Slashdot Mirror
Slashdot Asks: How Does the US Gov't Budget Crunch Affect You?
The partial government shut-down that the U.S. is experiencing right now is about to enter its second week. Various government functions and services have been disrupted (including some web sites, whether it's a good idea or not), and lots of workers on the Federal payroll have been furloughed. But since the U.S. government is involved in so many aspects of modern American life, you don't have to work for the government to be affected by the budget politics at play. So, whether or not you work for the government in any capacity, the question we'd like to hear your answer to is this: What does the shutdown mean to you, in practical terms, whether the effects are good, bad, or indifferent?
Well, I've subjectively seen one effect -- a huge spike in the number of telemarker calls I've received in the past week, apparently due to no longer being able to report them to the DO NOT CALL registry (which is shutdown due to the gov't shutdown).
This time around, I was classified as a "mission essential" employee, so I have to work or lose my job. But I will be paid retroactively, and not until the budget is passed. So again, no pay and because I am working, no unemployment or other low income services.
My sister works at Madigan Hospital (which is part of JBLM), and is in the same situation - working with the promise of retroactive pay. If the shutdown is short, it's not a huge deal... but if it drags on, I wonder if her bank will defer her mortgage payments? Likely not...
The son of a friend is a civilian helicopter mechanic attached to the base. He isn't "essential", so he's currently not working and not bringing in income.
Long story short - it doesn't affect me directly, but it is having significant negative impact on people I care about.
#DeleteChrome
My life has been 100% the same. If I didn't hear about it, I wouldn't have noticed a difference whatsoever.
If anything this shutdown has exposed one fact, most of government is "non-essential".
Fire all of the non-essential workers!
It's affected me about as much as the sequester did. Meaning, not at all. And I work for a heavily federally regulated and subsidized industry. My best friends wife works for the the VA and she was told that she was "Critical" and would have to work without pay until the budget was passed. She suggested she felt the flu coming on and suddenly she was getting a paycheck again.
This is all for show. The government quite literally prints money. They don't need a budget, they don't need dept. All of the money they bailed out the banks with was quite literally created out of thin air. We're once again being distracted from the real news. Enjoy the show.
"Of course, I would fucking hope the average person has saved enough money to cover one month's worth of expenses just for an emergency."
ROFL. You seem to be seriously out of touch with "average". The AVERAGE person lives paycheck to paycheck and can't pay every bill every month, the AVERAGE person knows how far behind you have to be with company x before they shut off service.
Why do you Americans treat the words of your Founding Fathers like religious edict?
Dude, your security agencies' behaviour has a lot less support than the PPACA, and a lot less democratic oversight, but that's allowed to continue. Ditto for your endless wars, and ANY given opinion about abortion, marriage, taxation, private ownership (consider e.g. gun ownership and property taxes)...
If you really were a country which only did things when supported by an overwhelming majority, you'd do pretty much fuck all except have the police stop people murdering and attacking each other, and stopping people from actually coming to your country and attacking it. Slavery would also have carried on nicely. The whole "only if the overwhelming majority of people" thing is quaint fantasy.
What I find fascinating is this: In most other democracies, if the government can't pass a budget, then the legislature is dissolved and an election is called. New people are elected and they try again. Seems crazy to me that there's no framework of this in the USA - If the government is at loggerheads it's time to let the people decide via an election.
My wife and I started our 2-week vacation to all the nation parks on September 29th. We managed to get in Badlands NP and Mt. Rushmore. On October 1st, we were turned away from the gates of Yellowstone National Park -- we couldn't even drive through to the other side (2 hours) and were told we had to drive around (8+ hours). The rest of our destinations were at national parks around the west.
We drove back to Denver (our start point) and hopped a plane home. 1600 miles of driving over 4 days and we didn't even get to see the main attractions of our trip, spent over $400 in hotels, almost $150 in fuel, and another $200 changing our return flights.
Thank you, asshole government.
Oh, I get it! You seriously believe that a major world power can be run on an a-la-carte basis, in little dribs and drabs, each selected by a minority of one party in one chamber of one branch of the government. Nope. Won't work. Sorry you slept through civics class. Too bad you have such a naive, Saturday-morning-cartoon view of the way things work. I know of several banana republics that are run on that scheme -- you are, of course, free to move to one of them.
I feel the same way and I'm perilously close to a furlough situation myself. We are rapidly getting to a point where the actions of the RWNJ's and their oligarch sponsors will be tantamount to sedition. Some argue we've already passed that threshold. Many GOP members of Congress have vowed to "dismantle" the Federal government. They are the new Confederacy, and the actions they are taking with this GOP shutdown are entirely consistent with their words and previous deeds — in fact, they have no incentive to stop because it is what they have promised to do. They are gleeful to see the government fail, and don't care if that means our Democracy fails too. They certainly don't believe in majority rule, and that is a bedrock principle of democracy. I don't know how to stop them, or what legal methods are available to the President or other elected officials. I fear the worst. Good luck to you. I'll see you at the barricades.
