrimination of tg compared to the us economy, im weighing my options as to weither or not it is safe, or as safe as it can be, to transition. As ive told others before, its difficult to choice to be yours and fight rats off for a bite of cheeseburger, then to maontain the facade and be able to survive.

Hi Gadgett,

Your initial post and comments did inspire some political and personal observations.

Opinions about the merits of transitioning in the current economic climate were varied and I trust you will set your course for your life as you best determine the need and resources available to you.  I am sure we all wish you well and will continue to support your exploration.

You as the original subject poster here are not responsible for the drama, we who write are.

I stepped away from this thread, as most every one else has, for several reasons.

It seems to me that the discourse devolved into a microcosm reflecting the sadly dysfunctional and polarized state of politics in this good ole USA and elsewhere.

Some folks offered qualified and tentative opinions and a range of ideas but it seems some were acutely aware of how angry and passionate feelings can be hurtful rather than enlightening or illuminating to a discussion.  That concern was warranted as we can see that some will confuse the messenger with the message or resort to an ad hominem approach to "win" an argument.

The effects of such name calling and anger is to stifle legitimate and important debate and sharing of ideas.  People may reasonably avoid politics as cutthroat, mean and posturing rather than the arena for robust and critical discussions of how we can best govern ourselves.  Ideally the consent of the governed is fully expressed to provide legitimate authority and direction to the governors.
Taking strongly reasoned and clear positions on the issues is helpful.  Personal attacks, cyber bullying, mischaracterizations and anger may serve to vent spleens but they can also cheapen the dialogue and greatly diminish the wider contributions that really inform a democracy.

I remain hopeful that we can do better here at Susan's Place so that more, rather than less, will freely participate.

Quote from: Gadgett on October 15, 2013, 05:23:55 AM
Not sure if this is where this belongs but if it belongs elsewhere I would request it be moved accordingly.

I don't have a link to any news article, but I wanted to ask a question to those of us in the US. With the economy going the way it is, (with taxes on the verge of skyrocketing and job security becoming even more fleeting) How do you all feel about transitioning with everything so up in the air?

Everything that's happening right now feels different than in the past. I think it's only going to get worse unfortunately. I simply don't understand how one generation can place so much debt and misery on future generations. I was so disappointed when republicans agreed to raise the debt limit. They were twelve hours from effectively a balanced budget amendment which would force us to live within our means, every generation should do that! And no, we would not have defaulted on our debt service obligations, what an absurd notion.

The current political climate has caused me to rethink transition, what it will entail and the timing of it all.

Quote from: genderhell on October 18, 2013, 01:06:11 AM
Here is my opinion about why the democrats do it ...

It is intentional.

America has a "share the wealth" immigration policy to bring in 1-2 million 3rd world people per year, set them up with free housing, food stamps, free education, and now free heath care. We are so wealthy as Americans that we feel we need to share it with the less fortunate people of the world.

Consider if amnesty is given to the estimated 10 to 30 million illegals in the USA, these people are poor and uneducated  coming from Mexico, Central and South America. The "share the wealth" immigration policy will let them bring in their families as preference is given to family members. That will add tens of millions more mostly poor, and poorly educated people.

All these people will get free housing, food stamps, free education, and now free heath care.

These people will likely be lifetime Democrats, and will likely vote Socialist once the Republican party fades, and the two party system is Democrat vs Socialist. They mostly come from socialist countries.

So, it makes sense to some to run up the debt now, so they can get enough low educated 3rd word people hooked on the freebie system, so they vote democrat now and socialist later.

Eventually America is coverted to a 3rd world [insert profanity] country like the countries these people are fleeing, and the Marxist can claim victory on another success at destroying a country (i.e., equalizing  the wealth so everyone is impoverished).

Further, the cultural Marxist can claim victory at destroying the "evil" white people though replacement of the native white population, and through promotion of inter-racial  breeding. So, race is equalized too.

80 years of "New Deal-" "Fair Deal-" and "Great Society-" type socialism has led to the formation of a permanent underclass of those who are educationally, motivationally, and economically dependent on the government.  In the antebellum era, the Democrat party was the "Slave Power."  They still are today, except than instead of whips and chains, they use public housing and food stamps.

Quote from: Jamie de la Rosa on October 27, 2013, 08:28:19 PM
80 years of "New Deal-" "Fair Deal-" and "Great Society-" type socialism has led to the formation of a permanent underclass of those who are educationally, motivationally, and economically dependent on the government.  In the antebellum era, the Democrat party was the "Slave Power."  They still are today, except than instead of whips and chains, they use public housing and food stamps.

God those welfare queens are such a drain and never contribute back. The worst of them are in lists such as these: http://projects.propublica.org/bailout/list

I really hate topics such as this. Rhetoric gets sperged on all sides of the debate (I do it too, obviously,) and feelings get hurt. While we armchair judge who is deemed to be worthy of receiving public funding real people struggle to survive with scraps. disadvantaged kids, pensioners, VA vets, etc, etc. Real people.

I wish every one of these damn posts would be locked, drawn and quartered.

To the OP.
Personal psychological issues often are not tied to economics. Of course, if the bad economy is making it impossible to transition, that could be a reality, and a real challenge.
    I can still feel like a woman and wear cute clothes without regard to the economy. I think the economy will soon crash because we're riding a bubble, a bubble created by the Fed's printing of 85 billion per month. The economy is being propped-up. Transitioning can be a priority. You cannot transition without overcoming many challenges, some economic.