What Does Government Shutdown Mean?

[Sactowndog]

Only in America could an army of federal workers who accomplish little or nothing on a good day become a political tool when they are laid off their non-essential jobs.

This statement is why this shutdown could drag on for months. The right wing of the Republican Party feels the government in shut down mode is exactly what the government should be. Therefore they have no desire to move unless they receive an extraordinary concession like killing Obamacare.

As long as Boehner sticks with the Hastert rule this wing of the Party will continue to dictate policy.

Praising with faint damnation?

Not praising or condemning just stating an opinion that this will go on a while. The Right has no motivation to Change, Obama isn't going to gut his signature political accomplishment and doesn't face the voters again, and Boehner's to interested in staying speaker to ignore the Hastert Rule. We will be lucky to avoid default.

 

[alan1]

Other than inconveniencing the public, what does it accomplish? No one is losing any pay during this period, so all we doing is paying people to do nothing. Am I missing something?

Well, yeah there are people that are losing pay. Currently, the government is running in a reduced mode to fore stall a complete shut down. On October 17th is when the Treasury Department predicts the complete depletion of funds.

Treasury taking final steps to avoid default - MJ Lee - POLITICO.com

That is the short of it.

I'm unsure how a "complete depletion of funds" can happen. Will all payroll tax deductions suddenly end? Will all businesses suddenly stop sending in tax payments?
I call BULLSHIT.
The inflow of tax revenue to the government will continue. It will come from my paycheck and yours. It will come from businesses large and small. The government has no reduced income with a shutdown, it merely has a reduced expense. BTW, that continuing income is more than enough to pay the interest on the debt, so default won't happen.

 

[Sactowndog]

Only in America could an army of federal workers who accomplish little or nothing on a good day become a political tool when they are laid off their non-essential jobs.

This statement is why this shutdown could drag on for months. The right wing of the Republican Party feels the government in shut down mode is exactly what the government should be. Therefore they have no desire to move unless they receive an extraordinary concession like killing Obamacare.

As long as Boehner sticks with the Hastert rule this wing of the Party will continue to dictate policy.

Praising with faint damnation?

Not praising or condemning just stating an opinion that this will go on a while. The Right has no motivation to Change, Obama isn't going to gut his signature political accomplishment and doesn't face the voters again, and Boehner's to interested in staying speaker to ignore the Hastert Rule. We will be lucky to avoid default.

 

[oldfart]

Only in America could an army of federal workers who accomplish little or nothing on a good day become a political tool when they are laid off their non-essential jobs.

This statement is why this shutdown could drag on for months. The right wing of the Republican Party feels the government in shut down mode is exactly what the government should be. Therefore they have no desire to move unless they receive an extraordinary concession like killing Obamacare.

As long as Boehner sticks with the Hastert rule this wing of the Party will continue to dictate policy.

Praising with faint damnation?

Did you start this thread for the purpose of having a discussion, or were you merely trolling, as explicitly prohibited by CDZ rules? You answer thoughtful comments with one liners that contribute nothing to the discussion YOU STARTED.

 

[jwoodie]

This statement is why this shutdown could drag on for months. The right wing of the Republican Party feels the government in shut down mode is exactly what the government should be. Therefore they have no desire to move unless they receive an extraordinary concession like killing Obamacare.

As long as Boehner sticks with the Hastert rule this wing of the Party will continue to dictate policy.

Praising with faint damnation?

Did you start this thread for the purpose of having a discussion, or were you merely trolling, as explicitly prohibited by CDZ rules? You answer thoughtful comments with one liners that contribute nothing to the discussion YOU STARTED.

The purpose of my comment was to inject a little high brow humor. The purpose of yours?

By the way, Congress has already agreed to pay all federal employees for their furloughed days (i.e., free paid vacation). So I guess my OP has been vindicated.

 

[FA_Q2]

It depends on what Congress decides to do.

Just a quick read of Google searches indicates that, at best, they may get paid retroactive. That can be a bit of a problem for some folks, I would think. Last I checked, landlords don't care much for retroactive rent.

In other words, we keep paying them to do nothing. Every federal credit union will advance funds to federal workers whose paychecks might be delayed.*

*Most federal workers are paid monthly, so their paychecks won't be affected unless the shutdown lasts more than 30 days.

Yeah, I am sure if your paycheck was delayed, you wouldn't be all I sure wouldn't. Seems a bit self centered a perspective.

It seems a bit ridiculous to be giving them all an additional paid vacation. Kind of a waste.

And you are still inconsistent with "Other than inconveniencing the public," then claiming they do nothing. Either they do something that results in an inconvenience when they don't, or they don't do anything and it isn't an inconvenience.

You seem to switch your perspective around at convenience, to suit your biased preconceived emotional perception. I'm just saying.

You were not just saying. You were overtly attacking character. That is a fail and you are well aware of it.

I can tell you that I am one of those that very well might see a hold on my pay and this is not the first time that has occurred. Last time I did not really care. It was another thing to joke about with the others that were at work. To put it simply, federal pay is not something that is so low that we live paycheck to paycheck. Those that are living in that manner are lost anyway as they are not managing their cash at all.

I can also state that I am against giving them a paid vacation. For those that are at work – such pay is legally mandated. For those not working, consider it time off. Honestly, I would GLADLY give up a month’s pay to get it off. In a heartbeat.

