Slashdot Mirror
No U.S. Government Shutdown This Week
A Reader writes "If you were hoping for a government shutdown today, you are going to be disappointed. In a last-hour cliffhanger, Democrats and Republicans managed to agree with each other enough to keep the government funded for the rest of the current fiscal year. Since the budget bill that finally passed was a compromise, no one is happy with it. So it goes. That's how things work in a representative government."
anymore.
I seriously doubt any of us have much in common with any of them.
anymore
Without a government shutdown how will the media try to frighten the general public with predictions and assumptions? I'll tell you what the 'almost' shutdown did for the economy - it gave a whole lot of 'journalists' and people who blog something to blather about. It's all about ads and page views, people.
Cancel the invasion, the government is still fully operational! It's a trap!!
There's a spot in User Info for World of Warcraft account names? Really?
However, it will be very equally applied. Congress doesn't get paid either--especially being that they're not doing their jobs anyway.
And when we shut it down, it gets shut down. That means no more bombs dropping in countries that don't need to be receiving our expensive military tech. It means no more funding for anything people depend on.
You know why this is important? So people revolt and get rid of Obama, all of the Democrats, and all of the Republicans, and all of the rest of the people who sit in Washington and twiddle their thumbs arguing over absolutely ridiculous crap all day.
It's time for change and since one man, who promised to bring it, couldn't. It's time for 300+ million of us to.
I am employed by the Federal Gov't.
The last e-mail I got on Friday was explaining how and where to file for unemployment.
That is, the gov't was telling me how to get the gov't to pay me for NOT working because the gov't couldn't afford to pay me FOR working.
Is this a great country or what!
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
This image says it all really - http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/2011-spending-trillion-cartoon.jpg. As an outsider looking in, it's obvious to me the government really needs to cut military funding. Our UK government has done. Apart from a cool info graphic on the NYT a few months back where you could pretend to make the necessary cuts yourself I've never see this mentioned anywhere else in the US media.
Jonathanjk.com
Congress has to continue being paid according to the 27th Amendment, which prevents any law that varies the pay of members from taking effect until an election takes place. This is to keep them from engaging in any shenanigans with their own pay. If you allow them to suspend their pay between elections, you can bet that they're going to use that logic to increase their pay at some point in the future.
Social Engineering Expert: Because there is no patch for stupidity.
Medicate Part D was never funded. That is $64B and growing, or probably close to a trillion dollars of deficiet spending over the next 10 years. Repeal it or fund it. Could save $30B in the current budget process.
The department of education has grown widely since 2000. End NCLB and other unfunded mandates that infringe on the states right to educate it's population. DOE in an advisory roll is fine and history tells us it can be funded without deficit spending. So cut it's budget, maybe $10b in the current budget process.
Department of homeland security has also always been funded by deficiet spending. Cut it. Return the decision making to the civil servants that actually work. The last thing we need is another administrative layer. If the Tea Party wants small governement, this is the place to start. If we want screeners and the like, put it under the other agencies and shift administrators from other less important projects. Saving in the current budget cycle may $10B.
That is our $50 in deficit spending. We could do $100B but that would require a cut to the military, which they have already said they can do because they admit they waste massive amounts of money, and a tax increase to cover war operations around the world. Ultimately Obama is going to have to do what Bush I did with Reagan tax cuts, which is to end the Bush II tax cuts. Can't do it untile 2012 budget cycle, but much of the projected deficit comes from them.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
If this isn't a strong case for term-limits, I don't know what is. The FY2011 budget took SO LONG to pass because IT WAS AN ELECTION YEAR and Americans were starting to worry about defaulting on their national debt. Are we really so stupid to believe that in a nation of 300 million people, it takes the same small group of elite warmongers to pass our laws year after year? Many congressmen have been there so long, they are rolling in their own shit. With term limits at least, there is the fresh flow of ideas every election cycle. There is also incentive to do well...with a 6x2 cycle for representatives (6 2-year terms, max) and a 2x6 cycle for senators with the requirement that they first served in the House, there is more incentive for aspiring first-time Representatives to appease their constituents (geographic, not party) so that they can "upgrade" to a Senate seat (and later, the presidency).
