queencitybuckeye;1518790 wrote:It makes no sense for them not to do it if the issue is "no big deal". If they mean it, they'll lead. If not, the statement is disingenuous.

To be completely honest, I wouldn't be upset if they took a deal that was a Clean CR but with Congress not getting subsidies. Mostly because I don't think it's a big deal either way and they'll be able to beat the hell out of the GOP with "they shut down the government and did all this damage for essentially nothing". Even some senior GOPers would join them in that.

I Wear Pants;1518793 wrote:And an even bigger majority agrees that it's not worth shutting the government down over ACA.

That maybe true, but it doesn't make it "ideology".

jmog;1518799 wrote:That maybe true, but it doesn't make it "ideology".

Dude...if 41% of Americans were against Obamacare the Republicans would still be going to war over it. You didn't see the Tea Party pointing to the broad public support for Gun Control and Immigration or Higher income taxes on rich people as justification for their stances during those debates did you??? No, because the pathways to citizenship, higher taxes on the rich and background checks are supported by more people than oppose Obamacare/Er Affordable Care Act/ Er wait most of the public has been intentionally misinformed on what it is...

The Tea Party are not the stewards of public opinion. They only appeal to public opinion when it appears to conform with their rigid anti-Obama stance on everything. If the public supported it...they'd just appeal to the Constitution or Freedom or something else.

When all is said and done. Subsidies for individual health insurance in functioning markets is going to be just as popular as any other middle class subsidy nad that is why they fought it so hard here...because they know it's over.

I Wear Pants;1518793 wrote:And an even bigger majority agrees that it's not worth shutting the government down over ACA.

Well, the government isn't shut down, so........

fish82;1518842 wrote:Well, the government isn't shut down, so........

Yeah ok.

BoatShoes;1518812 wrote:Dude...if 41% of Americans were against Obamacare the Republicans would still be going to war over it. You didn't see the Tea Party pointing to the broad public support for Gun Control and Immigration or Higher income taxes on rich people as justification for their stances during those debates did you??? No, because the pathways to citizenship, higher taxes on the rich and background checks are supported by more people than oppose Obamacare/Er Affordable Care Act/ Er wait most of the public has been intentionally misinformed on what it is...

The Tea Party are not the stewards of public opinion. They only appeal to public opinion when it appears to conform with their rigid anti-Obama stance on everything. If the public supported it...they'd just appeal to the Constitution or Freedom or something else.

When all is said and done. Subsidies for individual health insurance in functioning markets is going to be just as popular as any other middle class subsidy nad that is why they fought it so hard here...because they know it's over.

100% opinion. 0% fact.

Fact still remains. Americans don't want the ACA

fish82;1518842 wrote:Well, the government isn't shut down, so........

There is no FY14 funds, so what is "open" or there is working off funds left over from FY13, funds discovered through end of the year or money they hope will be appropriated.
Then again, it depends on the agency, or office.
But, just to say we aren't shutdown because 85% are there doesn't get the budget cycle or how funds are approved or how agencies actually operate.

It's funny, the whole thing is hard to explain unless you are here in it. Sounds like a cop out, but really, it is amazing how many of you here have no clue how things actually are in the area.
It is frustrating, because unless you see it everyday, it is hard to explain.

Oh, well, at least the Senate seems to be getting their act together. Whether the House agrees, we shall see. I give up on trying to guess.

jmog;1518850 wrote:100% opinion. 0% fact.

Fact still remains. Americans don't want the ACA

We get it.
But, shutting down the Government has to be one of the biggest miscalculations in a while.
Can we now shut down the Government over every little thing the opposing party disagrees?

So, let's say a deal is reached, honestly, what was accomplished?

ptown_trojans_1;1518851 wrote:There is no FY14 funds, so what is "open" or there is working off funds left over from FY13, funds discovered through end of the year or money they hope will be appropriated.
Then again, it depends on the agency, or office.
But, just to say we aren't shutdown because 85% are there doesn't get the budget cycle or how funds are approved or how agencies actually operate.

