http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/09/09/get-ready-experts-say-a-government-shutdown-is-likely/

Do you think it will happen this year? Originally I thought no, but from what I hear from my friends on the Hill, it is not looking good smh.

Dumb. Just dumb.

I also meant to place this in the politics forum if a mod wants to move it.

If it does my life will carry on as usual. I will not loose a wink of sleep.

I hope it happens.

So what? Nothing significant came out of the last few shutdowns, despite all the demagoguing from the Agitator-in-Chief. While it's still more political than practical on both sides of the aisle, this may be the necessary first steps to addressing tough budget decisions. For the better part of 30 years (at least), there wasn't any serious discussions about cuts and it was mostly gentlemanly disagreement over what to spend more money on.

gut;1749542 wrote:So what? Nothing significant came out of the last few shutdowns, despite all the demagoguing from the Agitator-in-Chief. While it's still more political than practical on both sides of the aisle, this may be the necessary first steps to addressing tough budget decisions. For the better part of 30 years (at least), there wasn't any serious discussions about cuts and it was mostly gentlemanly disagreement over what to spend more money on.

nothing significant happened because gov't workers were made to work without pay.

Glory Days;1749544 wrote:nothing significant happened because gov't workers were made to work without pay.

IIRC, those labelled "critical employees" had to report. My question would be why does the government have any other kind?

Glory Days;1749544 wrote:nothing significant happened because gov't workers were made to work without pay.

That was after the first week and after being guaranteed back pay.

Glory Days;1749544 wrote:nothing significant happened because gov't workers were made to work without pay.

They all got paid for their work. Every single one of them.

gut;1749542 wrote:So what? Nothing significant came out of the last few shutdowns, despite all the demagoguing from the Agitator-in-Chief. While it's still more political than practical on both sides of the aisle, this may be the necessary first steps to addressing tough budget decisions. For the better part of 30 years (at least), there wasn't any serious discussions about cuts and it was mostly gentlemanly disagreement over what to spend more money on.

We believe that to date, the shutdown has shaved at least 0.6% off of annualized fourth-quarter 2013 GDP growth, or taken $24 billion out of the economy. However, the closer we get to breaching the debt ceiling, the higher we expect the economic impact to be.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/sp-cuts-us-growth-view-2013-10#ixzz3lLGL70DC

Step 1. Engage in behavior that harms economic growth

Step 2. Blame Obummer for harm to economic growth

Step 3. Profit with 2014 election.

Step 4. Try a repeat in 2016.

queencitybuckeye;1749546 wrote:IIRC, those labelled "critical employees" had to report. My question would be why does the government have any other kind?

I have the answer. There's an absurd amount of waste in the federal government that wouldn't happen in the private sector. In some cases, you have two people doing the exact same job with slightly different titles. You also have a the contractors coming in and doing all the work for the federal government employees who do nothing but sign a piece of paper every once in a while.

Most of the federal government is just a giant jobs program that adds little to no value. You could reduce the size of the federal government by 20% tomorrow and have zero actual impacts to anything relevant and then some. The only impact would be a lot of people would lose their worthless jobs and be on the dole but they would be much cheaper for the US taxpayer on the dole.

BoatShoes;1749554 wrote:



Step 1. Engage in behavior that harms economic growth

Step 2. Blame Obummer for harm to economic growth

Step 3. Profit with 2014 election.

Step 4. Try a repeat in 2016.

Hilarious; absurd obviously, but hilarious.


Try for a moment and compute the REAL negative effects of $18 trillion in debt, half of which has come in just 7 years under obama. The massive deficit spending is decreasing the value of a dollar, crippling growth, and sucking immeasurable purchasing power out of the economy. Ultimately we will be crushed by it. The only possible answer at this point would be to eliminate 40% of federal government; sell nearly all federal government assets to pay down the debt, and operate from a zero-based budget each year, spending no more than the prior year in absolute terms, and then measuring revenues to spending and adjusting annually thereafter, never spending more than the prior year's revenues.

The idea that government spending can solve any problem has been proven world-wide to be a complete failure.

BoatShoes;1749554 wrote:



Step 1. Engage in behavior that harms economic growth

Step 2. Blame Obummer for harm to economic growth

Step 3. Profit with 2014 election.

Step 4. Try a repeat in 2016.