It's okay though. Looks like we are going to default on our debt sometime within my lifetime. There's no way out at this point. In the meantime, continue to spend, spend, spend. Let's get that new infrastructure (new bridges, roads, high-speed internet) built for the NEXT government. Maybe then we'll get it right with Term Limits.
The World is Yours.
I understand the sentiment - if people have a moral objection to abortion, they shouldn't be forced to pay for it out of their taxes. As it turns out, I have this moral objection to war, you see...
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
"That's how things work in a representative government." No, that's how things work in a schizophrenic government. Nowhere in the constitution is power over the government given to political parties. They were invented solely for overcoming slow communications and lack of education during elections. We have significantly improved both. Yet our "representatives" do not represent us at all; they vote according to who they party with rather than in the interests of their constituencies. You've heard the phrase "across the aisle." What it refers to is the fact that senators and representatives do not sit with others from their own state - they sit in two big camps of Democrats vs. Republicans. They should be forced to sit by state and to completely deny any party affiliation once they are elected. Right now most of a politician's time is spent trying to thwart the efforts of half the government. It's a wonder we get anything done at all the way this beast keeps tearing at itself.
On the one hand you take life too seriously, and on the other, you do not take playful existence seriously enough. Seth
(Rhetorical)
Nah, keep the tax cuts. Just pulverize the military. Do the whole Cardassians Left Bajor thing and we can use the pantheon of DS9 to guide us through the mess. (/Rhetorical)
No? See, that's the deadliest political trap of all, the one the Republicans built their party on - "We'll have fun giving people tax cuts and we'll make the Democrats clean up the mess!" Then the Masses don't understand why things are so tough, and they elect in more Republicans who "ease the burdens of sacrifice" with more tax cuts.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
...just come to Belgium. We have no government since 300 days and counting, 3 unhappy language communities and a shitload of compromises.
You must realize that shutting down the government is not a money-saving act. It is actually much more expensive to shut down the government than to keep it running.
Such leadership! Even if they had agreed to slash the budget by 50%, it would only take us back to the level of spending of the Clinton administration. But no, they only managed to agree to $38 billion in spending reductions - about 1% of total outlays.
With leaders like this, we just as well jump off the cliff ourselves.
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
The military industrial complex. As they are still way over funded.
US spends 47% of all world defense spending. Over 60% if you include allies spending, leaving less than 40% divided among many small and or poor countries. So what do we really need this abusive defense spending really for? Defense against what and who?
Are the personal domestic economies really such a national threat?
Or are they just a threat to the military delusions of power elitism?
The US government is based on one idea nowadays:
Government of the people by the government, for the government.
They do what they do to stay in power.
While it is true that ultimately the people DO have the ability to replace the government, in practice this would be hard to achieve- everything is set up to maintain the status quo.
And most of the Money in the US likes the status quo: they get still more money.
The largest cooperative groups in the US are the "scary people"- the religious conservatives and corporate entities that continue to make more money. The religious groups have been catered to by a large number of politicians in order to gain/retain the political clout and the corporations have funded the same politicians to continue to receive tax breaks and federal policies that allow them to make still more money.
The PEOPLE in the US are a fractured group, many of whom are so busy simply believing what the Talking Heads say (even when contradicting themselves) that they can not get past pre-conceived ideas that are not based on facts. The PEOPLE in the US are therefore unable to exert much real influence on real issues- every time we get close a topic that is truly silly will be brought up to de-focus attention from important subjects.
Our government is rarely able to accomplish anything meaningful FOR the people of the US and this will continue as long as so many citizens believe that things like gay marriage, presidential infidelity or building a physical fence along our borders are truly important agenda items.
Wake up, America.
Linux computers, watercooled, photography
Comment removed based on user account deletion
With over a $1.5 trillion deficit, congrats, you've just reduced the deficit by .025%. The coming forced austerity is going to be a lot worse than if Congress got it's head out of its ass and worked to cut the deficit.
Fixing our budget problems is easy.
1) Take a sheet of paper and divide it into two columns. Title the sheet "Budget"
2) Under the left column list all absolutely necessary for government as spelled out by the Constitution (see 10th Amendment)
3) STOP
#3 is the most important part.
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
As a Kurt Vonnegut fan, my first question was "Who died?"