There's no sense in being precise when you don't even know what you're talking about. -- John von Neumann
It's interesting to watch this from the outside. I don't quite understand how you got into this situation. In Australia, if the Senate blocks supply of funding for the government to run, that triggers a double dissolution of parliament. At that point, a general election of both the Upper and Lower houses of the Government is triggered. All seats are open. The public then gets to vote on which idiots we want to run the country. Generally, the voters side against the politicians that caused the mess in the first place. So it rarely gets to this point.
No no no no! They had 7 months to work out the differences between the House and Senate versions of the budget that BOTH groups passed. 18 times the Senate tried to get a committee together to work on those differences. 18 times the HOUSE refused to appoint anyone to do so. Now that the shit has hit the fan the HOSUE says sure we'll talk so long as the health care plan is axed, the president said "eat shit".
Lets be VERY clear here - the HOUSE has a bill that would fund the entire Govt sitting on their desk. All that has to be done, because the majority over there has agreed to pass it, is put it up for a VOTE. Boner the Repub leader REFUSES to do so.
Lay the blame where it belongs - on a MINORITY of Republican asshats in the House being led by Bahner aka Boner. Yes, I WILL remember this come election time - no doubt!
here's a refresher on the process for you http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFroMQlKiag
what you see is the republican party making a last ditch desperate move on something they already lost over a dozen times in order to seem releveant while their entire party is busy eating its own soul from the inside out.
its quite pathetic that they are in such a circle jerk internal struggle to even give the liberal's this much influence
Actually they do have the votes to take ACA out of the continuing resolution, since there is no point in passing a budget right now (the Senate won't vote on a budget as long as the Democrats control it). The problem is the Senate won't pass such a continuing resolution. Of course, since the Senate can't initiate a spending bill (as the Constitutional provision on revenue bills is currently interpreted), they can't do anything about it.
And yes it does feel like the final days of the Roman Republic. Of course, I was thinking more along the lines of Julius Obama myself. After all, when the President unilaterally suspends portions of a law that he himself pushed for, it makes you wonder if there is any point to Congress anymore.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Actually, yes, through a quirk of the Constitution the clowns in D.C. are indeed getting paid.The 27th Amendment prohibits changes to Congressional salaries from taking effect until the next election. The original intent was to keep Congress from voting itself a raise, but according to some legal experts it means we can't stop paying them either.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
What you are seeing is the liberal's strategy for staying in power. Get as many people as possible dependent on the government. Then nobody dare oppose them or they will threaten to take away the government teat like what is happening right now. Obamacare is their attempt to get the majority of the population dependent on government for medical care. Imagine the power they will wield when they can threaten to shut down the government and take away your health care.
It's a lot more likely that you will get fired and lose your Medicare coverage, than it is for the government to turn tyrannical and stop providing health care funding. I'm Canadian. Our public health care provides me with peace of mind. It's like employment insurance - you never know when you're going to need it. I'm 31 and probably won't need it for another 40 years, and yes, it's a waste of money until I do. But I wouldn't give it up for anything. There are a few advantages: first, there is no upper limit on how much treatment you get - whereas with insurance-based systems often you are only insured up to a certain amount. Second, there are no co-payments; getting sick won't bankrupt me. Third, I don't have to worry about paying for sick relatives - I know people in the USA who have lost everything paying for treatment for sick family members and friends. Our health care system has some problems (e.g. long wait times in some areas, high cost), but I would take it over a private system any day.
That's because it's not in the Constitution, much like the Hastert rule which Boehner claims is causing the impasse. The difference is, the House holding the power of the purse is an old and established tradition, whereas the Hastert rule is just some crap that's been disowned by its namer.
Like a lot of government-in-practice, the House holding the purse strings is just something that's accrued over time. Budgets originate in the House. That's what they do, one of their major functions in modern American politics. It grants them a lever against the Senate and the Executive branch, either of which would otherwise outclass them.
The Senate could come up with their own budget and try to pass it, but that would simply never happen - no one in the House would ever vote for a budget that originated in the Senate, because it would be basically agreeing to let the Senate steal some power from them.
It seems to me that Republicans overlook many aspects of the health care plan being enacted are design features created in response to Republican criticisms.
The system that is being enacted is not single payer, it doesn't end the business deductibility of health insurance for employees, it is not a socialistic giveaway, it isn't a state system like Canada or Britain. All of these "isn'ts" reflect decades of Republican and political conservative editorializing and theory spinning.
The fact is that health care expenses have been destroying American families for decades and this proposal is going to slow down the destruction of American families by medical bills.
What I would like to see is Republicans start paying attention to the two big individual American problems. Your average American is in debt most of his or her adult life and your average American is a petroleum slave obligated to burn typically 1 or 2 gallons of gasoline per day to get to work to make payments on his or her debt. There is plenty of room for changing the economic rules of the game away from debt and the commuter rat race.
In short, a Republican that works for the benefit of the common man exists. Health care has arrived. Time for Republicans to move on.
As opposed to giant omnibus bills that include everything but the kitchen sink?
You are probably way too young to remember but it used to be the case that spending bills were limited to specific areas. In fact, if you look on You Tube, you can probably find Ronald Reagan displaying a giant stack of paper in the State of Union Address that was the omnibus bill for that year and proclaiming it ridiculous, which many people agreed with.
So fuck you and your stupid teenage ignorance.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.