It's funny, the whole thing is hard to explain unless you are here in it. Sounds like a cop out, but really, it is amazing how many of you here have no clue how things actually are in the area.
It is frustrating, because unless you see it everyday, it is hard to explain.

Oh, well, at least the Senate seems to be getting their act together. Whether the House agrees, we shall see. I give up on trying to guess.

All this tells me is that people that budget are terrible at their jobs and ask for too much money. You could cut the federal government by 20% and most people wouldn't even know the difference.

Having worked with both government clients and private sector clients, I can tell you government clients are worthless. They really don't do anything other than puff their shirts about how important their position is; the consultant ends up doing all the work and the client ends up taking all the credit. I'm all for the sequester and continuing to trim the federal government until it's run entirely by contractors. The American people won't notice a difference in the short run and in the long run the work will be done efficiently by American's best and brightest rather than America's rejects.

sleeper;1518864 wrote:All this tells me is that people that budget are terrible at their jobs and ask for too much money. You could cut the federal government by 20% and most people wouldn't even know the difference.

Having worked with both government clients and private sector clients, I can tell you government clients are worthless. They really don't do anything other than puff their shirts about how important their position is; the consultant ends up doing all the work and the client ends up taking all the credit. I'm all for the sequester and continuing to trim the federal government until it's run entirely by contractors. The American people won't notice a difference in the short run and in the long run the work will be done efficiently by American's best and brightest rather than America's rejects.

I agree on asking for too much, and the policy of spend it or you lose it on the end of the FY is insane. That does need to change.
I won't go that far in saying they are all worthless. I work with both sides myself, and see both the good and bad on the public and private. I see examples of contracts that are too high and could be done by the Gov. and work that needs to be contracted out.

Tricky thing is sometimes private contractors can do the work at a cheaper rate, and other times where the costs skyrocket in certain projects. Most IT systems or weapons systems fall in both areas.

I think you can also cut by 20%, but I would object and say you have to do it the right way. Otherwise, you may create unintended cost rises through cutting essential services.
Funny thing is, in all this shutdown talk, what we are talking about is not even being addressed.
What a waste of an opportunity. And, I think Tom Coburn or OK has even said that.

jmog;1518850 wrote:100% opinion. 0% fact.

Fact still remains. Americans don't want the ACA

Why do Republicans oppose a path to citizenship if they're the great stewards of public opinion?

BoatShoes;1518888 wrote:Why do Republicans oppose a path to citizenship if they're the great stewards of public opinion?

Or changes to gun laws.

Funny how either side use public opinion to push their own agenda.

ptown_trojans_1;1518851 wrote:There is no FY14 funds, so what is "open" or there is working off funds left over from FY13, funds discovered through end of the year or money they hope will be appropriated.
Then again, it depends on the agency, or office.
But, just to say we aren't shutdown because 85% are there doesn't get the budget cycle or how funds are approved or how agencies actually operate.

It's funny, the whole thing is hard to explain unless you are here in it. Sounds like a cop out, but really, it is amazing how many of you here have no clue how things actually are in the area.
It is frustrating, because unless you see it everyday, it is hard to explain.

Oh, well, at least the Senate seems to be getting their act together. Whether the House agrees, we shall see. I give up on trying to guess.

So "not fully funded through the next FY" = "Shutdown?"

Different strokes, I guess.

ptown_trojans_1;1518894 wrote:Or changes to gun laws.

Funny how either side use public opinion to push their own agenda.

If we did everything according to public opinion Democrats and Republicans would be fucking furious.

fish82;1518911 wrote:So "not fully funded through the next FY" = "Shutdown?"

Different strokes, I guess.

Yeah, there is no money for new projects.

ptown_trojans_1;1518872 wrote:I agree on asking for too much, and the policy of spend it or you lose it on the end of the FY is insane. That does need to change.
I won't go that far in saying they are all worthless. I work with both sides myself, and see both the good and bad on the public and private. I see examples of contracts that are too high and could be done by the Gov. and work that needs to be contracted out.