Then I saw what programs were getting cut drastically, and the answer is abundantly clear: poor people and old people.
I am officially gone from
You wouldn't need taxes anywhere near 100% to fully fund all those programs and have plenty left over to pay down the debt. Currently the US pays around 25% of GDP to taxes (of all kinds). So, raise that to 50% and you double the total tax taken, at all levels. Well, last year federal tax income was about $2.16 trillion, and expenditures were about $3.46 trillion. Double $2.16 trillion and you get $4.32 trillion. That means you can fund everything and have $860 billion left over to pay down the debt.
In actuality, it could even be more because we are talking about doubling total tax liability, which includes non-federal taxes. So less federal funding would need to be given to states since they'd be taking in more.
This is not impossible, by the way, Sweden pays about 50% in GDP in taxes.
For that matter, you wouldn't even need to go that far. In 2010 SS and Medicare taxes amounted to about $860 billion. The two programs cost about $1.5 trillion. So, double the SS and Medicare tax and you have $1.7 trillion in income, enough to fund it and extra, you don't even need to mess with income tax or anything else.
Not saying that this is what should be done, that the programs should be reexamined and modified, but this bullshit of "Oh we can't fund them no matter how much we tax!" is just that: bullshit. It is completely false. It is true they are quite underfunded, but they could be fixed by raising taxes. Right now the combined tax rate is 7.65% to you and to your employer so 15.3% total. Increase that to 15.3% each, 30.6% and both programs are fully funded with money to spare at current levels.
You do realize that the GOP's budget strategy of cutting taxes on the rich and spending huge sums of money to make corporations happy left the President in a huge budget hole, even before he took office, right? Clinton was in a relatively similar situation when he took office as well, large GOP driven deficit spending.
You forget part #4: "Defending against roving bands of marauders"
And part #5: "Disposal of bodies of dead seniors"
One of the riders:
"Prohibits NASA from collaborating with China"
Systems of governance are ultimately a reflection of their society. In this particular case - that of budgetary issues & massive debt - we're talking about a society with masses of people unable to keep balanced personal budgets; generally at the forefront when it comes to rates of living on a debt, consumptionism, etc.
And revolutions tend to not promote the "best" people, but the most ruthless ones.
One that hath name thou can not otter
If you have a problem with Planned Parenthood, perhaps you should step in and build a nationwide network of clinics in poor areas providing reproductive health services to women who otherwise have no access to them.
No?
Well, perhaps we could have the government do that? It would only cost, oh, several billion dollars to build such places, and of course, cost more to run them because Planned Parenthood had a lot of donors covering costs.
No?
Oh, oh, I know. We could just stop funding them and let women die. I can't see any objection to that. At least not on the part of the Republicans.
And people wonder why poor women vote Democratic.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
Belgium has been without a NEW government following elections. Its old government is still in place even if reduced in this kind of decisions it can make. And its public services are completly uneffected. There is NO shutdown of the Belgium public service.
In contrast, the US has got a government AND has leaders in charge, who just aren't doing their job of running the fucking country and are threathing to break down basic services in order to get their pork projects signed off.
Big difference. The bullshit is the same (In Belgium nobody wants to face facts that the two-state nation is at the end of its life and in the US the two party system needs to change) but the results are very different.
To put simply: Belgium is proof that if you shoot the politicians, nobody would notice. The US is proof that politicians should be shot.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
The government can't really be affording to hand out free optional medical procedures to anybody right now. Funding for this sort of thing (amongst a million other things they shouldn't be spending on) should have been cut ages ago. It's not a moral issue at all, it's just everyone failing to see the big picture of impending doom.
Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
For all this talk of "budget savings" no politician has the guts to tackle REAL savings by cutting the stuff that will actually make a difference in the long run.
How about stopping payments to farmers to grow crops on land that is otherwise un-viable to grow those crops on?
How about spending less money on buying fancy new scanners for airports that do nothing to make airplanes safer from bad guys?
How about giving less money to the coal industry?
How about removing tax cuts and subsidies for the big end of town and making them pay their fair share?
How about spending less money on IP enforcement on behalf of the big content companies?
Oh wait, this is America where big corporations and special interests rule the day and where saying bad things about corn can get you sued for everything you own and then some.