 

[FA_Q2]

Praising with faint damnation?

Did you start this thread for the purpose of having a discussion, or were you merely trolling, as explicitly prohibited by CDZ rules? You answer thoughtful comments with one liners that contribute nothing to the discussion YOU STARTED.

The purpose of my comment was to inject a little high brow humor. The purpose of yours?

By the way, Congress has already agreed to pay all federal employees for their furloughed days (i.e., free paid vacation). So I guess my OP has been vindicated.

Have they? I believe that the house has but AFAIK the senate has refused to pass the law at this time. Do you have a link?

 

[itfitzme]

In other words, we keep paying them to do nothing. Every federal credit union will advance funds to federal workers whose paychecks might be delayed.*

*Most federal workers are paid monthly, so their paychecks won't be affected unless the shutdown lasts more than 30 days.

Yeah, I am sure if your paycheck was delayed, you wouldn't be all I sure wouldn't. Seems a bit self centered a perspective.

It seems a bit ridiculous to be giving them all an additional paid vacation. Kind of a waste.

And you are still inconsistent with "Other than inconveniencing the public," then claiming they do nothing. Either they do something that results in an inconvenience when they don't, or they don't do anything and it isn't an inconvenience.

You seem to switch your perspective around at convenience, to suit your biased preconceived emotional perception. I'm just saying.

You were not just saying. You were overtly attacking character. That is a fail and you are well aware of it.

I can tell you that I am one of those that very well might see a hold on my pay and this is not the first time that has occurred. Last time I did not really care. It was another thing to joke about with the others that were at work. To put it simply, federal pay is not something that is so low that we live paycheck to paycheck. Those that are living in that manner are lost anyway as they are not managing their cash at all.

I can also state that I am against giving them a paid vacation. For those that are at work – such pay is legally mandated. For those not working, consider it time off. Honestly, I would GLADLY give up a month’s pay to get it off. In a heartbeat.

I wouldn't be so dis-respective of other people to assume that they an simply go without being paid, and to do so on a moments notice.

I'm just saying.

 

[FA_Q2]

Yeah, I am sure if your paycheck was delayed, you wouldn't be all I sure wouldn't. Seems a bit self centered a perspective.

It seems a bit ridiculous to be giving them all an additional paid vacation. Kind of a waste.

And you are still inconsistent with "Other than inconveniencing the public," then claiming they do nothing. Either they do something that results in an inconvenience when they don't, or they don't do anything and it isn't an inconvenience.

You seem to switch your perspective around at convenience, to suit your biased preconceived emotional perception. I'm just saying.

You were not just saying. You were overtly attacking character. That is a fail and you are well aware of it.

I can tell you that I am one of those that very well might see a hold on my pay and this is not the first time that has occurred. Last time I did not really care. It was another thing to joke about with the others that were at work. To put it simply, federal pay is not something that is so low that we live paycheck to paycheck. Those that are living in that manner are lost anyway as they are not managing their cash at all.

I can also state that I am against giving them a paid vacation. For those that are at work – such pay is legally mandated. For those not working, consider it time off. Honestly, I would GLADLY give up a month’s pay to get it off. In a heartbeat.

I wouldn't be so dis-respective of other people to assume that they an simply go without being paid, and to do so on a moments notice.

I'm just saying.

And you are just saying nothing. I don’t care what they think of going without pay – that is utterly irrelevant and has nothing to do with the larger debate going on.

You can just say that until you turn blue. How about we start to simply state what the actual issues are. If they have a problem with losing a month’s pay then they need to reevaluate how they manage their finances. NO ONE should ever put themselves in that position. Further, this is not a government specific event. It can happen anywhere at any company and actually happens FAR more often in the private sector than the public one. Again, for all your ‘just saying’ you have failed to make a point or respond to one made to you.

 

[Hoffstra]

many govt. services are shut down.

Veterans cannot apply for VA benefits, for example.

 

[itfitzme]

You were not just saying. You were overtly attacking character. That is a fail and you are well aware of it.

I can tell you that I am one of those that very well might see a hold on my pay and this is not the first time that has occurred. Last time I did not really care. It was another thing to joke about with the others that were at work. To put it simply, federal pay is not something that is so low that we live paycheck to paycheck. Those that are living in that manner are lost anyway as they are not managing their cash at all.

I can also state that I am against giving them a paid vacation. For those that are at work – such pay is legally mandated. For those not working, consider it time off. Honestly, I would GLADLY give up a month’s pay to get it off. In a heartbeat.

I wouldn't be so dis-respective of other people to assume that they an simply go without being paid, and to do so on a moments notice.

I'm just saying.

And you are just saying nothing. I don’t care what they think of going without pay – that is utterly irrelevant and has nothing to do with the larger debate going on.

You can just say that until you turn blue. How about we start to simply state what the actual issues are. If they have a problem with losing a month’s pay then they need to reevaluate how they manage their finances. NO ONE should ever put themselves in that position. Further, this is not a government specific event. It can happen anywhere at any company and actually happens FAR more often in the private sector than the public one. Again, for all your ‘just saying’ you have failed to make a point or respond to one made to you.

To the contrary, my point is perfectly clear. That you have some personal opinion about what other people should or should not be doing is your own personal problem.

How is, "because it happens often" a reason for doing something stupid on purpose? Maybe we should intentionally tank the economy every couple of years... after all, people should be prepared for it.

I'm just saying.