Tricky thing is sometimes private contractors can do the work at a cheaper rate, and other times where the costs skyrocket in certain projects. Most IT systems or weapons systems fall in both areas.

I think you can also cut by 20%, but I would object and say you have to do it the right way. Otherwise, you may create unintended cost rises through cutting essential services.
Funny thing is, in all this shutdown talk, what we are talking about is not even being addressed.
What a waste of an opportunity. And, I think Tom Coburn or OK has even said that.

I agree that contractors are greedy as shit but at least you can fire a contractor. In a competitive market, those companies that bid low and then have their project costs skyrocket out of control can be kicked out indefinitely. Currently the way government works is you have people that come to work and do nothing and never get fired. Only incompetent people stick around because the rest will simply leave when a contractor comes calling with a higher salary.

I Wear Pants;1518741 wrote:Why would they? The people blame the GOP and even people in the GOP are breaking against the GOP.

Actually, I'm seeing more "they're all assholes/fire them all" views than anything else. Most of what I see is that people recognize that either side can be blamed for their part in the whole thing.

And even if you maintain that the GOP should dig its heels in, you should STILL be mad at them for their actions to contribute to the climate in which it comes to this.

I Wear Pants;1518848 wrote:Yeah ok.

Technically, isn't most of the government still running? If I have 20% of my brain removed because of some horrific accident, my brain has not shut down, I don't think. Simply less than 100% of it is functioning.

ptown_trojans_1;1518894 wrote:Or changes to gun laws.

Funny how either side use public opinion to push their own agenda.

Yeah, assumed public opinion is used far too freely, but I wonder sometimes if its mention isn't used publicly just to sway the undecided.

I Wear Pants;1518917 wrote:If we did everything according to public opinion Democrats and Republicans would be fucking furious.

And minority opinions ... or minorities in general on some issues ... will be denied at the majority's whims.

Which is exactly why we don't do that. The founders didn't want the mob ruling since the mob is fickle and not very rational much of the time.

I Wear Pants;1518948 wrote:Which is exactly why we don't do that. The founders didn't want the mob ruling since the mob is fickle and not very rational much of the time.

Oh, I agree. I was taking your point to its ultimate conclusion. It's why a pure democracy is problematic for a culture with any kind of heterogeneity, which I'd suggest that a culture as fragmented as ours certainly is.

ptown_trojans_1;1518852 wrote:We get it.
But, shutting down the Government has to be one of the biggest miscalculations in a while.
Can we now shut down the Government over every little thing the opposing party disagrees?

So, let's say a deal is reached, honestly, what was accomplished?

You are acting like it is JUST the opposing party that is disagreeing, the majority of American is disagreeing.

BoatShoes;1518888 wrote:Why do Republicans oppose a path to citizenship if they're the great stewards of public opinion?

A path to citizenship is actually supported by Republicans.
Complete 100% "free load" amnesty is not, and neither is it supported by the American citizenry.

jmog;1518972 wrote:You are acting like it is JUST the opposing party that is disagreeing, the majority of American is disagreeing.

Doesn't mean you shut down the government over it.

jmog;1518973 wrote:A path to citizenship is actually supported by Republicans.
Complete 100% "free load" amnesty is not, and neither is it supported by the American citizenry.

The Tea Party would not shut down the government over a "path to citizenship that's not freeload amnesty" because the American people support that. Instead, they cut Marco Rubio off at the knees and excommunicated him from the church of true conservatism.

I've read that as part of the deal the debt ceiling will from now on will be raises unless there are affirmative no votes to stop it rather than needing affirmative yes votes to raise it and that this was offered up by McConnell....

BoatShoes;1519004 wrote:I've read that as part of the deal the debt ceiling will from now on will be raises unless there are affirmative no votes to stop it rather than needing affirmative yes votes to raise it and that this was offered up by McConnell....

Boatshoes should be jumping for joy, infinite deficits!