This and other predicted economic disasters due from lower govt spending that never happened....up next with Boatshoes - unapologetic Keynesian apologist.

I mean, it's a REALLY neat trick to shutdown the govt and SPEND MORE MONEY as a result and somehow make that money disappear from the economy...the infamous Keynesian multiplier must have a mischievous cousin.


But, yeah, continue blaming Repubs for the most disappointing recovery in over a century. Obama doesn't own that!

Imagine how much better things would be had we embarked on a private sector growth strategy instead of the obama regime's disastrous policies which have done the complete opposite and only grown government and the dependency class. The chasm between where we could be and where we are is immeasurable, and the damage likely irreversible.


We elected the enemy.

I, for one, am tired of the dysfunction and demagoguery. I can tolerate it a bit from Congress, whose members have the primary duty of representing their constituents. It is unforgivable, however, coming from the Divider in Chief, who should make some attempt at acting in the best interests of ALL Americans, and for the good of the country as a whole. That is one reason I like guys like Rubio, Kasich and Carson...those guys get the idea, that what is of primary importance is that the country move forward and in a positive direction. Moreover, while they have their own personal ideology, they are not above submitting to the will of the people.... Something the current resident of the WH refuses to do as he drives his agenda.

It bothers me, and it's a poor commentary on our electorate that Trump and Sanders, who play on the visceral emotions of people, garner so much attention and support. SMH.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3334440/posts


Government employees now outnumber manufacturing workers by 1.8 to 1.

Change we can believe in ...

BoatShoes;1749554 wrote:



Step 1. Engage in behavior that harms economic growth

Step 2. Blame Obummer for harm to economic growth

Step 3. Profit with 2014 election.

Step 4. Try a repeat in 2016.

Why wouldn't they? You people guaranteed they'd get the blame and a subsequent asskicking in 2014, and instead you got curbstomped.

If you're getting 8 YPC with the same off-tackle play, you freaking run it until the other guy stops it.

Twitter happened. Not trolls. Twitter is my first stop for nearly everything now.

like_that;1749548 wrote:That was after the first week and after being guaranteed back pay.

after the first week? I never missed a day of work during the shut down and back pay or not, any official travel that I had to do, I have to pay for....yet because of the shutdown, I wouldn't be reimbursed until it ended. so not only was I not getting paid, but I was paying to work.

gut;1749551 wrote:They all got paid for their work. Every single one of them.

just curious, how long can you go without a paycheck? because even in the private sector, people throw a bitch fit if they don't get paid.

Glory Days;1749924 wrote:so not only was I not getting paid, but I was paying to work.

deferred pay isn't remotely the same as not getting paid

Glory Days;1749924 wrote: just curious, how long can you go without a paycheck? because even in the private sector, people throw a bitch fit if they don't get paid.

Months (years, even).....I bill some clients monthly. I'm not a dipshit that lives paycheck-to-paycheck. In fact, my "transition" fund is almost 18 months...but, again, I'm not a dipshit. I used to go with a 6 month cushion, but I adjusted to reality.

And I always get paid. If timing is an issue, well that's just poor planning on my part.

gut;1749929 wrote:Months (years, even).....I bill some clients monthly. I'm not a dipshit that lives paycheck-to-paycheck. In fact, my "transition" fund is almost 18 months...but, again, I'm not a dipshit. I used to go with a 6 month cushion, but I adjusted to reality.

And I always get paid. If timing is an issue, well that's just poor planning on my part.

get the fuck over yourself. You have a job that allows you to go a year and a half without needing money. Awesome. Do you think anyone making 20,000 a year can do that? It's not about being a dipshit, dipshit.

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1749934 wrote:get the fuck over yourself. You have a job that allows you to go a year and a half without needing money. Awesome. Do you think anyone making 20,000 a year can do that? It's not about being a dipshit, dipshit.

If one lives within their means (which admittedly means living somewhere not great), one can live on and save money making $20k. Congrats on never having been poor (or you would know this).

queencitybuckeye;1749935 wrote:If one lives within their means (which admittedly means living somewhere not great), one can live on and save money making $20k. Congrats on never having been poor (or you would know this).

No one can set aside living expenses for 18 months making 20k a year. No one can set aside living expenses for 8 months making 20k a year.